Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Hon. Jaok C. Altaralr Opinion No,. V-102 County Attorney Johnson County Re: Redemption Of COUti- Cleburne, Texas house refunding bonda I iseued in 1923 Dear Sir: We hare received your letter of March 6, 1947, which we quote in part as follows: “The County of Johnson issued oertain Court House Refunding Bonds dated April 10, 1923, and due April 10, 1947. In Ootobsr, 1945, the County called in the outstanding County Court House Ref’und- iog Bonds. One holder of these bonds has refused to submit them and has de- manded payment or principal and interest to maturity date. QDMTION: In view of the deoision handed down January 29, 1947, by the Supreme Court of Texas in the cam or the State National Bank of El Paso va. Tarrant County, Texans does Johnson County have the right to oall in the outstanding County Court House Re- iunding Bonds?* We have examined the oxigisal transoript covering these bonds whioh is on file in the Comptrol- ler t s Department. It is noted that the,bonds were made payable serially from 1925 to 1953, inclusive. We awnma that in your letter you have refcrenoe to thm $7,000.00 of boada.(Nos. 96 to 102, inolusiva) whioh mature on April 10, 1947. The tranaoript shows that no option of redemption prior to maturity was included in the bonds. Therefore, if they can be redeemed prior to their maturity date, the authority au& come from operation of law. The reoord showe that the bond8 were is- sued to refund $150,000 "Johnson County Courthouse Bonds," dated October 10, 1912, due and payable forty years from their date, Rwith option reserved to redeem HQJP.Jack C. Altaras - Page 2 (V-102) said bonds at any time after TEN YURS ifem their date.” The authority toissue'the refunding bonds was round in A$',;,'; 657, Chapter 3, Title 18, Revised Civil Statutes e Yoreever, it is expressly stated in Sestion I of the bond erdsr and in the bonds themselves that the bonds were issued under the authority of the Oonditu- tion aad Laws of the State of Texas, *partiaularly Ar- ticle 657, of Chapter 3, Title 18, Revised Ciril Stat- utes of Texas of 1911 e . ." Artiols 657 provided as follows: "Art. 457. Old bonds of legal issue may be substituted by new. h- Where bonds have been legally issued, or nay be hereafter issued, by shy county for any of the pur- poses mued in Article, 610, new bond8 beariag the same or a lower rate of inter- est nay be issued ia conformity with ex- iatiag law, in 114~ thoreof. (Acts 1693, p* ll2. A&d 1901, p. 16.)" The original -bonds were issued under the authority of Article 610, Chapter 1, Title 18, Revised Civil Statutes ~of 1911. Article 611, which wae part of Chapter 1 of Title 18, provided as follows: "Art. 611. To run not exceeding forty years; redoenable when. -hAll bonds issued under this chapter ahall rim not sxceed- ing forty years, aud shall be redeemable at the pleasure of the county at any time after five years after the issuance of the bonds, or after any period not exoeed- ing ten years, wh;toh.may be fixed:by the oommissioner~q court. (dots 1893, p. 112, 1” (Emphasis added) The Supreme Court of Texas in the case of Cochran County v. Mann, 172 S. X;'. (2d) 689, in inter- preting Article 611 held as follows: "As we eonatrue the above statute, where bonds are issued under the ohauter there- in referred to, if the Commissioners' Court at the time the bands are issued makes no provision oonoerning its right to rode.6 the bonds prior to their matur- Hon. Jack C. Altaras - Page 3 (V-102) ‘ity, they ma7 be redeemed at the pleasure of the ooanty at any time aiter fire years arte,r the issuance thereof.:, HoweVer, the Commissioners! Court my, by an approprl- ate order entered at the tihe the bonds are Issued, postpone the date after whioh the”bonds may be redeemed to not exeeedlhg ten years from the date of their isauaneeO The .bonds are redeemWe, in all, went, at not eroeeding ten yeara rroa the date of their iasuanoe,,‘~ Dallas C0uBty.Y. Loakbart, ;gk$e Trealmrer, I.28 Tex. 50, 96 9.1; 2nd (aphada added):~ Earever the abhnmon County !Courthonae Re- ‘funding Bends were Issued in 1923. arler ‘the-authority ~0r Ilrtlal+ 657 .tilsh appeared in a dirreront ohapter. 15 the 1925 revision of’ Texas i3tatuteai Artlole 657 wati plaoed’ in the laae chapter with Articl.er ‘610 and, 61.1. In the Revised Civil Statutes of 1925 ,these statutes appear-in,Ohaptsr 2.of Title 22 as Arti. 7b8 (610), 720 (611). and 726 (957). The ‘Supreme Oaurt$r the oa8e’or Bexar oouaty Y'. .Bellerr 178 ,S. w,. (ad) 505, i hold that ,thi redergtlon prmid~ae Of &tiele 720 ‘ipi ” plkd to’ all bolaas fswed under Ohapts 2 l,f Tit10 22, whioh idolu#od rowrg bonds issued L der the author- ‘ity or .APtioIe 725. ,ti that chapto+. We haYa stated borore, howover, that tho refunding bonds tmder oonsideratlon.were lsauod i& 1923 under the l uthor,itV of Ariiiale~ 057; whloh appeared in a diftrrent ohaptor irom~Az=tlole f311~, and as stated by th,e ‘SuPrems ceurt :in the 0464 0r at4te mat10541 Bank or 241 Pad Y.' Tarrant County, Texhs, 199 9. 3. (2d) 152:, eWe are here conatrul~ ‘the applloahle. stat- utes as they existed in 1922, when, the fund- ing bonds InVolved in this ault w4r4 lsmmd.” The statutes were the same in 1923 as ‘in 1922* X5 the Tarrant Oounty ease t,he ~i,dentloal log- al quest,ion am thr one under oonslderation was berore tha Bnpreme Court+ Tartint~ Qot@ty~ had. ,lssued refunding bonds in 1922 under the .autherity ~of’Artlole 657. Ro right or prior rede.mptlon was retalnod in those bond@. The Court held as fo~llats: Hon. Jack C. Altaras - Page 4 (V-102) “. . . It is undisputed that the right to redeem such bonds before the aatur- ity dates staateaia suah bonds was not reserved in the bonds or in the orders of the Ceiamissioners' Court authorizing their issuaaoe. The redmptien article, Article 611 of Chapter 1 of Title 18 of the 1911 statutesi provides that 'all bonds issued under this chapter ahall be redeelpable' within a certain period of time. It is quite obvious that that article does not by its ewu term apply to bonds issued under any other chapter. Jefferson County v. Sellers, 142 Tex. 528, 180 S. W. (2d) 138; Gavin v. Potter County (Civ. App.), 187 5. W. (2d) 705 (writ refused) . . .'* . . . "We have conoluaed that the redemption provisions of Article 611 6f the Retised Civil gtatuter of 1911 applied bnly to bonds issued uuder Chapter 1 of Title. 15 of the 1911 Revised Civil Statutes, and cannot be applied to funding la4mb1 Issued under Chapter 3 of Title 12 or the 1911 Revised Civil Statutes." As the Johnson Ccunty Courtheuso Refunding Bonds, dated April 23, 1923, contained no eptFon or prier redemp- tion, under the decisioa of the Supreme Court of Texas in the case of State %a- tional Bank of El Paso v. Tarrant County, 199 S.% (Ed) 152, the outstanding bonds of such issue are net subject to redemp- tion prior to maturity, and the CO~DILS- sienere' Court of Jehnsos County has no right to call in suoh sutstaading bonds prior to maturity. Of ooureel; such .. . Bon. Jack C. Altaras - Pags 5 (V-102) bonds may be redeeoled before aatmity with the consent of the holdars there- Of. Very truly yours ATTORNEY GEWERAL OF TXAS -” George WKsSparks GWS-stwb Assistant ATTORNEY GBtWtAL OF Tpus