d NE NE
ArJwl-xN 11. TsDIAs
PRICE DANIEL
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
June 12, 19.81
Hon. Albert L. Barticy, Jr. Opialon No. V-1187
Colmty Attomcy
Fan&n County Re: Fees of dclimqwat tax attor-
Bonbam. Texas neys when taxea are paid
after suit but before service
of &&on, anewer. or other
D&r Ma. Bartley; action in the auit.
YOU rOqUeBt Urs 0pWon of thb office upon two queations
which we shall rertate aad mawer in the order prerented.
‘QwrUo~ Ha 0~~6: Whexe the delinqucent tax at-
torney lilem a Bait Xor tbrar against a taxpap in which
e0it no c&at&a k La& or service oi citation is pro-
cured, no answer la UI.ad, and ao further action is taken ,,
by the MM attotaer, and the detendantm therein subse-
quently rrmit the uap&$ tax08 to the tax collector, io
the raid rttotriey cutdUe& to lb contractual commission
it the paymmtt by ths de8endants was made alter the con-
traat between the county and the attorney had expired,
but befoxe sLr men&# of the following year had paesed?
*Question No. Twor Xn a&tit6 itutituted by the de-
linquenttax aUo*ney rgaliut delbqueat taxpayer& is the
said aUor8ey entitld tobls contractual compensation
where he airo we& IruWrnentsl in UlIgg the defendant’s
anewer wbicb claim8 the Ica pcu statute of limitations? ”
Tbi4 of#lea ba# hereto&t aurared your first question
in Opinion No. O-237 rber& the follow&g queaflon was asked:
“Qcurrttoa 4: DM$ the contractor hre the right
to a 13 % commirsioa on any recovery In the sattlement
af a tax suit abter Decembes 31, 19381”
The foAXowing answer wa# given:
“Suit@ t&t are filed by ths kx attorney duting the
contract per&$ and 8ettled by him within rix months af-
ter the tertinut6oa date are clsr;rly contemplated by the
contxect, and the provision referred to above that pro-
widei for payment to the attorney of 13% of the amount
collected applterwithont que*tioa to theme cases.
. _
Hon. Albert C. Bartley, Jr., Page 2 (V-1187)
“Our awwer to your fourth question is that the
contractor, the tax attorney, has the right to a 13% com-
mission on a recovery in the settlement of a tax suit
after December 31, 1938, provided the suit was filed by
the tax attorney prior to December 31, 1938, during the
term of the contract, and was settled within ‘six months
of December 31, 1938,”
In view of the ioregoing+we agree with your conclusion
that the delinquent tax attorney in question is entitled to his con-
tractual commission.
Your secoul question, at most, involves merely a ques-
tion of legal ethics. It does not appear that there was any collusion
er fraud practiced between the txx attorney and the defendants in
the suits in which he’prepared pleas of limitation on road district
and school district taxem. They were filed, by the taxpayers and not
by him, and certainly the attorney’s conduct in this respect is not
such as to deprive him of the compensation which’he would other-
wise be entitled to receive under his contra$. .It ir not the policy
of the State to impose upon taxpayers ;unnecessary expenses in con-
nection with the payment of their tax sGror to conceal from them
legal defenaea to the payment of the f’axes accorded by statute.
Therefore, under the submitted facts, your’ second &es-
tion is answered in the affirmative. *,
SUMMARY
A tax attosney collecting delinquent taxeo under
a contract made in accordance with the, provisions of
Articles 7335 and 7335a, V.C.S., is entitled to the com-
pensation provided in the contract on suits filed before
the expiration of the contract where the taxes ale p&d
within the six months provided ia the con&act after its
expiration to conclude suits previously filed, regardless
of whether judgment is entered in the suits.
b Che 6bsence of CQh SiOn lr fraud brtyeen the
taxpaptr *all * dect(hlMt tur attorney, the mefe fact
that the atmy )reparem p1eau of. limi(aLia& 40 &hool
dirtrict taxel m toad dW.wPct t-0 far the dda(ut
_ -.-
Hon. Albert L. Bartley, Jr., P,ag,e 3 (V-1187)
taxpayers, which are filed by them, does not affect the
right of the attorney to his commission on the other
taxes collected.
Yours very truly,
PRICE: DANIEL
Attorney General
APPROVED: By ?!.p gw+J
L.%. Lollar
W. V. Geppert ARairtant
Taxation Division
Jesse P. Luton, IP.
Reviewing ASSi6tant
Charles D. Mathews
First Assistant
LPL/mwb