Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN g-able V. B. Qoer county Att--Y You have rtqwrte of thle department lpon the r0110vlngr mane0 coun- same brand in eath o? (A) re- date es appears an the record book bee prefarenoe. Therefore, under article 6899, if a dlepute arises as to who has the preierential r$gbt tq reoord 8 mrk, this preisrenoe belongs to the person who hils had the particular mark on reaord the loagest . t&arksant5 brands are persona1 ppopert and are eub- ject to be sold or lnborlted. Rankin v. Bell, 85 Tex. 28, 19 3. W. 8743 ?A¶better v. State, 35 Tex. &, R. 195, 32 9. V. 9038 Dugat v. State, 67 Tax. Cr. It. 46, 148 S. U. 789. V.” Honmab& 0. B. War, page 2 ft 10 also prmtaalble for an lndlvldur;l to ahmga or abandon a r8oordeclvrk or bran&. Moc1ulw V. shwk’a nelra, 68 Tex. 426, 4 Se W. 552; Dugcatv. State, rup~a. Thrrerore, und6r the given rasata, ii (A) had not lbadoned or ohanged the &urk lo queatlan at tha tlm6 of his dea th,lud (C) 6811ahov he is the doviaee or 614 l&malt thla mk, than it la our o~inian that (C) has the ~feraxW.al right to raoord this bm14 under Artiolo 6899. rr thote raota oamot be shown, than (B) Lo. our opinion poasoaaea this pm- fexwntlal ridght. Your* vary truly ATTO- OEIIRIUL OF TEXAS ROK:db