OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
,
:xaney Latham
rjOl3.
;;eoretaryof State
Auatln, Texas
Dear 8lrr opinion HO.
rrer l3etluul
Your rsque8t So
h&3 been I7MeiVOd #MM!OOQS
quote fmm your letter of
*For the tax
or bras round no ia
or State, however, reolami-
b pubA.iout;lltlea and proo6eded
86 franeailretaus u&or Sub-
*In thr trlul OY the @me judgaeat was rodered
in favor 0r the piaintiris and against thu State OS
Texas. '3~ JuQper:t of the trl%l oourt was rubrequently
aftlrmed by tho 3rd Court of Civil Appaels, 174 SW(2dJ 70.
Thls daoision wen rendered Duly 28, 19L3, and DO writ of
error W%B %pplhu? for.
Y3e0tlon 2 of Art1010 7057b providesasong other
fhfnge 66 follow8r *P%oridod, bowever, where a olae0
ootlon1s brought by any tax-parer all other tax-payers
bolon~ir~ to tn. OlEOO
who hare pro9er
9ohm1 not be required to tile esperate wit8 but ahall be
ontitled to at;Q ~or#raeQ by the Qaolol6a ru#QwoQ la ltoh
elauu eiotlan. A 018#S aotlon OhUl taoltrdoany llt
*It is to be noted tha8 the ault broPghtby Texas-
Xexlo%n R&iluayC~~panyan6 San Antonio ROuthwnRtilway
0-y 0oaplIes nlth tibadOfInlLl4sn0s a olism mtloa
a* oontaiaed in th rte6uto rlma +han uom a8 rweJTas
two plalnWia Jo- ln t&o but uutt tin
le~gu~go
%uQ reproaeated ia suoh olaua Mt 1 oat appoad.n& ln MO
statute preoo4lng the datlnltlm M l oh85 aotbm mom0
pomfblg to lndioate thetekl @eWe8 lxpeeoblng
to alalm
the benoilta Of the 01~0 aotioa should pa~sibl~ bs CWOU
in ths petitionax~otherwl~ raprasekkte6la the Ooit.
lwna~ous rallr~Q8 ftilln& rLtbl.0 th0 naae olaes
adtTerse-baloaa and son Antonio ;55outberahave naw aa0
Qwands of thi6 offi ior a Tuftlnd Of e&k Of&It Of
ircmohlei taxea haratoforo ptildunder protest. Hone of
these railr0aQs, emept Temm-i~exioorianQ %9anAntonio
::outhern, wore 6QU#t?iWt11y naLaoQ a0 pulntrtrm tt the
petition,and so fplr
88 thlroffldellli
abviswl,none04
the otfierslaterruM la auah suit but thay mm aantend
thet they ar~ssntttlOa to the benehte of the JuQg000t
runtieredat .+.:7-.burt1
of the STEM ol.1~8aa the naned
373
plalntiffe. :Wer &ate of Jamary 18, 1944yo,ur
departm~t in A latter .mdressed to Non. Tssee Jtmoe,
?tata Treamrer, apeoif~oally authorlsed a refund to
the plaiotlffr amed itithe ju@.unt.
*In the lluht of the crbow t;rete,will you
pleaee advlee tr.leGepartrxbntupon t&s foXlowln.g
~QUiXi68:
*A. Is it neoesMry thnt one olslmlng the
bensilts 0E tho olaas eotlon prmlded r0r la SeOtlon 2
or Artlals 705?(b) be speolfloally named as a plaintiff
in a suit to reoovor r2mnohi80 taxes.#ald
or lnti3rvercor
under protest.ln or?ferto alsim the benefit8 of e jude-
smnt .ronberedin 8 alass aotlon7
3pOulU this ~fi'ioarefund the frmohlse taxes
pa%4 $r pretest to t&o88 railroad soapasiss is the
aem alasr ss Terms MeerisssRailway Caay)aaJand 3sn
Antonio FWuthorn Railway Goap%rw?
tjhojlathis offlcre in We ll@ht oE the
Court,;?.UW AppeelsQeelsl&irbtio roforrad'to, main
ruolusiig mmh ~Ureodr and eampute Weir t&x08 here-
after unbar Bubaivislos (b) 01‘Artlole 7084Eather thsn
as a publ1~utflity Under %hQhl~lan (Qlan yea hsrete-
fore done?"
I.
So6tion 2 or~Artlol@ 7057b, Vi A. 0. 9., proride8:
?Yjmn the paysmit of aueh tarsa or f*eBt a~oeotnpnled
by.auoh nrltten protest,tbs taxpsyqr shall have niasty
(90) bay* fxaslamid dates witth+nrblah 00 file suitfor
the reootery thereof. . .I
La sspeol6llw true in view al She qualiifeattonr the atetute
psorltiea of these other tarpayem rho aim11 not bo repulsed
to file separate sulta. Them other tax#ererel&; f,",,";g
myso (1) iuastbe "of the same olamw$
rated In auoh aotion" ad (31 aust "hftt~aOi)Orly proteuted
88 hersln pmwldeu.w If Q tarpayer is of the 88~28olass as
tho8e Sillng the stilt,and has properly protest&d, he 1s
thdn pZIBittd tieiat@WTetW ia tbt Wit itIStO@dOf b&ng
re~ulred to tllr an lMepc+ndmt cult. This w60 prmldsd by
w Lq&alature in ardor to avoid a multfplloity of ruftm.
nota of 1939, 46th Le&lature 9. 8. Ro. 400, iseo.4.
A$eont mm& a rtatutfmy provis~oo, this taxpayer~a attempted
&lpder ln the ame muit would be iPlpropb& and woald not be
panltted, aa his oakme ef eotion is 8rpuata end Uietinot
ftolathat of the plaintiff who brought the auit,
That affirmative aotion ir re uired oi the taxpiyor
wlthln the ninety URy period ia rmihw Pnuioatiea by them
&&ultlolml proTis~onmr
"It wit 18 not broughttidbhln
the t&m aa4within
muanerBezels b2m3wlddI.
tit0 b . thanaed in thatwent
It elm11 be t&e duty of the State 'huasumr to tranrfar
luoh yamy Zxwn the ru8pmmo,aooount to the prox#r fund
. . .
Under thlo rZI,loR, (Baww inted out b Confer-
enae Oplaton Nai 301$ r-Opinion No. O-640r3”
, 1S at the exptratlon
ef ninety daye sio suit has !xwn film3 by %hsl protortlng tax-
pyer, for t&o rwemery af srloh taxer, the OOlL00tlogdepart-
imnt oamet 1eLegelly keep or oauw to be kept ia ru8pense euoh
taw4.
*The iaeuea to be Uetemalaed in euoh #tit 6hti.l
(Emphasis ours)
seotion 4 of krtlole 7057b protides:
hereinabove
by suoh pub110 offloial and that'
taxmmr. theA and in that
event it ahall-ibex
the d&y o? &e~Stak Tma8urer to
rotund auoh unount,together with the pro rata interset
earned themon, to m&oh tax&nkyer.* (%&pha818 aura)
Thle prorislon, as 1* pointed out is Oplaion No.
048l9,~meant8 thet r8fWl OM be anda only after W&utent
fnrorable t0 taxpayer.
Seetlon2 rafus to ruoh aotion al)a
Although
*8Y"us ratfal," tt Is submlttdlthat it 18 not a ola88 aotlon
fn the uauaI eenm, but Ls one in a very lidted, atabutory
WE% B th8 01688iO ~18 Of the teX?R (Cma the dOefd1IU&8Or
the emmta.at equity sag be exmiaed to deter&&i8 whether
*wati$& pro~lslocr are mpplloable to a gtven ma0 -&7 c. f.
i+J,Sea. 831 Tobla t. PortluM Wll$ag Co., U Or. 269 62 P.
7631 q elma aetlt+tir; e muftbreu&ht by one or 110~8 $alntifio,
for tbhmnl.+w sod ethem almUarly*it~ated whm'a a o-
or general iptuest la InvoWed or the p&e* ue ~0 numerous
Chat it would be impraotQ%itbleio bxf them all before the
wart, and their oommm 8ftuatien snd"Bntmst -he it pmmlble,
or their grad mmbu makes it neeesruy iar one or mare to
mNPr(limlItal1. 1 FX?eexmiOn ~Ud&BE~S t&h Ed. 950 Se& 4351
20 I?. C. L. 669, 6ee. 9; 62 C. t. 1001: Sea. 12k &are there
mum00 bo a maplate deterialnrt~eaot the oontrwereg uithbut
the prommoe of the pwmm la uJmi8 bakmlf l&e plelntlit
lwlaga the sot&n, a mgreeecalrtite Ot *la86 aOtion 86nnot be
aalntelaed. 47 3:.J. 43, Sea. 64, 8cd authorities oited.
Where there eriete 45mu8 0oraffuUtg of iatrreet
in a gu~stion of a a olarrasot&en miuiat be maintained.
%kus a bWrOw63 who &d beea ohsrged WUT~OW interest Ootia
not me for hfa8elf tmd al8o ior the benefit of other8 wEe
bed paid tha aa.m dstcmdaautuoux-louaiatemlrt to ~eoo*ar such
~~ssent6, althaugh the aetion was Sow&id upon t&e 8fme 8tatute.
ThaPas ** Yecixa:sy Rust co., 156 IQ* 260, 160 a. -:.1037:
47 C. s. 47, see. 929
A0 worn said in Trustemor Jaakeon T0wnmhip v.
T&S#iA; 51 Ohlo St. 285,37 N. E. 52).526:
'A suit to reewer ba& is qalte 4ilYexent in
tne growla uponwhioh a raowerg OM be ha4 frost R
suit ta enfoln8 tax, IA the latterO(l8d,eaah fa
not only interested in the question Involved, but e
So here, the rarlous pxot~6tMtm aust be W&a
the oowt (eaahwltain90 days frwnthe date of SiUng his
proteat), eNher a0 putlw piamirr or lntww5erts, beaausor
1. The taresarem not joid.
2. B&ah proteat Is 8emrato and dit&laat and
laPet 8tsnd 05 ltb Awn asl4C8. 0s netwwlty
the oourt oannot
drteraiae the ralialty of the ixrdirldsmlproteats, rhlah
aze 88xlatly aautrued uhwe mab or t&e& ia not preamited
and at lame. 0bt10& the partydw lartitute4the wrlli
ir lntoreste4 only in protin& the validity of hla om protest
aad right w refed, and ban io no scumer bs maid ce represent
pXOt8StAAtllBOt ~0IWAt.
3. ikiohpayaient $6 a mparste tzWmablO5. Aa
-ah taxpayeP6 aauso ot aatlon ir 8opanbe an4 diatinot,
8h4ra la no atmao titlm 01:,8uoh%deAt&ty or interest a* to
bring dli *ithin the tie 8r vimal ~0p~~~krbit35.
t-h.6rights ati awaif or aaah alab far wund
ww.bi not bo ae *4ju4la*ti~A ror another.
5. S-emate doreases woi0.d be r~~ulrs4 ta raaah
alalm.
xeaovarisa wwl.4 haos to be rdJu4&e4
6. ::a,s?arste
to eaoh alelmant.
Thcspurpose oi tho requlmme~t in Seatlon 2 of
7057b, thst ttm proteetlag tnxpeyer mist rth suit
.rirtfcle
~a his alai% within ninety 4eye is to quiet the title to
,mneye,
the :~.tst.o*r and to enabia Cm auspenae acaomt
&tam to be plao8d in the funds to whiab they bslon&. Tf
any otiieroo~struoti.on then the one we adopt be plaoed
an the *claes slation’ pravlelau, 5any swpenso ltsm .ziay
r*oaiA in CpiWtiOII lAd6iiAittiy.
h SASWBP to YOU? riLr%tiAqUiPy We hotd that
It 1s naaoeaary for om alaMt& tha berm& or the “alaas
nation” provided ln Sootion 2 oi Arblale 7057b-to be speaifl-
any naree4(LBpi615tirr 5r ln~ommer in auuh sul~t In order
to moorer Sraaahlse texeo peld uadsr pmatesf.
IL
The judspunt in Capw Eo. 63,609 in the 96th i
Plstrlat Court or Trawls County, style4 The Texea !.fexlaan
RallvrayCo., st 61. -8.:z.0. FUmoxa, et al., entare 05
NW. 23, 19.2, rezi40In part 6throlloval
“It la thereforeordered, .dJu4@ en4 drone4
br the ammt. . . theft
“(3)The drremlant,isseeJamas,Raa~unr or tha
State of Texae, mke proper refuad ae prorIde by
Extlale7057b,am amended, to saoh eorporatloa of the
aleea r0r the benetlt 0r whlah thla 8ult he8 bean lnstl-
tutea an4 whiah
o 2; “v; ygg&llcd with Artlole 7057
68 6~93ma,9 0 an 1% 0 it to a refund-la aaao
ulth thla judgmsnt.W (:%lphe81*ours)
i%r the rwmu18 set out ln anewer to yQur Pirat
lw~~lry, the railroad aaapsnierr8cw demndii%j refund hate
not aoaplied trlth the pr~~l~ltmi of &Mole 7057b eo rret0
entItle them to A refund. There have b06~ no ilndlngs on
the follmis&$, ell of which %r6 eaeentlalto reoaresyr the
DLi:ze of tliatnxpaye~~ mat t&I taxpayer p&I under PrQtUiit;
thnt ~363ta~~payQrf5protest was valid end stated m.efi0i~~t
~JUA~SJ tent ths crourt aati.05 , am *a eeoh swh taxpsgsr, WA%
1ttzt.i t,utedwithin tha ninety day parlad$ tk amount duo it
aa R refund.
Th~rd~r~, you should not,mfumi the franahisr
wea apaf~?under proteat, to the railroad aofnpani~s%n
quastton.
. III.
The Court of Cfrll Appaalo, fn Fleers; et al.
f~*IWms ~~xiaan Ry. Co,, et al., 174 3. 6'. (Zd) 70, held
that rsilraaa oorporations, regludlsas of whether they
r&ually yafd a tax upon fntan&ibla asIot6, were ontitled
to the fom-JfZths trxenptlonon acrrporatioafrwohise taxea
granted by Artfale 7084, Slotion b, V. A, C. S., to eorpoms-
tions wow required by law to pay annually a tax upon
igtaagible awets+. * At piwe73 the oeurt eaiPr
*Tke erl&mt purpose of 3ea. B w-as ta rrlleve
those aorpore.tlona Re a oltwa that were
potler for taxatfcsn&I1 of their pmprrrty %%%&ble
htangtblr. ‘i?hhfs wea not aade dependent uponthe
%%mt of swh lntmqible8, relatiroly or otherwise.
A railroad tight imn ~hysfual pnt~erty that maa aotually
tared at ~61~s of 8im.y&llione and yet ita ~tar&&fbles
(for a given year) mfght be amisenod at only (I few hundred,
and the tax thereon be asgligible, or et least rolativmly
S0. How~vor. euah raflrmd wQuld Sal& within SSO, B tho
scme ao ane that gaid a rslativsly great fntangkble tax.
The the&my of the 4/S axetnption0lsarLy 16 ;i$;s~~pora-
tloan whom iatan&blee are FeuuireU to be a
under th aat 81% paying ptom ~6x1~ upon 4 full rendf-
tlon basis than thallrs net wit&in the aoti and this wIrethor
Tktw, fn wswer to your third inquiry, you should
rwlaeritjv auah raU.roadrrand ooiuputetheir tares hereafter
under :ieotioab of Artfolo XV&, V. 3. (7, S.
Trustlnr thrt tno foregoing rully ~11swer8your
inc,ui%so, b*)nrc?
You!? vary truly
Arthur I..Yeller
hssiatant