Our Commissioners Court enacted a county-wide burn ban back in December. I was not consulted during the process, and when I looked at the order that was signed and will be put into the minutes, I find that the order was merely a form with choices in it regarding the scope of the ban, etc. None of the choices are circled or lined through, so none were made when the order was signed. There is some controversy about the ban, and I think this order as it stands is completely unenforceable due to the clerical errors.

My question is, can we simply substitute a correct order (the current one has not been placed on the minutes of the court as far as being imaged or indexed) or do we need to do a nunc pro tunc order. If nunc pro tunc, does that have to come back through the court?

Jim, the prudent thing to do would be to redraft the order correctly and put it on the court agenda to replace the ineffective order.

Agreed. That's particularly true, since drought-prompted burn bans need to be reviewed periodically (every 90 days or 7 days, depending on how you do it) anyway. Why not give the county a fresh time period by enacting a proper order (presuming that you, like us, remain dryer than a popcorn belch)?

A little training goes a very long way. Between my county clerk and the secretary for the county judge, my court is kept pretty well in line even when I'm out of pocket.

When we started, she would have filed anything for the court - now she looks at it and raises questions. If you can teach yours to look at such things in the future, the problem can be avoided...

SO far as solutions go, I think you have heard the best available!

Lisa L. Peterson
Nolan County Attorney

I appreciate the input.

It looks like the burn ban will probably disappear on Monday, any way. I am glad to have some information for future reference, though.

I have been made aware of an order of the Comm Ct. that was entered over six years ago regarding the closing, abandoning, and vacating of a road in the county. The problem is that the field notes describing the portion to be closed attached to the order are completely incorrect. I am thinking that the procedures outlined above would be sufficient to correct the order. What do ya'll think?

Rick's comment works. It might not relate back six years but would certainly clarify the issue.

Thank you Ray.