Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

ORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS Honorable Baeoom Giles Commissioner, General Land Office Austin, Texas Dear Sir: Opiniori No. O-6771 Re: Right of reinstatement under Artiole 5326, by purchase of school land under tax judgment after forfeiture of land by Commissioner of the General Land Offioe. Referenoe is made to your letter of August 3, ,1945, whioh is as follows: "I am in reoeipt of a letter from Mr. J. L. Rasberry of the law firm of Burgas, Soott, Rasberry & Hulse of El Paso, Texas in whioh he makes inquiry regarding the reoognitlon of this department of the right of reinstatement under Artiole 5326,by one who holds title by virtue of a tax deed.executed under a tax judgment in a suit filed after the forfeiture of the land for nonpayment of interest. It is the contention of this department that any tax suit instituted against the purchaser after the date of forfeiture of the purchase oontracts would take no title to the land from him for the reason that the title revested in the State of Texas Permanent Free Sohool Fund upon forfeiture of the purohase oontracts. "I have been requested by Mr. Rasberrg to ask for an official opinion from your office on the matter. The lands in question were Publio Free School Lands. purohased from the State on deferred payment plan, and whioh were forfeited for non-payment of interest .on July 28, 1941. Acoordlng to the information furnished by Mr. Rasberry, these lands were sold to the County of El Paso on March 8 and lY*arch9, 1945 under a judgment in a suit for foreolosure of tax liens. "Please givd me your offioial opinion as to the validity of thy@ +~bove mentioned sale under tax judgment, and as to whetl:,~:lx or not such conveyance held by an assignee of the County would entitle him to reinstate- mol:t of the purchase contracts under Ar~ticle 5326." . . ft is well settUd that when Public Pree %Chooi Ha&3 itifdPf8ifBd bs thi, &dmissioner, as is the case here* the title to the Z&id V&tit& in the %tater and it reVerta to the status ;Ithad before it was sold, the former owner having no tiiiia or r&ght of possession+ Lawless Vf~#right (Cl&v, Appr) 86 S.W. U40~ Houston Oil doi ve ,Reese;6orrihak frbf‘ f&3*, l6l id”Wi +&I$, wit a,r errdr rtjflisi8dr 'it-da&id df thiti hid dnder t&e judgment is af ammi@ void, ~rifitie;t&i ~tia@ient,&bt~r h&a tip title 6~ rigkt of p(3ss8stiidfitd thiti @&id Wtil sudh time as he exei+aised his ri t ef reInstatement as is provided for in APt;r @S6 dk., Btate VS %toVall, Pexc diva Appo 76 %.WI (2) .kO6j Danoiger Vd %tate, et alt 166 8fWi (2) 914 (%upa 6tr)o The @&ses abolte cited also hold that after the imd has passed into the hands,of the soirereign, it is not then available for sale in satisfaotion of the taxes adjUdge& age&kit ltr Under Article 5326i VcA.tii%ii the right of reinstetement after feffeiture la Limited to the last pilrehatierfrom the Btate or his vendees or their heirs or legei representatiVes, !&XI ptir6haser of this land under the ta% judgment rebeived no title by virtue of his pur- aheael and being a stranger to the original award by the State, he ha8 no rights under the reinstatement statuter !I%4 opinion herein expressed bonfurms to your depertiMnta1 eonstructioti of the law, and is in accord with the dpinion of previaus~ffttorne' 5eneraLs as evidenoed by tiha opinions written q the Bona 9,‘ B. %iaedley, then Assltit&nt Attorney ffenerall on jdaroh 14, 1913# and Feb; ruary 5, i915# reported on pages 527 and 567 of the Attorney - . - Hon. Basoom Giles - Page 8, O-6771 General's Reporta for trPlosemspeotive years. Yours very truly ATTORIWY 5ENERhL OF TEXAS a/ Jaok W. Rowland- BY Jack W. Bowl&d Assistent JWRrBT-og Approved hug. 17, 1945 a/ Cirover Sellers httorneg 5eneral of Texas Approved Opinion Committee by BWB, Chairman i