Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN lioaonbla &orge 8. Wpjxrd aaptrollm of mblla lioooaat8 Aast~ia, T8nr I)ru 8s.rr . : flonorablo Ooorga H. Sheppard, pa& 2 Artiole Ii388 ia ia part en foI.lovsr “The State Treasurer shall rece3.w dally prom the head of each Dapartment, each of whom. 1s spcclflc4lly charged vlth the duty of naklng wge dally, a dotailed list of all psraons re- mlttlng money the 6totua of vhich is undetermined or vhioh is avaitlng t;ho tine when it con final.- ly be taken into the Treasury, . . . ” (Ezqhasis oars) - ‘Article 705’p, supra, would not be applicable to the taxi collector of Brewster Couaty for tvo reasons1 i a) he is not the head of any department of the State Covera- Dent, and (b) the tax In question 1s an ad valorcm tax and does not fall vithin the namad classlfications la the stat- ate, Article 4388 vhlch describes the duty of the State Treasury in handling suspense accounts, vould not be appll- cable for the reason that the tax colleotor of Brevster Coun- .ty, belae, a county offloer, la not the head of 4 dewrtment of the State of Texas. It 1s true that the couuty tax col- lector la a State officer to the extent that the La&lsl.ature of th& State of Texas hao delegated pover and authority to hln id his capacity as counts tax collector to collect taxes, liceaae feen, bto., due the State OS Texas from the taxpayer, and remit suah taxes, fees, etc., to the respective heads of the departments after they have been collected. Hence, 1~ the absence of any legislative authority, and there ie none, tho tax collector of L)revster County is vlthout authorlty to keep the taxes mentioned in your letter la any suspense fUn6, but on the contrary, lt 1s his duty to remit such taxes rhea collected by bin to tho proper authorities under the Provlsloas of Artlales 7260 and 7261, R.C.S., 1925. By complying with the terms of Article 7260 and 7261, supra, the tax collector of Dravster County vould ln- Cur no personal llablllty since this very issue vas decided by the Supreme Court of Tcxaa in the case of Continental Lend aad Cattle Company v, Board, Tax Collector, et al., 80 Tex. 489, 16 S.tJ. 312, vhereln Judge Staytoo bald in part as fol- lower . . Bonorable George 11. Sheppard, page 3, w. . . $he rule up& thLo subject is thus alearly stated: *In general, any oSSicer whose duties are merely mlnlsterlal, and to vhom pro- cesa is issued which 1s apparontlg la due form , of lav, and which neither la lts recitals nor lo lta omissions apprises him that it 1s issued vlthout legal right, vi11 be protected in serv- lng it, even though in fact it was issued vlth- out authority of law. This 1s a rule not only ossentlal to the proteotlon of su~offiaers, but absolutely required also for the due dls- patch of pub110 buslness. . . . Appellant could not have been compelled to pay the illegal tax if he had used the means to prevent its collec- tion vhlch the law gave hiram,but, having paid It to 85 officer holding process vhlah aommaud- ed him to colleat it, he cannot nov look to that offloer for reimbursement. . ..I The doctrine above enunciated has bceu afffmed la the cas8 of Texas Lend and Cattle Company v. Xemphlll County (01~. App.), 61 3.X. 333, the court held ia part as follow 8 t w. . . This llmltatlon, hovever, and vhlah 1s here urged, seems to have been expressly re- pudiated by the Board Case, as will be seen from tha criticism therein ma&e of the ‘case of Uardus- ty v. Fleming, 57 Tex, 3991 to which might be added that, after the collection, the collector 1s required by the lav, under penalties, to make oolleotion, and promptly report and remit all taxes collected by him to the state and county treasurers, vlthout excepting cases in which suits, hovever promptly filed, ma% be lnstltut- ed for the recovery thereof. ... Bence the tax collector of ,&evster County may be raised that it 1s his duty to remit the taxes collected by hln to the proper authorities under Articles 7260 end 7261, *Wa, an& that .he ~111 not incur any personal liability by ‘0 6Olng. Slate the aature of the protest made by the tax- ~Ysr at the time of the payment of the taxes lo question ~~~~~~rablo George II.' Sheppard, pagd 4 ia not ~lwon, this opinion does not paes upon the queotlon . a~ t3 whether 02 not such payw+ was vo)uatorg or invol,un- tcT* .. . Very truly yours5 . w C. li; Rlchnrde Aemlstant