OFFICE OF TIIE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSI’IN
nonornbh DflA 1f. faOk8OA
Distri6t IittOl'Aey
nous ton, Texda
Dear Sir:
dCr Ue- 8A ~QffiOiol
latlnc to the OOA-
, Title 122, Da-
statu.tos AliAotntedl
apply to the r0ii0ma
5~ arrondoue deaorlption whloh'
roparty AOt omad by him aA&
rroneoua a6QeSSWAt. In the
arronaous dasorlption la Lot 18,
Houstcn, which he did not own,
R, I3look ~160 !:outh llouston, ~whloh
he did OWA. The taxpayer ~alzs th%t ha ha?z oellad
tbla error to the attention of ths office of thaw
ne?asgor but that th6.prOporty cata beok on’ tha 1
rolls ur.dar the e.rron,eous doeoription on& the tax- .
payer ~nadrartently failed to nota the erroneous
deeorlptlon IA the list praparad by the ottlor of
the Irssa8sor Sor hi8 sl@mtUra; but 190 i%nAot~'
assume for the purpose6 of this OplAiOA thst,thlr
fact hsa bean aatabllshad.
I
242
tionorsblo DCA .X. Jaokson p-F3 2
62. Is suoh payment a dlaoh3rga of the taxes OA
the~proparty aobunlly oanod by the taxpayer?' Are tha .
taxse~dellnqusnt OA ths propsrtf eotuallg owned by tha . a.
taxpayer notwIthotindin&.thls pnymont?
"3. If suoh pny.mnt dlrohnrgee the taxes, murt
this bs ylend dofensivaly In a tax ioreoloeure suit
ln a distrlot oourt, not having yat brati filed, or may
tha Uoiniulssioners~. Court eorreot th&,‘!rolla’ao es to
sbow that the taxes harr’ bean psld? Thlo ‘quertlon
lnvoltes the .proper prooadura share taxes appssrIA8
OA the .dclInqucAt roll .RS dollnquant have in feat
been paid.” .
.’ .
The mmv6r to yonr qiaestion involves the 0onstruotIo~
of hrtlole 733R.. Ch. lOi TIkle..1224 %llnghrAt~ Texee,. V. C.S., .
For oonvenlauoo wa.ouote this statute insofar aa ralavsnt
$ihla oplnlon, a8 follovk?r .’ .: ”
lRsa1 estots which A& hdye batin ran&wed for taxer
and paId under erroneous desorlptlon eiten.In aaseeemsnt
1
i
rolls,
.. or lands that may hava
- - baon.dulO'as8as'aad'rAd
.-.. tax60
jl6lU OA On4 .6848tXK!l43it, or laaas wnl6n may hav6 beeA asoerard ..~:y :,.,
nnd tax68 paid thcreoa:In a oo*mty other' t&&the one in' :' : ::
.'
whlOh th6y are looated, orlands ?rhIoh may hnocr been mold
,.- to the S&to atid UPOA whloh ‘taxaa, hava bdikti oaid snd throuah
error note Oredited-IA t@e cs#easmaAt rolls,~ ihall oo’t br -
deemed oubjsot to the- provbslone~ of thla .ohaptsi.* ‘.
The ~61~ gucstlcn.ls wh6ther or not In.vI6w of thi'a
nrtlols of tha abtutes the taxpeyer udar the olrcumstanoe8 .
outlined in four.lettsr has in truth’and ln,taat fald hlr’
taxe8, althou& upon aA erroAeou8 d6eorIptluA In his 8s6eo8-
mtnt.
X%ars of ths OPIAIOA that although thla taxpayer
trroneously doeoribsd th6 property actually Owned by hlm.In '
hl6 rendition, or the Asssaaor arroneonsly desorlbed It, ho
ncoortheleoe by vlrt&e ~of’artlola 7338'aupra, I8 protsoted
and has paid his taxes as'etf6otlV6l aa thuu.g!h ho had prlld'-
the.3 upon n coryeof degop$ptiOA Of t K6 1Md SOtUsllY OgCd
by him. #\r w6 view It thIs'~,artloIo of th6 3t3tUt8 Wa3
emoted by the L6fjf0latW6 for .the oxprnsa pur OS4 of tflkl,ng
6are of 4 situation cuoh~.ng grosanted,in'yuur Eetter. If
lt 1s not su~oaptIbl6’of,thls oon8truOtkm thcut to OUF mInda
it la more or lass meoAlA~lasa end IncffeOtlve in~aboom llrrhk
ine the purpose wkioh we.:thIAk the Legislntu2e had iA 6$Ad
Lo ltr anaotment.
243
Eonoreble lJan ii‘. Saokson page 3
We bslieve that outi viaws are sustained by judioial
&,hoPitJ’ as herelnsrter pointad out. In the ease or Down8
et w v. Yiilson (Galveston Court of 01~11 ~ppenls) 183 S. w.
803, the Oourt there oons’t~ued and applied~ Artlola 7694 which i#
.4rtiola 7338 of the present oodlrioation with whloh we are hero
oonoarned, wb.Gra %t was contended by a mortgagee that he was
entitled by virtue of the provisions of the deed or trurt par-
a.ltting the aooaleration oi the entire indebtedneae upon the
failure to pgy texes by the mortgagor before they boom& delia- :I.
quent to fOr8OlOse his lien baoauae tha mortgagor had tailed .
to pay taxes before they beoama delinquent; in other worda,
it ~63 oontendad that the mortgagor had failed to pay hia taxer,
although he had paid tnxas upon the land owned by him under an
erroneous deeorlptlon. The Court of Civil Appaala dld not
rustaln this vim, but expressed what we. think is the oorreot
applloatlon of thia etatute ln the following langueget
uAppellee~s~oontentlon 1s that ae the tax aasasa-
&nt and reoslpt. for pe$?nsnt of taxes for the pears 1913
and 1914.show thst appallants aseersed and paid tams on
the land eltuated on thd T. Kalkar-and John ?Joors leapae,
md doee not show that he assamed any~ land on the Wing-
field mrvey, 60 muoh of the land aa was on the XlnEfleld
survey wne not dsssaeed nor the taxes pald.thereon Sor said, ‘.
years, and that thcroiore appellea had the rlGht, unaer
the terns of sold dtmd of trust, to deolare all of ~the ‘.
notes @van by nppellants to her due and payable, and to
brine her ‘cult at tha tfme she did, and that the suit was
not thererore prematurely brought. ArtloIe 7694, Retlaad ..G.
3tatutas of 1911, provides that, real eat.qte whiah tllay
have been rendered for taxee and paid und62 erroneoul
desorlptlon Given In aeaeeement zolle shall hot be deemed
subject to tho further paynent of taxes, and shall not
be hold delinquent as to payment of taxes,. under the
provisions of ohaptrr 15 of said atotutae, relating to
the assearment end oolleotlon of taxes. iie do not think
that it oan be reaionebly oontended, and osrtainly not
justly oontended, that the oolleotor of taxea ior Qrime8
county oi~ould~be authorized, under the law above referrafl
to, to aooept paymant of taxes due by appel.lata Upon *
their said dereotlve aseeasmeut whan tandersd and ior
which he had issued his receipt, and then th?reaiter
oolloot a seoond tax upon the property 80 detaotivaly
aaaeesed, beoauaa ssid property had not bead aaeaaaod .in
strlot oonformlty u4th the law. Under the ‘law the pay-
ment of the taxes upon the l&O aore .9f land by DOWIN
though under a deieotivr or erroneous~demoriptlon, WSB
. ,
(, .,,~ ‘;. “.
~.:
nonorabls Dan, U. Jeokson raea is
a rull dlsoLarge OS the toxoe duo on Bald land (?KotdIol:le
v, F.oohalle, 125 i3.W. 741 Hollywood vr Vlallhauran, 28
civ. kpp SLl, 68 S.W. 329)”
i:e thlnk~ to the 8amo eifrot 18 the holding la thr
*t/e of Hollywood V. GellhiVM*n, 68 n. m. 329(5saliatonio~~~t
or Clvll Appeala) ln w!lIoh a writ OS error wtsa denied.
WO.1an notion In trespsaa t!) try title by :Wlheusen, thm
,ppgllee In the oeae,-who prevailed In tha trial oourt, who
ola;aed under a tm deed, where it WM oontendsd that nolly-
rood, ths sppellant h&d sot f.aId the t,xea slthouch he hed
=ade mi erroneous aseessnsnt and paid taxes thereon; Thr
oourt hold thst the taxes hod been pold, .anp aooorded to him
the protaotion of the statute 88 It then sxlntsd, which lr 1
in the sama lsny.uaKa 3s It Is now, Art1016 7338, supra. 3n .- .!
dlrposlng of the’mstter, the oourt raldr
. . ,The ruit for taxes aaeinst ther ‘unkaown ’ .:
ownar WI; browht by virtue of ohaptar 5a, tilt. 104
Caylae’ Ann* civ. LX., which was pnsaad In 1897.
After fully and olaarly settin:; forth the nod6 of .
prooedure In the oolleotlon of dsllnquent texoe, it *,
Ia provided In artiole 5232 I. that ‘real e&ate whioh
mny ha+6 barn render&d- for taxes end peld under
arroneour desor,lptlon given In aaaesamtnt rolls, or , :
lulds that any huve been doubly aeseseed end tare8
.?a18 on one esoaasmant, or lands whloh ‘may have been
aseessed and tnraa pald thareon Ir 9 oounty other than
the ona In which thay ar6 looatad, or lends whioh may.
have basn a016 to the stata end upon whioh taxes have 3.
,baen ,I:oId and through arror not oredltod I5 the eeeessr
.cant rolln, ah311 not be .deemed eubjaot to the pro-
rlnlonn ot thSs ch.?q$ar;’ ?!nder the. pr’tIole r-uotod, .‘Y
none of the provisions of the law embodIed ln oh,pter ~“.
5n bad my opplIontlon to the land of the appsllant,
Ha had sasaesed It, and had Fplld tha taxaa on it.
me fsot of the 3aaee~nent mat have been known to
the aaeaaaor, and whan the ault was brou&t, arid
the sffidovlt sodo that the land belonged to aomd
unknown cwnsr, tha court found that the asae8sor
and county attorpay know that It #aa the homestoad
of ~ppallants. 7nowInc thsie i~ofct, the ault wan
filed, rrooaas was obtolnad for unknown owmr8 by
* the aftidavlt of thr’oounty nttoraey, and the home-
ataad of ~gpallantn sold for toraa whIah thry did
not owe* They had done all rrqulred of thsm’by law,
Is rrnderlne their property for texatlon, aad then
paid the taxer; but beoauae they iaI~Lod to append
245
nonorabla Dm ii. Jnokdon paca 5
t0 thQ d4sOriFtiOA Of the property trio wora8, '!Jahon adaltlon,~
they neS> +jud@d - to . . have
. . lost their .-lsnd, glthou&h the
repreaentatlvas Or tne at-at9 icnaw whet land wag mg~t, s&
glthourh there ia no faot found that would tan& to astablish
thnt the dasarlptlon was not all that should have baan rsr
&rod. It oamot be reasonably hold that the fc1lurg fo
attaah ‘Lisbon addition' to-the dasorlptlon or the lana "
ohowod that a difiarant Lot was randarea ror taxation by
arpallants from the one aseaasad to an unknown owner ht
the ns80ssor. There wssb as baford statad, no proof that
thara were other lots ~6 ‘in block 1 In foakum than the ens
in the Xahon add;tionk WGma of the opinion that. under
the fasts, there was no law under whlah tha suit for tha
taxes oould be p~oseout8d, snd the judgment -obtainsa, rore-
aloelne a lien on the property, was null and told, ml.
thllt lt aould be attfiakad under a plea of not guilty, ahd
that the error ln the jud@mt will be noticed hare In ,-
tha sbsanao of Sssi~mants~of error.*
3a.thlnk the oaaa nf Texas & Q. Rallwsy Co. t, ITall
St UI., 125 9. W. 71 (Tsxarkano Court of Clvll Appaale) euetalnr
thr views expressed by us in prlnolpla, olthou(lh the rsats are
adt altoeathar 41m11ar. IA this doolalon the eourt in eiiaot
hald that there ,waa a suffioiant dasOrlptlon and that.tha
dcaoriptloA in tha assassman6 aouia not br naoassarl~y alasalriab
49 SA 9rrOA4OU4 dasorlptlOA.
It follows fros what wa have said above thot hour
first quastlon Is answered iA the arrirantioa. Ana that .tha
flrat p3rt of your .caoond questlon, namly, “1s such payment a.
dlsohsr[e OZ the taxoo on the property satually ownod by the
t9x~nyar,m is agawerad in the arfirinativet and that.the SSObAa
rnit'of that question, "ArS the taxes daliAqueAt on the
property aatually OWAOaby tha.taxpayor notwithstanding thi8
papilent," slrould be aAawarad in the na(jatlva.
'i;a do not deem It necessary that any ault ba fii9a
to aorraat the eltustloA, iO2 wa ballava that this prOVlalOn
oi the atqtuta is by .foroa of Its own tarms aufflolant pro-
tootion to the taxpayer; Since In law the taxes have actually
bran peid by the taxpayer, we ballava the 00mmi8810na~s' OOUrt
hoa the authority to aorreat tha daliAc,uaAt roll8 to shor thi8
trot, but whether the aorraatlon 10 made or aot,,,thr State
.
.
j ~\
’
246
mnorsbla Don. G’. Jaoktion pamb
end aomtg oannot raoovar the taxoo sgnlnnt thin taxreyar
nd e suit ticula be a more tutlle gesture. In other wor48
It IO o ?lCht Inherent IA the law Itself, and not NJ a
aare dotenslva right that thfn taxpayer would hat8 la thr .
muit t&it suit 8hOUl.dbe fllatl aealnrt him.
%%llBtif@ that thi8 Will. 8llti8t8OtOrily8B8lV8r
your qUd8tiOll8,we SW8 /
!.
!
..
PIRSTASSISTANT.
Al’l’ORNXY
C+;rmTHI&n w
-.i,
LPL1n~ .
.