Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Your request for hn telstlre to the above subject conalder$d by this departmeu Restated, your rir a person who braads but rmallec figure Article 1484,~Pena the brand ia PlaC 8heeF and goat8 t ful for the oouns 18s Of sni!s!3is UpOn VblCb uo perroas register the azure ereat polats on the aaimals’ uho has cattle, bogs, sheep or n ear aark an& bread differtag clerk of the county vhere such animals shall be. 30 periton shall use aore than one brand, but may re- co& hlo brand In as msay counties 8a he deems nec- crsar7.” Artiole 1486 of the -enal Code proVidea: “Any couaty clerk vho rhall record any brand vhen the person hating tbe same recorded falls to loowable ~14~ Jurrg, page 2 deolgaata the prt of the animal upoa vhloh the urn Ir to be placed ahall be flmd aot less thaa tea aor more thaa fifty dollars.” The la stquoted lrtlole I8 an lxtraotloa from the Aat of Maroh 23, 1874, (flea. &VI, 14th Leg., p. 45, 100. 52). ~&ion 20 of this Aot required the party having a brand re- ewded to derigaatr tha part of the aalmal upon vhloh the braad voald be pl-ti. Although this seotloa va0 omitted vhen the statutes vero retired, the oourto have be14 that It Is plrIa, troll reading Artlole 1486, oupra, thst the reoord of a braad te be logal, the .reoorder auot designate the part oi the anIma1 wn vhloh the Maad Is to be placed. Xarvell v. State, 2 S.N. 66. The court In the ~080 Of Reese v. State, 43 Tax. Cr. R. 559, 67 3.Y. 325, luotalned the coatentlon that a recorded braod’de8igMted as a figure elther on the hl or side of an aala violated our penal statutes porldlng -La t ao~rooa shall have more than oae brand aad ,provIdIng aa offense for sly eouat$ Olerk to reoord any brand ualeo8 the p8rt OS the a-1 upon vhlch the same lo to be placed 18 deoigaated. Ao- 0~61 Steed t* State, 4) tex. Cr. R. 567, 67 S.U. 330. In the light of these cases, ve agree vlth the oourt la Relamuth V. State, 1 Tex. Ct. of Clv. App. R. 580, vhere It stated that tho lav seems to make .the particular portlaa of the animal upon vhlch the brand is to be placed equally as Important as the letteps or +aractero rued in the braad~ltseli. fhe#e luthorltleo In effect hold that a tlgure lo- sated oa dliiereat pert8 of an animal’s body Is aot u braad that oaa be properly recorded la lcoordanoa vith the provl- oloao of our m.rks aad brands ltacuteo. Further, that ouch a recordatlon I8 In rIolAtIon of our pmal strtuter, om of vhlch lo th8t no perran shall have In use more than oae braad. In other vords, thr sam figure. at dlfrereat loeatloao oa the lnlmal’o body la aot one brand but reveral brands. Therefore, vo agree vlth the~olualaa reached In Opinion Ilo. O-1114, the ooundneos lf vhloh you queotloaed, la vhlch VI held that tvo perooas may hate the same figure as a brand ii plaoed at dltterent polnto on the lalnmls~ bodies. Ye are of the oplaloa that the looatloa OS a bread should be ths same aotvlthotandlng the olasr d anlmala aa Iadlrldusl possesses. lie hate found a0 luth6rIty dIreotly Supportlag thlo oontentlon, hoverer Artlole 6890, supra, In Proriding that an lndlvldurl 8bould bare ln use on17 9 brand ._, . -Fable Alax Jung, page I ,+! of a perroa vho has Cattle, hogs, ohsap and &ats. There w 90 iafereaoeor refereaoo vhatooerer that la o hp er so amy n ,y,e for laoh ol888 of aalmalr ho 0~01. 8 braad CoaaIderIng w8 fret la ooamctioo vith v&t vo hare uld a8 to thhr in- we of the lOCatIOn oi tlu braad, ve Se01 ooastralaed to u &hat tb fIg~r8 8M lo88tl@a ot tha braad should be the If m mtvlthetrrrdiry the vwlous olasooa of 8nImsls an Indl~i- To rnbrtantI8te thir aoaoluslon, it need be, ve re- st8t8, 20 8. Il. 740, aa8 Led- better v. 3tSto, 32 g. V. 903, vheroin the oomt8 held that ,e lt8tut.8 do Rot require the reoorder to derlgaato upon vhloh 8~80 of animals the brand 18 to be used. fhl8 Is Indicative mt th e la ms braad , iigure aad looatloa, lo to be used by a -goa aa all hi8 lnl~l8, for l.f not, the reoorder should shov r@h olas8~oignrtlon a0 the purpose or the registratlao rtai- 8te8 vould be fulfilled. Although it I8 our oplaloa l'psr;od 18 urlng more wn one brand vhea ho brand8 hlr cattle vlth the same figure em 8 dffiereac body plrrt t&a he brands hls sheep aad goats, m do not bellore suoh a person la so dolag would be violating Utiole 1484, Pearl Code, vhlch prorldeo: gbhoever In &lglnally branding or m&king '., ” ” cattle uses more thaa one wrk or b&d shall ba "., fla4d. not less than tlieaty-flro aor ‘6oro than oae b$red dollars for e8c-h lnIma1 so branded or murk- It vi11 be aotloed that the above statute rpeaks ot using more t&n one brand vlth refereace oaly to oattlo. Thlo statute 8ao part Of OOCtlOn 41 OS Aotr OS August 23, 1876. AS to the WOW OS thla Aot, ve IlnQ thereio the folloving provloloar . . provldod this Aet shall aot be so ooa- atrued*.; to lnoludo sheep, goats, ovine or hldeo of either. . . .” tbrefore, lt oa0 safely be said that Article 1484, supra, 8p- flI@O onl to cattle, end ona rho uses a dlffereat bread 00 hi8 ~ep~goats thaa on hla oattle lo not l ubjeot to proseou- tion thereunder. Iaoofar as the county ilrrk recordlag different brands $8~ an lndlrldual oa his rarloUo elaooeo of animals, ve.hare noble Alex Juog, paw 4 *d no provlslon or strtute vhloh vould sake it unlaviul ir bl,E to do 80. The foregolog oonolusloao have been reached oaly 8Ster each lorue preaeated vu8 oare?ully studied aad coarlder- rd. IOU have rrgued that by allwing tvo perooas to use the se,e figure for a br8ad but St dlff@F@nt pOlat0 on tbe lal~ls' )odies vi11 oreate oonfu~lon~ an example subaltted vas If tha fume ~8s placed ‘2 Iaehea 1eSt of @@atOroi right shoulder .’ ma vould oause ooafuolon to the reoorder, Ye admit, but lf eae figure i8 deslgaatee as oa the hip, 8houlder or side, aad the plan IO logically oarrled Sorth by ports OS the aalrmrl & not by decimal ueaouremeats, ve oaa sea no great oause for OlAW. .:a You have pointed out and Ye have conoldered the lm- ~gotl~lllty a? requiring a brim! to be plsoed on the same bdy pO$qt OS Sheep and goats aa lo placed oa cattle. This ~~aot~lllty has 8rloen bec+of~ our lPark0 and brands otat- gtgo have not been rollovee. As queer, as It may appear, It ggoao tbat It Yam the lntentlon OS the ~g~8l8ture la enaotla& oilf oltll statutes on omks Sad brands that cattle should be grkGzktgd branded but that hogs, sheep and goats should only . Ue arrive at this CoacluSIOa after reading the orl- g1na1 rot from vhloh our ascot 01~11 statutes vere derived, tbls befn~ the Acts ot~.l8 r 8, ps 156. rhlr Aat atter providing ror person8 to hate differeat braado aad marks apeoifled that rattle should be la r da r k ed or brended before tvelve months old r& bogs, sharp and oats shall be marked beiore 01x months bid. Also see Artlole 689 8 , Rerloed Civil St ltuteo. Our oourto rec- ognlre the dlotlnctloa betveea oborko and breads. Johnroa vs. &ate, 1 Tax. App. 333. Ye have also aotloed th8t House Bill 170 (aov Artl- ale 6899-l) requires thst In rtoordlag tettoo wko th8ra should be o $colgaatioa o? the types OS aaimalo upon vhlch the mr’ko We to be used, You hare suggested that such a procedure should be Solloved vlth our ear-marks and brandr. Although ooneedlag laob a method of recording vould be more nearly proper, such a ehoge vould hare to be lcooapllahed by legislative aotloa. yurthesmoru, ve eaanot say thst the Leglr&ture intended that tbr Prooedure prescribed for reoordlng tattoo Mrkr should be Solloved in recording msrko aad brands, SOr by a speclSIo pro- Vision Ia House Bill 170, oothl~8wrela affects our rarks and ~mdo records. We quote In part from your letter vith refereaoe to your a@xt group oi lat8mog8torIes: .(a) Goes te lppl~oatlo~ of -8 Qgure In pint on aa saI5al oautltuts brsndlagt “(b) Ia ihe owur reatrletad to tha use of the same figure as registered VhSa ho u808 palat? '(cl 18 be reatrlctod to the 8ame polat 00 th eb o d y o fth ellr iP ra8a shova 1 by ths reoord vhen applying Olirrt?’ Although Ye have Sound a0 FOXaS oasee as to vhat our oUtuteo maa by ‘brmdLog,” ve believe tha ooUN ia the CBS8 of Chuvchl11 v. Oeorgls RSIlrOad & BankLcrg Co., 108 Oa. 265, g. E. 972, very rptly StSted the meurlag of “branda? aad 1’ arp’ as used la our otatutea vhea It usid; 0 l!he vord ‘braad’ IndIoate8 some Slgure or dev;o; hraed upaa the aalma by a hot lroa, aad the vord ‘wk’ indicates generally 800m ohango mea la mom part OS the anlmtil by l kalSe or other, meaas ,. -- such 80 ~borlng or l llttlag the ear: The ‘~‘. ‘brand@ lo ~moreoommoal~ used upoa come aalmala le ~’ a means OS ldeatISlcatloa, -- ouch 88 horoeo, mules, and the like; vhlle otherl are generally ld8atlSIed by %arks’ 8ade by kaIfe outs la the ear, -- ouoh as oattlr, hogs, and the like. . . .a Aooordr Pollwh v. Kansas City, 87 km. 205, 121 P. 985: 42 L. R. A. (X. 8.) 465. Ue therefore lasver these qwotloas la the aega- tire. For the next ocrIeo of questi- ve quote from your lrtter as r0ii0v01 '(8) it a ViObti= 10 Of tit. 1484, OUpSS, for one to in the ear 0s an a-1 pl8CS a tattoo mrkae additionally aaother OS ths oommoaly used ear MrkS vhloh Ouch perooa ha8 reOOrdedT ‘(8) ky the tattoo mark show&by the oerti- ficate mmtloned u sec. 9 0f he. 6899-1, CIT. St., ba r.COrd.6 b7 the Count7 Clerk la the -me book - kept for tha pWpo00 of rroordbg vrkr rad brrado &or raid 8. B. 170 (Art. 6&g)? ‘(0) II it poralrrlble for the County Clark to k eepl rqmrato reoord of 8uoh tattoo mark81’ It la our oplmloa that House Bill 170 providea l 1U. and dlrtlnct method OS ldvntlilcrtloo. For amorous raw loon vo do not bvllrvr Artlolr 14&, rupra, vould be rlolat- ,d if l per-a l8r-mrked 4ad tattooed the 88M lalml. E%P- mpk8 8ad t8ttOO Mrk8 8F8 tV0 bl8tbACt Mthodr Of ldentlflc8- (ion, 88 different 48 mark8 rnd br8ndr. Article 1484, 8upm. 8pe8k8 only Of Crttl8 8136 br8ndr 8nd Mr-Mrk8, vhlle &W8e ~111 170 de818 Only Vlth t8ttoO marklog Of hOg8, 8heep aad gmt81 iIt 0th’ VOrd8 , fit1018 1484 dsrl8 vlth 8 differeat 01888 of ralmdr 8nd L differeat type of ldeatl~lortloa from that PO- frrreb t0 l.Ta HOU88 Bill 170. ,~ ., BOU80 Bill 170 3WOVidO8 tbrt 00p1.8 Of th88e t8ttOO Mrk8 rhould be Slled la thr County Olerk'8 oltlee ol the ooun- ty of the 8ppllC8llt'8 r88ldenO8 la l rOgUb book for that put- m8e. Althou& it 8DDC8P8tohave been the lntrntloa OS the ~iUtti8 68t thr-‘tattoo Mrk8 rhould b8 kept 011~ record Fa 8 rsp8rate book, VI 808 DO brrn W&dthiak it pW8188lble to CC- cord there t8ttOO nurkr la th8 ram book vlth M r k r ld brmd8, provided the t8ttOO Mrks 8re properly 8O@O@t8d 8nd titled 80 88 t0 &2MlOllt COoiU8iOll 88 t0 th8 MtUN Ot tb Mrk8. For JOUP u8t ~UO8tiOa, VO ag8in Quota trO0 yOUr r8- QUO8t: “Do08 the r8oord-owner of l brand. (tiguro) ha*8 priority upon rr-re&rtratlon vhore thr rot- ord do88 not d180108r th8 point on th8 body ot the rnlmal vhsro the brand 18 to be plaordt" We ln8uer thir quertlon in thr Mg8tlTo. A8 polntod out in the 0.~88 Of Hwvrll v. gt8te, luprr, lo ordrr t0 hrv0 l leg81 bwnd, thr rroordsr oi the brand murt drrlgnate the por- tion ot the 8nim81 upon vhlab the flguro 18 to bo ptoed. Vlth- Out 8uoh l de8l&MtlOn, th0 lark Or ii&W. 18 not I lrgtllly !‘a- Oorded brand, the type our re-moording 8t4tUtO giv88 priority # pa8feremOe t0 rO-r8OOrd. Themtore, 8 p@r8oa, vho hA8 00 r Ho r d l ii& We Vith 00 iK&diOatiOa l8 t0 VhOra it 18 to b. puaod on the a-1, ha8 no profrrentlal right to iare it ,,,rroordrd under our nev rroordlng 8t8tUt8. we tXW8t the fOr8gOhg ftily lOIVIC8 YOW QUW tioar* Robert 0. Xooh AS818ant