Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

445 OFFICE OF THE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Fonorable Taylor’ Carllale Crl.dmS Distriot :.ttorney jCauf=ien ‘County Icauhan, Texas Dear 3.r I r\ttentlon: i3akeuf oanvenienoe in nnswrin,*:y0Ur &l’OUFd and nwtbercd your qu@.ioW3. $0 trod, the two cpmtlons rrsnd9s io3.lowst *Can tRe Conrd of Jupsrvisora of a Levoa In- PrOvemn~a:~iutrlot naiely proookd In the gollcotion of t5eir dellnr;ucnttarea In either of two ways: under tb ststute prOVidhQ for the oollaotion OP ~itatesnd OOlrntytaxes tlmt,are deli~nr;ucnt - or 446 , ’ ??onorabJ.a Taylor Carlfsls, page 2 2. WStrlotly under t&3 provisions of INiiole 8017 -e~OOOrdi5.?.ly es th0y nay desire 50 FrOostd?" Artiole UN.6 wss enacted 13 1925 by ths 49th LegialatWo or ‘:cxa3, en9 sold article ;rovide3 .93fol~ous,: *Tax collnotoraof levee improvemnt dlatricta ahall perCOrm all duties and ererolse all powers in rasFa:eatto delinquent taxes due levee Improvement dlatrlots a3 may be provided by law for t?e aolleotlon oi delinquent Xata and oount;?toie3, :rcS t!teoollsotion of such delinquent levee tiprovaeat diatrlot taxes and sale@ of Iroperty therefor ahall be governed bj the law8 applying to the oolleotfoa Of dalinSu8nt State and . county taxes Rnd foreolosure deoree thersfor shall in- clude writ of 9os3ss31on. T?tesu9arvisora are al.80 given the po;rerand autboritg to collect suoh delinquent taxce, and to lnatltute and ?rpseaut,ssuit3 in the name of the dlatriat Cor their oolleotlon; and suoh dlatriata are'alao authorized to do and perform all other thinea that nay be aeoessery for the.callnotion of such taxes. Taxes levied under this law shall be a first and prior lien upon all. property ag&.lnstwhloh they sre asaeased., and shall be payn3lo and ahall.st3tureend beoume delia- Went a3 provided by las for &ate and county tarea." Artiole IOBOe, v6rnon~a AriiotatedTexae gtatutae, enacted 1~ 1935 by the 41th LegIelature, reads as follorsr *That all OC the ~oviolon3 of Title 122, of the ‘ievlsedcfvll ::t::tutasor TexaB, or 1925, be, and the S%c6 are r:adesrail3ble in 30 far a3 saw :laybe api.ll- cable and neoessary to all 3ohool dlatrlota and muuiolpal Cor;;orationsorgalzed tinderany Kenera or spool81 law of tkls State and whioh have power and authority to levy aad colloot Weir own tares',%nd t&at eaoh of auoh cor- POratlone 3kaL.lhere the benefit of all liens and remedies for the soourity bjd collcotlon o!'ta:ea due them a3 1s rrovlded in saI-1.Title in the case of tax83 due the Atate end CO!.m ty.* : !m attorney for the OOllection of tholr delinquent taxes withollt the approval Of mot oontmot by the AttOrn8p Gonsral? "1s t;:e.oompansationto thn attorney in suoh :ianorableTeylor Carlisle, page 5 mtlele 7335, Vernon*3 :nnofated statutes of ~‘0x44, allows the Comlssioners~ Court to aontraot with 5n-vaozpetent qttorney to enforce or essist .In enforctig :be ceilaction 0r delinquent State and aounty taxes under >r*scrlbbcdoonditlons. Artiole 7335a , ?. A. C. 3. of Texas, JOt3 ttie !%Xh3u OOqx?aSatiO~ Of said attortU?yst 15 per ocat of the amount aolloated and further ~rovidos that the ooatraat must be approved by both the Conptroller end tine ittorney General of tke 3tate of Texes:. In order to settle the Cuemtion OI?the aj#i- cabllity of these statutes to your westiona, we agoin mst refer to the analocJousdeoisions in del.f;lquanf tax aufts browAt by cities, towns and independentsahool dlstriats. 3~11 9. JLensfieldInd. School Xstrlot, 12Q 3, ‘5’.(2d) 029, deals with the validity or a aontraat bntxeon sn independent ~hool distrlat end a pivate st,torney,where the compensa- tlan Qrovided was 20 per cent of the amount colleoted. The oourt !:eltl t!e portion or ,%rtlcle 7335a, providing for the sXro9al of tax ~aontraats entered Into by the Commissionerst COurt;l by the State author fties nomad, not ap~lioable to delin$uant tax oantracts’entered in%2 by inde>endezitsohocl ~~lstrlots. The oour t reasoned ?&at the State has 4 direct Interest In the oollootlon of Stato and oounty taxes, avheroas it has no auoh direct interest in the colleotloo of del.iqquent taxes Of independent sahool dlatriots. Applying that reasoning: or the su.wene Court to ths instant situetian, we ounalude thet the 3osrd of Super- risers is not reouired to submit their delincuent tax oontraot r;r the aQpravsl*oC the Compfroll.erand Attorney %neral. ?Our question NO, 3 is therefore answered in the aifir@MYQ, if Ux dlntriat proaeeds to .colleot its taxes by tie :3tate -3 aoEnty method hereinbeiore outlined. 3~ also answer queskon;~Xq. 5 in the afY%nuMve if the district Poc8eds under .utioib 8017. action (h) of irtiole eo17 pr09ide~ for the ampi0ynar.tof s.nattorney, and ‘here is no provision for the spFrova1 of such aontrsot by QJr State authority. 1.7.~ neti aonsider question M. 6 set out above. irticle 73354 has no application to suits browht under btiole 6017. however 4 more difriault oucstian Is presented I4 tha event’the dist&at chooses th* state and oounty aol- ’ e”tiJn me&&I ;r.onoreblc Taylor @mllele, :a?..o~ 6 451 ?oonorableTaylor CarliSle, paLTe 7 aouaty attorney to represent t&v levee kqroveaent dfstrfats in mit8 for t)leoolleatlon or dellnc.uenttaxea. Such rep- resentation on hla Part in suits broraht under &Mole 7345b, Title 122, would be isocqatlble with hi3 duties as county attorney, as set out in .Artiole7335. By t!m: artiolo oven thou& he does not represent Vie oountf ln c tax suit, he nust aotivaly amISt the prson with -#hihoE the tss contrnot is -lade,nnd V&O does actively represent fke county in Suoh 3ult. You will also note that by reason of t!m provisions of .@tlale 7345b, the Ltipleadedtnxinz unita are partlee defendant, and of aourse have the right to question the causo of oatlon asserted by the plalntlff or any other im- Pleaded unit. It is plain that the county attorney my not represent the levee dietriot in a suit brought under ,?rtiala8017, it being unreasonable to,preslllce that the fern of reedy deternined upon by the levee iraprovfment distriat supervisors,eating under the auvtcc of their ,attornay,.woulddaternine~whether or not t?,ecounty attorney's employment Would or vmuld r!ot be ircoapatibla. he believe it to be caslly apparent that In a oase where. the acunty attorney could not :epreaant t:lelevee itiprovezentdiatrlo% by remion 0: 51s ofZicla1 status as oounty attorney, that the assistant County attorney appointed by hti would be equally dlsquallrled. Your question No. 8 reads as followa: 8. Tr the taxes delincgant are several tine6 the value of the land against w!lialithey are levied and aaaessed, can the laud be sold at judicial sale after foreclosure ror a leas amount then the total taxes, Penalty, interest, at torheyls fee3 and 003tS?* If the atit is brimght unler t3e provisiona of ?tiOle 8017, the property ~.aybe aold ior any mm that it -TV briq., iJo 1Fni tation aa to the sale Prioo is set by a tic10 8017. Ii the state and 00~l:y OOlleOtion nethod iS 'je% the prVtiSiOfiS of A.mC$le 7345b Vim .:OVC% %CtfOn 3 Or ?aid sot, a3 amended in 1941, provides as follows: 'UPon th8 trial of seld cause the Court Shall hear evidence upon t!m reasonable fair value of the P~opcrtg, and s-halllnoorporafo in its jud~q:enta finding . 452 Yonorable Taylor Carllslo, pane D of the reasonable fair value thereof, in bulk or In parcela, either or both, aa the Court nay deei?proper, whiah roesamble fair valus so found by the Court la hereofter soAe tidea styled *adju;i&edvalue, * whiah *adjudged value’ ahall be the vslue as of the date of the trial and &all not neceasarlly be the Vnlue at the tins the aasesszaentof the taxes was Aade; provided, that the burden of pro6f shall be on the omar or owners of suoh proparty In establishing the *fair’value’ or adjudged rnlue ad provldsd in this oeatIon.e Seatlon & of neld aat reads a8 follows: *:foproperty sold ?or taxes u;lderScores In suoh auIt shall be sold to the owner of said property, dlreatly or lndlreatly, or to anyone having an Intereat thoreln, or to any wty other than a tax@ unit whIah Is a party to the suit for less than the mount of the adJudged value aforeoaid ot said property or the aygre- gate.aOLOuntof’ the judgmntr qalnat tho property In said 8uIt, whfohevar is lower, and the net proceeds at any sale of euoh property made under deoree oi court In 8aId suit to any party other than arty such taxing unit shall belong and be distributed to all taxing uaits whloh are parties to the suit vrhiohby the Judg- Aent in add suit have been found to have tax liens Wafnst euah property, pro rata and in proportion to the rrmountaOS their reepeetlve tax liens as established in aaid Judgmnt, but any exoeex in the proaeods of sale over and above the amount necessary to defray the ooata Of suit and sale and other expenses hereinabove made chargeable against such 9 rooaeils, and to fully disaharge the jud,qAentsagainst said praperty, ahall be paid to the parties legally entftied to suoh exaeaa .” :fo oonsiaer that the quoted sections areelear m’ ~a~biguoila md the foreclosure sale should be had In accordaaae With said seations. i:eare aware of the holdfng In b~aieer v 3tat.3,if303. !;i.(26) 914, but t?,eLuprene ‘Ourt In ‘that’oase aaa not dealing with Mtiole 734%. . . * i!osOrdJia Viylos Carlfsla, pa;q 9 ---_.._ .