Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

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