Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Jerry Sadler Opinion No. C- 478 Commissioner General Iand Office Re: Whether surface lease for Austin, Texas a term exceeding ten (10) years on land being pur- chased under Veterans8 Land Program is in violation of Section 17, Article 5421m, V.C.S., and if so, is the Dear Mr. Sadler: lease void or voidable. Your recent letter requests our opinion as to the above stated questions relating to land being purchased from the Veterans' Land Board. Pertinent portions of Article 542l.m,Section 17, Vernon's Civil Statutes, are set forth as follows: "Section 17. The sale of all lands hereunder by the Board may b properly initiated by CONTRACT OF SAG AND PURCBASE . . . wrovided further. that wrowertv sold' under the provisions of this Act-may-be transferred, sold or conveyed at any time after the entire indebtedness due the Board . under the contract of sale is paid, the Board shall execute a deed under its seal to the original purchaser of the land or to the last assignee whose assignment has been approved by the Board. . . . (Emphasis Added.) -2266- Honorable Jerry Sadler, page 2 (c-478) It is presumed for purposes of this opinion, that the lease in question relates to land presently being purchased under a contract of sale and that a conveyance of the prop- erty to the veteran has not occurred, although it was not so stated in your letter. It is stated in 58 Texas Jurisprudence Second 208, Vendor and Purchaser, Section 2, that: "A contract to sell real estate is an agreement for a sale in futuro, either abso- lutely or on the happening of some contingency or the performance of some condition. A trans- action for the purchase of realty will there- fore be held to be a contract to sell rather than a sale, if . . . the purchaser does not presently acquire a complete and indefzasible title to the property purchased, . . . The veteranis~~~ldingpossessionof the land under a contract of 'sale with legal title remaining in the Veterans' Land Board, an agency of the State of Texas. The property has not been deeded to the veteran, but will be conveyed when the entire indebtedness has been paid. We hold that the owner may limit the use of the property and that the lease in question is illegal. "Contracts that are directly and expressly prohibited by a valid statute couched in unmistakable language are absolutely void." 13 Tex.Jur.2d 361, Contracts, Sec.2;zg; Hennessy v. Automobile Owners Assn., __ Tex. -, S.W. 791 (1926); 47 A.L.R. 521. The lease is illegal and void since it contravenes a valid statute. Woolsey v. Panhandle Refining Company, 131 Tex. 449, 116 S.W.2d b75 (1936). Black's Law Dictionary defines a voidable contract as, "one which is void as to wrongdoer but,,notvoid as to wronged party unless he elects to so treat it. A void contract is defined as, "one which never had any legal existence or effect, and such contract cannot in any manner have life breathed into it." In the case of a voidable contract, there,,isusually both a power to avoid and a power to validate. Corbin on Contracts, Vol. 1, Sec. 6, p. 11. -2267- Honorable Jerry Sadler, page 3 (C-478) The statute does not provide for ratification or vali- dation by the Veterans' Land Board of a surface lease in excess of ten (10) years and, therefore, the lease in ques- tion is a void agreement. SUMMARY A veteran cannot give a valid lease on the surface of land being purchased by con- tract of sale under Article 542lm, Section 17, V.C.S., in excess of ten (10) years, and if he does so, the lease is void. Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General of TexaC; ,-, Assistant CIS:afg APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman Milton Richardson David Longoria Phillip Crawford Harold Kennedy APPROVEDFOR THE ATTORNEYGENERAL By: T. B. Wright -2268-