- -
THEAVTORNEY GENERAL.
OFTEXAS
Grover Sellers
A=rr‘,KN*:Y G*:NExcAlr
Hon. R. C. Neaves Opinion No. O-6324
County Auditor Rer If real property conveyed to the City
Grayson County of Sherman at a tax sale, is sold to a
Sherman, Texas third party, would the State and County
be entitled to collect all delinquent taxes
prior and subsequent to the tax sale to the
Dear Sir: City? And related questions.
We are in receipt of your recent letter of December 14,
1944, reques.ting our opinion relative to the above captioned matter.
Your letter reads as follows:
“Please furnish me a written opinion on the following
proposition:
“On June 17, 1930 a delinquent tax judgment was ren-
dered in cause No. 40788 ‘See certified copy of judgment
attached’ and on Decembei 27, 1930, the Sheriff, acting on
the above judgment and decree of sale, did convey by Sher-
iff Is deed, the premises described in said order of sale,
to the City of Sherman a Municipal Corporation, for the
sum of Three Hundred Ninety Two and 74/100 Dollars, it be-
ing the highest bidder therefor, and that being the highest
secure sum bid for same. ‘See certified copy of Sheriff’s
deed attached.’
“The County and State were not a party to the above
suit, therefore, none of the State and County taxes were
included in said judgment. (See copy of State and County
delinquent taxes attached)
“For your information and consideration I submit the
following:
“The City of Sherman, Plaintiff, bid the premises in
at the amount of delinquent taxes due said City a,t the Sher-.
iff’s sale on October 7, 1930, and said City of Sherman has
held same until now without taking any further action. HOW-
ever, the City of Sherman is now in process of taking poses-
sion of same, which is some 14 years after such premises had
been conveyed by the Sheriff.
“1 have been informed by the City Attorney that, it i.s
the intention of the City of Sherman to take possession of
Hono R, C. Neaves, page 2 (O-6324)
said premises in order that they in turn may sell same
at private sa f e.
“There is now due the State and County for delin-
quent taxes, together with interest and penalty in the
aggregate sum of $247.60 for the years from 1928 to 1943,
ee State and County delinquent tax state-
i%tlu:tf;::he::
“From the above information we would appreoiate an
answer on the following:
“1. If said premises are sold now by the City of
Sherman, would the State and County be entitled to collect
all delinquent taxes from 1928 to 1943 inclusive, provided
such property is sold for an equal amount, or more than the
amount of all delinquent taxes due said taxing units?
“2 0 Would said premises be exempt from State and
County ad valorem taxes for all years subsequent to the
date such premises were bid in by the City of Sherman in
19301
“3 * Where such premises were conveyed to the City of
Sherman b Sheriffus deed in 1930, and possession not taken
until 194 t 9 would the City of Sherman have the authority to
sell such premises at private sale?
“40 In the event the City of Sherman may sell such
premises at a private sale, what would be the proper method
for the City of Sherman to follow in order to convey such
premises to the private purchaser?
“0 0 0 0’8
We are enclosing herewith OUP Opinion MO. O-5710 which an-
swers your first two questions.
Your other two questions request our opinion as to whether
the City has the authority to sell such land at mate sQ& end if
so9 the proper procedure to follow D
It is our opinion that the City of Sherman acting through i
City Council, could sell said land as provided in ,A&.cle 7328 Ver-
nonOs Annotated Civil Statutes, by virtue of the provisions of Ltlcles
7343 and 106Oa, V.AX.S. However, each of said ,Articles 7343 and 1060
by Its own terms, is merely permissive, and is not exclusive.
Article 1062, V,A,COSO reads as followsr
Hon. R. C. Neaves, page 3 (O-6324 )
“If, at any sale of real or personal property or
estate for taxes, no bid shall be made for any parcel
of land, or any goods and chattels, the same shall be
struck off to the city, and the city shall receive, in
the corporate name, a deed for said property, and shall
be vested with the same right as other purchasers at
such sale, and may sell and convey the sameo”
Article 1140, V.A.C.S., reads as follows:
When the entry mentioned in the preceding article
has been made, the town shall be invested with all the
rights incident to such corporation under this chapter,
and shall have power to sue and be sued, plead and be
impleaded, and to hold and dispose of real and personal
property, provided such real property is situated within
the limits of the corporation.”
Article 962, V.A.C.S., reads as follows:
“All the inhabitants of each city town or village
so accepting the provisions, of this title shall continue
to be a body corporate, with perpetual succession, by the
name and style by which such city, town or village was
known before such acceptance, and as such they and their
successors by that name shall have, exercise and enjoy
all the rights, immunities, powers, privileges and fran-
chises possessed and enjoyed by the same at the time of
said acceptance and those hereinafter granted and con-
ferred, and shail be subject to all the duties and obll-
gations pertaining to or incumbent on the same as a cor-
poration at the time of said acceptance, and may ordain
and establish such acts, laws, regulations and ordinances,
not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of this
State, as shall be needful for the government, interest,
welfare and good order of said body politic and under the
same name shall be known in law, and be capable of con-
tracting and being contracted with, suing and being sued,
impleading and being impleaded, answering and being an-
swered unto, In all courts and places, and In all matters
whatever, may take, hold and purchase, lease, grant and
convey such real and personal or mixed property or estate
as the purposes of the corporation may require, within or
without the limits thereof; and may make, have and use a
corporate seal and change and renew the same at pleasure .I’
said It is, therefore, our opinion that the City of Sherman may
sell/land to a third party at private sale, and that the City Coun-
cil, as a governing body of the City9 is the proper agency to exer-
cise the authority to sell, and that the sale should be authorized
Ron. R. C, Neaves, page 4 (0~6324)
by ordinance or ??esolhtfon. See Wilder v. Amerfcau Produce Co.,
160 S.W.z (2d) 519 (SupoCt.10 However, ff the charter or an
ordinance of the Cfty of Sherman provides how the City may alfen-
ate its real property, such procedure should be followed.
Trustfng that the abo,ve and foregoing fully answers your
inquiry, we are
Yours very truly
ATTORNEYGENERALOF TEXAS
By /s/ We V, Geppert
W. V0 Geppart, Assistant
APPROVEDJAN 11, 1945
/s/ Carlos C. Ashley
FIRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEYGENERAL
APPROVEDtOPINION COMMITTEE
BY: BWB,CHAIRMAN
WVG:forwb