Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

The Attorney General of Texas January 28. 1982 MARK WHITE Attorney General SupremeCourt Building HonorableMike Driscoll opinion No. Ml+433 P. 0. BOX12.343 Harris County Attorney AusIln. TX. 78711 1001 Preston, Suite 634 Re: Penalty filing fees 512147525Ql Houston. Texas 77002 required by 1981 amendmentto Telex 9lOl974.13S7 L article 6626, V.T.C.S. Telecopkr 51214750266 ’ Dear Mr. Driscoll: 1607Main St. suite 14w oailas. TX. 75Ml The Sixty-seventh Legislature amended article 6626, V.T.C.S., 2141142.B944 which deals with the recordingof certain legal instrumen:s,~by adding subsection (b). Acts 1981. 67th Leg*, ch. 206. at 498. You have 4324Alberta Ave. Suite 150 asked five questions concerning this subsection, which reads as ElPaso.TX. 79905 follows: 91- A deed or other conveyauceconveying an interest In real.property, If executed after December 31. 1981. shall contain a mailing address of .each grantee appearingon the documentbr In a separate instrument signed by a grantor or grantee and attached to.thendocument. Failure to include an SW Broadway.Suite 312 LUbbock# lx. 19401 address of each grantee In the document or wSf7476238 attached instrumentdoes not affect the validity of the conveyance between the parties to the document. Any such deed or other conveyancewhich 4309N. Tenth.&tile B fails to includea maillng address of each grantee MeAllen.TX. 78501 512m92.4S47 appearing in the document or attached ,Snstrument may only be filed for record with the county clerk of the county In .which the real property is 200 Main Plaza,suite 400 situated after pay&eat ,of a pCnalty filing fee smhtonio.Tx: 79205 equal to the greater of (1) twice the statutory 512l22Ml91 filing fee for the.filing of such documentsvith the county clerk. or (2) the"sinnof $25. .Upon An Equal oppmunnyl accep~tanceby the couuty clerk of a deed or other AfftfmatiwAction Empktyw conveyancefor recordationand the payment of the filing fee as determinedby the county clerk, it shall be cqnclusivelypresumed that such deed or other conveyancemeets all filing fee requirements of this Subsection (b) of this Article 6626, prerequisite to the lawful filing of a deed or _. conveyance. orner You first ask: 1. Is the county clerk constitutionally authorizedto collect the penalty filing fees set forth in article66261 Article V. section 20 of the Texas Constitution establishesthe office of county clerk and provides that the duties of- said office shall be as "prescribedby the Legislature." You suggestno reason- and we cannot imagine any -- why the collectionof the article 6626 penalty filing fee is not a "duty" which the legislature may permissiblyimpose upon county clerks. gather, you contend that the penalty filing fee provisions of article 6626 are invalid because Hous,eBill No. 196. which enacted those p~ovisioas,violated article III, section 35 of the Texas Constitution, which providesas follows: No bill (exceptgeneral appropriationbills, which may embrace the various subjectsand accounts,for and on account of which moneys are appropriated) shall contain more than one subject,which shall be expressed in its title. But if Any subject shall be embraced in an-act. which shall not be expressed in the title, such act shall be void only as to so much'thereof.as shall not be so expressed. Rouse Bill No. 196. which teenActed former article 6626 AS. subsection (a) of ~the new statute and enacted subsection (b), was entitled"An act relatingto a requirementthat grantees'addressesbe in or attached-toany document~conveying real property." You contend that this title did not afford fair notice of the penalty filing fee provisionsas requiredby article III, Aection35. We disagree. Numerous cases have construed Article III. section 35. An excellentstatement of its .lmportmay be found in Lee v. State. 352 S.W.2d 724, 725 (Tex. 1962).where the Texas SupremeCourt stated: It is well establishedthat the caption of an act should be liberallyconstruedso AS to uphold Its validity If at all possible... It has also been said that. ‘None of the provisionsof a statute should be regarded AS unconstitutional when they relate, directly or indirectly, to the same subject, have a mutual conaectfon,and. are not foreign to the subject expressedin the title.‘... So long AS the caption stAtes the main subject of An Act. it will also be construed to cover any subsidiary matters if they are reAsonAbly p. 1485 , * * BonornbleMike Driscoll- Page 3 (uw-433) connected,germane,incidental,or relevantto the main subject. In C. Hayman ConstructionCompany V. American IndemnityCompany. 473 S.W.Zd 62, 66 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1971. no writ), the court said: The test of sufficiencyof a legislativetitle $s ,whetherit gives reasonablenotice of the contents of the bill to an average legislatoror interested citizen. If such person interestedin legislation on a particular subject would be prompted by the title to examine the body of the Bills for provisions relating to that subject, then the . title is sufficient,but if he wbtildbe likely to get the impression that further reading is unnecessary because the bill does not relate to that subject, then thi bill, if enacted, is unconstitutionalto the extent that ft deals with that subject. s In our opinion, House Bill No. 196 comportedwith article III, eection 35. Its title expressed the general subject of the bill, "is., the requirementthat grantees' Addressesbe in or attached to documentsconveying real property.And we believe its penalty filing fee provisionswere reasonably,conuected And germane to that subject. . We also believe .that the wording of the title - particularlythe presence therein of the word "requirement"- is such that its readers would have been encouragedto read further. A statutory"requirement" will usually be accompaniedby A penalty provision;thus, readers of the title of House Bill No. 196 could reasonablyhave been expectedto peruse the bill to discover the penalty that would be Loaposedif the requirementwere not met. WA thereforeconclude that House Bill No. 196 did not contravene article III. section 35 of the Texas Constitution,and we answer your first questionin the affirmative. You next ask: 2. When a deed or other conyeyance is tendered to the county clerk for filing and recording without containing or having attached the mailing address of each grantee. should the county clerk collect only the penalty filing fee, or should the clerk collect that fee in 'addition to the regular filing fee? The language of subsection (b) of article 6626 is reasonably susceptibleof either construction. The bill,analysis of House Bill p. 1486 , HonorableMike Driscoll- rage 4 (Mw-433) . No. 196 offers no clue as to the proper interpretation. We must therefore choose the interpretationwhich finds the most support in the language of the statute,and which, in our opinion.best reflects the legislature'sintent. See RailroadCmmissio~ of Texas v. Miller, 434 S.W.Zd 670 (Tex. 1968).- We believe the most plausible interpretationis .that county clerks are to collect only the penalty filing .fee. First, the legislature'schoice of languageis significant. In our opinion, the term "penalty filing fee" signifies something complete, viz., a fee which is the entire filing fee to be collected,not a penalty fee to be coupled with the regular filing fee. Had the legislatureintended the latter. we think it would have selected a different term - for example,"penalty." Second.other statutesprovidingfor penalty fees do not contemplatethat such fees wfll be combinedwith the regular filing fee. See, e.g.. V.T.C.S. art. 3930(c). Finally, we believe that if the legislaturehad meant for the penalty fee to be added to the regular filing fee.- it would likely have said so clearly and unequivocally. . Your third questionIs: If a conveyance conveying an interest in real property does not conform to article 3930(c), V.T.C.S..such as by not having the grantor'sname . typed or printed under his signature.and does,not contain or have attached thereto the mailing address for each grantee, should the county clerk calculatethe fee under said article 3930(c)first and then double the amouqt so calculated to determine the recording fee under article 66269 If not. how should such fee be calculated? Articles 3930. 3930a-1. and 3930(b),V.T.C.S..prescribe fees to be charged by county clerks for performingvarious tasks, including filing and recording certain legal documents. Article 3930(c), V.T.C.S..providesin pertinentpart as follows: Section 1. (a) Each legal paper offered or presented to a 'countyclerk and county recorder for filing or for recording other"than fees authorized in Article 3930(b)...should maet the requirementsspecified in Subsections(b) through (8) of this section. . .. Sec. 2. (a) The filing fee or recordingfee for each page of a legal paper which is offered or p. 1487 . . nonoraole HZKe Drlscoll- Page 9 (MU-433) presented for filing or for recordingto a county clerk or county recorder and which fails to meet the requirementsfor, or which is deficient in. one or m&e of the items specifiedin Section 1 of this article, shall be equal to twice the regular filing fee or recording fee provided by statute for that page. The conclusionthat a penalty fee computedunder article 3930(c) is to be used in computing the,article 6626 penalty filing fee can only be reached if one accepts the followingpropositions: (1) the term "statutoryfiling fee" in article 6626 signifiessomethingother than the regular filing fees prescribedby articles3930. 3930a-1,and 3930(b); and (2) when articles 3930(c) and 6626 are both violated, county clerks are obliged to look first to article 3930(c). compute the penalty under that statute, and then use that figure in computing the article 6626 penalty filing fee. In our opinion, neither of these propositionsis defensible. First, we believe the term "statutory filing fee" refers to the regular filing fees contemplated by articles 3930, 3930a:1. and 3930(b).and that it does not embracea penalty fee resultingfrom the application of article 3930(c). Second, the conclusion that the article 3930(c) penalty fee is to.be used in calculatingthe article ~6626penalty filing fee assumes a correlationbetween those statutes which, in our o&iinion.simply does not exist. Articles 3930(c) and 6626 each sets forth its own requiremanteand prescribes its ovn penalty, and we believe that in computing a penalty under either statute, no penalty exacted under the other should be taken into account. Thus, where an individual tenders for recording a legal paper which violates both statutes, he will pay a combined fee consisting of the penalty fees required by each, which will be determinedindependentlyby referring to the regular fees established by articles3930, 3930a-1,and 3930(b). Your fourth question is essentiallyaa follows: Which of the followinginstrumentsconstitute 'conveyance conveying an interest fn real iroperty'within the meaning of article 66262 .. a. Deed of Trust b. Mechanic's and Materialman's Lien Contract C. Earnest Money Contract covering real property p. 1488 . nouoraolenuke Driscoll- Page 6 (NW-433) : . d. Contractof Sale of real property e. Certifiedcopy c&Probated Will f. Certified copy of Judgment in eminent domain case g. Certifiedcopy of Judgment in partition case h. Lease of Real Estate I. Mineral Lease . .I. Abstractof Judgment l k. CondominiumDeed It is suggestedthat the legislature'sintent in enactingarticle 6626 was to reach conveyanceswhich create a new taxable interestla the grantee, and that the phrase "conveyancecdnveyingau interestin real estate" should be construedas embracingonly those Instruments which have this effect. Language in the bill analysisof House Bill No. 196 is offered in support of this contention. Even if we assume that the foregoingis au accurate statementof the legislature'sreal motive, however, the fact Is that the wordiug of the phrase.in question is such that only one interpretetionis reasonable: article 6626 embraces x instrument which conveys m interest in real estate. Just as courts must, we must take statutesas we find them, and we way not resort to extrinsic aids in construingstatuteswhen the statutorylanguagein questionis clear and unambiguous. Railroad Commissionof Texas v. Miller,m; Rx parte Roloff. 510 S.W.Zd 913 (Tex. 1974). If anyone is to limit the scope of article 6626;it must be the legislature,and not this office. A succinct and workable definitionof "conveyance"can be found 'in Texas ElectricRy. Companyv. Neale, 244 S.W.2d 329, 332 (Tex.Civ. APP. - Waco 1951).rev'd on other grounds,252 S.W.Zd 451 (Tax. 1952): [It is] an instrument in writing whereby the grantor conveys to the grantee,some tlght. title or interestin or to raal property.~ Before it can be determined whether certain of the foregoing legal instruments are within article 6626, it is necessary to understandtheir meaning. A "deed of trust": p. 1489 Honorable Mike Driscoll- Page 7 (m-433) tak[es] the place and serv[es] the uses of a common-lawmortgage,by which the legal title to real property is placed in one or more trustees, to secure the repaymentof a sum of money or the performanceof other conditions. Black's Law Dictionary 503 (4th Ed.). It is, in legal effect, a mortgage with the power to sell on default. Phillipsv. Campbell,480 S.W.Zd 250. 253 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [14th Dist.) 1972, writ ref'd n.r.e.). A "mechanic'slien" is: A claim createdby law for the purpose of securing priority of payment of the price or value of work . performed and materials furnish&d in erecting or repairing a building or other structure,and as such attaches to the land .a8well as buildingsand improvementserectedthereon. Black's Law Dictionary1132 (4th Ed.). See 38 Tex. Jur. 2d Mechanic's Liens 551 et seq. An "earnestmoney coGct"‘calls for a deposit to be made to a stakeholder to bind a sale. Such deposit is used as forfeit monev or liauidated damages in the event the sale is not completed. See CowmanTV.Allen Uo&ments, Inc., 500 S.W.2d 223 (Tex. Civ. App. - Texarkana 1973, no writ). A "contractof sale" gives each party -to the contract'the right to specific performance-so .as to effect a conveyance of the property. Under such contract, the purchaserdoes not presentlyacquirea completeand Indefeasibletitle to the property purchased. the execution .end delivery of a deed notwithstanding. Padre Sands, Inc. v. Cawood. 595 S.W.2d 896 (Tex. Civ: App. - Corpus Christ1 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.); 58 Tex. Jur.Zd Vendor and Purchaser 002. 3. A "lease of real estate" conveys a portion of an owner's interestin an estate in land to a lessee for a shorter term than the owner'*. It passes a present interest in the land to the lessee. Black's Law Dictionary (4th Ed.) at 1035. A "mineral lease" is an agreement which permits the use of land to explore ,forminerals; if minerals are discovered,the lease affords the right to take the minerals either for a definite term or for so long as they can be produced in paying quantitiesupon the reserved royalty. Gordon v. Empire Gas and Fuel Company,63 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1933);Attorney General OpinionMW-402 (1981). :_ In our opinion, deeds of trust are within the scope of article 6626, as are mineral leases. lease8 of real egtate. and condominium deeds. These instrumentsclearlyconvey an intekest in real estate to the grantee. Gn the other hand, mechanic'sliens. contracts of sale. and earnest mosey contracts convey no title to or Interest in real estate,end are thereforenot within the statute. p. 1490 . WonorableMike Driscoll- Page 8 (Mw-433) . - A certified copy of a probated will is not, in ,our opinion. vithin article 6626. The actual transfer of title to any property devised to the beneficiarywill take place when the executor of the estate executesan executor‘sdeed, not when the certifiedcopy of the probatedwill is recorded. Certifiedcopies of judgmentsin partition cases are also not “conveyances.” Nor are abstracts of judgment, vhich merely afford evidenceof the judgmentin a particularcase, see article 5447. V.T.C.S., or certified copies of judgments in emin= domainproceedings. You finally ask: 5. Which party in each of the .. above . instrumentswhich constitutea fconveyanceof an interest in real property’ is the ‘grantee’ as contemplatedby article6626? We believe the ansver to this question plainly 5s that the “grantee” will be the person or entity to whom the int’erestis conveyed. This will be apparent from the face of. then instrument itself. SUMMARY 1:. county clerks are constitutionally authorieed to collect the penalty filing fees prescribedby article 6626, V.T.C.S. 2. Where article 6626 is violated~,county clerks are to collect only the penalty filing fee, not the penalty filing fee plus the regular filing fee. 3. Where article 3930(c). V.T.C.S., and article 6626 are both violated,the penalty filing fee under article 6626 is to be computedwithout referenceto the penalty fee prescribedby article 3930(c). 4. Deeds of trust, mineral leases, leares of real estate and condominiumdeeds”are,within the scope of article 6626. Mechanic’s liens. earnestmoney contracts,cohtractsof sale of real estate, certified copies of probated vills, certified copies of judgments In partitioncases, and abstracts of judgments are not vithin said article. p. 1491 . - 5. The “grantee” in a conveyanceconveying an interest in real estate is the person or entity. ,namedas such in the instrument. M A RR WEITE AttorneyGeneral of Texas JOHN W. FAINTER,.JR. First AssistantAttorney General . RIC&lB E. GRAY III ExecutiveAssistantAttorney General Preparedby Jon Bible AssistantAttorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Susan L. Garrison,Chairman Rick Gilpin Jim Moallinger .. Bruce Youngblood .. p. 1492