Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE AlTOtiNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Honorable Shelby X. Long Aarirtant Dirtriat Attorney Beaumont, Texar Dear Sir; opinion Ro. O-4 58 Rer Whether OP$\ et an independent rsuant to a tax deed e than the 8tatutox-y of redemption. U8 on 8 ntlmber: of pleoer Xo other tax- sge~eles 08 to the suit and they owaloaing thi iian, ‘ikeout- ty sbld at a Sherlff’r eale, *The attorney for the lndepsndent school Dietriot In Port Arthur 08m Into oourt and filed a mation ln tha ori&nal atit arkiag the Di8triQt UouTt to order the sheriff to 8611 thio property for the Port Arthur Inde- pendent School Dietrlct at a Sheriff’8 8ele3 ueld order : Honorable Shelby K. LOW, Page 2 was delivered to the Sheriff, and the Sheriff quea- tloned his authority to sell the property a second tine under the original executions; therefore, it was referred to this office. I advised the Sheriff, as well aa the District Judge, that in my opinion the Sheriff has no authority to sell this property at a Sheriff's sale after Its havin& been parchased at a Sheriff's sale by tha Port Arthur IndefiendentSchool District; therefore, the District Judge directed the Sheriff to hold his order in abeysnce until further orders of the court. This question beins an lnterpre- tation of the statutes, I am asking for an optiion from your department for the proper procedure the In- dependent school dlatrict should follow in selling property alter it has been held by them aa purchasers of the Sheriff's sale and foreoloaure of the tax lien and execution thereunder znd held for a tit-eexcoedlng the statutory requirements, to-wit: tvo years and six ilonths." Article 2791 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas pro- tides : ' * + l provided that in the enforced collection of taxes the Board of Trustees shall perfom the du- ties vhich devolve In such cases upon the aity council of an Incorporated city or tovn, the president of the Bcmd of Trustees shall perform the duties which de- volve in such cases upon the mayor of an lna6rporoted city or tovn, and the county attorney of the county in which the Independent school district is located shall perform the duties which In such cases devolve upon the city sttorney of an Incorporated city or toarj: under the provisions of lsw applicable thereto. l l l We have been unable to find any case conatru the provisions of the st%Wequoted above. Article 7337 of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas provides: "Any Incorporated city OP town or school district shall hsve the right to enforce the oollectlon of de- llnquent taxes due it under the provlaFona of thla chapter." Honorable Shelby X. Long, page 3 Artlole 7343 OS th6 Revised Civil Statutes provldesr v l s l Independent school diatrlats may collect thelr,delinquent taxes as above provided for oltiea and towns, the school board perfomlng the duties a- bove described for the eovernlng body of oltlea, and the president of the school board perEomlng the du- ties above pprssorlbed for the mayor or’other presiding 0friOt3r. The school board may, vhen the delinquent tax lists and other reoorda are properly prepared and ready for suits to be filed, lnetruut the county attor- ney to file sald sulta. Ifthe school board lnstruots the county attorney to file said suits and ho falls ox+ refuses ta do so vithln slxt$ days the school board may employ some other *ttorney of the county to file suit. Thti aouuty Bttorney, or other attorney, filing tax .aulta for independent school dlstriota, shall be entitled to the same fees as provided by lav in suita for State and county taxes. Ho other county officer shall receive any fees unless servloee are actually performed, and In t&at 8V8nt he shall. only receive such Sees as are nov alloved hlx by lav for similar aervlcee In civil suits. The em- ployment of an attorney to file suit for te;xee for oltlee, towns or Independent sohool dlstrlcts ahall author&e said-attorney to file said suits, wear to the petitions and perfoma suoh other acta as are necessary In the ool- leotlon of said taxoe. ‘All lt%WOf thh3 St6te for the p~~p056 Of OOil6Qt- ing delirguent.m3tate and county taxes are by this lav made avtrllabls for, awl vhen Invoked shall be oRplIed to, the oolleatlon of delinquent tares of cities and towns and independent sohool districta In so afar as suoh lava are applloable, ’ From the fact8 submitted by you In your rquest, ifa aon- olude that the lndep~endent school dlstrlot has proceeded up to the present time under the rtatutory prooedure authorizing the state and aounty to bring suits fox delinquent taxes, obtain judgment therefor and authorlzlng the sale of suoh property, all of vhleh 1s provided in Chapter 10 of Title 122 of the Revised Civil Stat- utes of the State of Texas. 'honorable Shelby IS, Long, page 4 Chapter 10 of Title 122, I)uprfiB, epeclfloally deals vlth "delinquent taxes.' The statutes therein founds se8m to be ooa- plete, within themselves, or by rpeclflo reference to other appll- aable statutes, ooncernLng the proaedure to be folloved by the reepeotlve taxiag authorltioe and offlolals oharged vLth the duty OS aolleotlng itate and county delinquent taxes. In this same Uuapter is found Artlolee 7337 and 7343, a ra, vhloh, evidently vexw meant to oonfer the saw rlghtr, prlvi "p eges and make available the same prooedum for the benefit of oltles, towns and villages, incorporated under the general lav, as veil a6 upon independent eohool dlstriots, .lnsofar as the lava for suoh purpose, for the benefit of the state and tounty, are applicable. If the provl- slons of Chapter 10 are appliuable to Independent aahool diatrlota and such districts oan properly avail thenselves of the procedure therein pyovlded, then ve think Artlole 7328 of said Chapter 10, supra, v1l.l ansver your question. The caae8 that have arisen in the.oourte might be of some help in arrlvlng at a oonulusion on this point. In Duoloa vs. Harris County, (Co& App.) 298 9. Y. 417, Barris County sued to reoov8F from Duolos, Dletrlot Clerk, exaess 'sea oharged by him in tax suita flled vith th8 Clerk vhiah suite me fo~'taxes other than atate and oounty. The lame ‘~88 vhether the Distrlot Clerk aould charge larger fees in rush suits than he oould charge Ln regular state and county tax suita. The sourt said8 "In 1895 th8 Legislature ensated a statute mak- lag provision for oolleotlon of delinquent, eto., et&s and cormty taxes; the statute van largely re- written, and ita provision paada available to oities, tome and sohool diatriats, in 1897g It was later a- mended fir various pa??tlaulars, and its present fom ;g2hapte* 10, title 122, artiolea 7X9-795, R. 8. IA artZole 7337 (o~iglna1l.y emoted in 18%‘) it Is piovlded thatr “*Any inoorporated oity or tom or sohool distrlot &all have the right to enforce tb8 oolleotlon of de- llnquent taxes due fh under the provisiona of this ahap- ter.I *And in artlcrle 7343 (enaoted In 1920 and amended ln 1923) it is provided, inter alla, that: “All lava of this state for the pumose of aol- 'lsatlng delinquent state and county taxee are by this Honorable Shelby X. Long, page 5 lav made a*%lable IQ& and vhen invoked shall. be applied to,‘the Oolleotlon of delinquent taxes of altlea and touns and lndepeadant sabool dlstrlota in 90 fau a8 suoh lava or0 applloable.’ ‘Those provlsl~na gave thy authdtlty for t&e sults~ out of vhtoh this oontrov~rsp arose. The chtlp- ~gGo~dn, bOa8me l~vallable for’ and, having been 1 t must ba apgllad to’ the subjeot matter in 00 rar a8 relevant. IR the oaf88of Dill va. City of Rising Star (Corn.. App,) 298 8. W. 41 , it vae held that in view of Article 7363, Articles 7321 wd 733i of the Revised Civil Statutes of Texas are made ap- pllaable to oltles, 80 that ln an aotlon by the city for delinquent taxes the ourrent tax roll and d8U.xiquOnt tax list prepared by the olty Oounoll and aertlfled to as oorrect by the mayor nake a prUa faote 0~843 as to the Fegularlty of esse8slng and levying the taxes. In the 0ae.e of City of San Antonlo vs. BOrry, 92 Tex. 119, 48 s. I?. 496, the court oonsldered the pr~vislons oreArticle 7337 (vhlah var~then Artiols 52324, R. da s., 1895, t&.x& seotlon 11 of Lava, 1895, p. 53) and tha oourt ialdr *Ia our opinlan, Siotlod 11 was not intmded to take aitay: th0 exmmq authority given to any olty by apeolal charter to bring an ordSnary ault to r&aover its taxes. It0 purpors was merely ta authoriza altlOs, tovna and school dlrtrlots to aooept the bctnefitr of’ th16~.~8Ot, shOuld they me propefl to ~I'OOSde ia tha man- ller pointed Out theraln. ~+ l l corporated olty and the 0-t lllcmrlee dlsouesed the enoral pouer OS an lnoorgtorated oity, tovn, or IiuIepewlmC mhoal tl ttrlot to manage its tax arraira. We quota from the opl~lonc. n l * l obviously, this statute (Artiale 7335a) has speolal appllcatlon to oontraots sntmed into by Cormisslonerrt Court8 of countlea for aolleotion of morable Shelby IL. hong, page 6 state and aounty tmsa, and has no beerIn& vhatever on the right8 of altlsa, towne, and school dlstrlatrr and other munloipalitlee, tmoept ea a oumlative pro- vision authorized by artiole 7337, wadingr 'Any ln- oorporated oltg or tovn or school dlotplot shall have the right to enforus the colleotloti of delinquent tax- ea due it uader the provZslone of this ohapter.’ Such art1010 rar not intended,to take avay t@e authority given to aitlea, tovne, and +ehools by speclalcbartera, or othervise, to bring au ordinary suit to reoover taxea and niake contraota for the asllectlon thereof. Cities, towns, ad aohool districts have the rfght to we and be sued, oontreat’and be oontraatsd vith and donduot and aontrol all of its affairs, particularly their Slmnoee and taxes.’ In the case of City of South Iioueton VII. Dab&w, (Corn. ~pp.) 120 3. tl. (Sd) 436, t5e oourt held that under the provision8 of Article 7343 the City OS 5outh Houston could contraot vlth an attorney to collect its delinquent taxes and that in view of the 5pol.Plc limiting provisions of ‘the statute, relating to the com- aaatlon of rruch attorney and llmltlng his componsatlon to the A.IQ~ Seer as alloved the oounty attornoy or dlatrlat attorney ln malts for colleotlon of stats and county taxes” the g&era1 oon- aludlng paragraph of such statute did not authorize the exeoution of a oontraot for a percent of the taxes, penaltier and intere8t aolleoted 88 oontemplated In Artlalb 7335, Revieed Oivl.1 Sktutes of Tam. The oourt made this observation: “With referenoa to the language oontalned IR the conoluding clause of this Article, it may be coWeded for the purpose of dlaeuasion that such languag& stand- ing alone, ia ouffloiently broad to bmbraab any.i$uthor- lty provided by mme other statute for the ampl’oynent au6 compensation of an ‘attorney for the oolleotlm of state and county taxes whloh are deliuquent$ but hov- c ever thla may be, * l + .” ge of Bell VU. #+mSleld lnde endent Who01 Dls- trlot, (Cc&? A%. pQ133 Tex. 403, 129 s. Y. (26) i&3, lb MB held- that the ruling ia the Dabmy oafid, nxpra, YES not ampl.ioable to oaupensatlon allowed la o&ntraots exeouted by FLUindependent aehool dintriot tith an attorney to oolleot delioquent taxoa aad that the provlslons of Artlole ‘T)35-a of the Revised Civil E+QtUte8 OS Texas vas eppflaable to such aontraota. The oourt said, vlth reierenoe to Artiole 7343, suprat xonorable Shelby II;. Long, Fag! 7 ‘Artiole 7343, It. $5. 1925, deals speolfioally vlth the question before un for deolslon. l * * “Rttfrrrlng baok to the partlons of Artlole 7343 above ab$Led, it vi11 be observed th+t oitler and in- &gend~.tes~l dlstriots are dealt*vlth separately Independent sohool distrlotir may lav- fully o&ract to pay the fees provided by lav ln suits for state and county ts;nea. * l l ’ l l* By the oonaludlng eentenoe of Artlole 73’13, above quoted, all lavs of thle state for the pur- pose of collecting delinquent state and county taxes shall be applied te the oolleotlon of delinquent taxes of independent school $l)istrlots In so far as such lava are applicable. * l l Prom a oon6lderatlon of aald Articles 7337 and 7343, supra, and the aonstruotlcns plaoed upon them by our ocurts, ve have no doubt but that an independent sohoal dlstrlot may prooaed to oolleot its delinqtlent taxes aooordiq to the exlstlng law provided for the atatb and eaoaty to oolleot their delinquent tax- It follcws, therefore, that it is our opinion that the avall- %ie statutory prooedure provided ior the state and oounty in suoh suits may be adopted and lollcued by an independent sohcal dlstrlot lnaofar us the fwm? 1s ap lloable to its cvn oolleotlcn. Ub aed no valid reason v& the pnov Pe&oar o? Artlole 7328 of Chapter 10 of Title 122, supra, are not applioable and oeuld not be ioUoved by the sohool distrlot ln your partloular care. The pertinent part of that statute provldest ’ + at * Zf any of the land thw rold to the State tr not redeemed vithln the time preaoribed W this lav, the sheriff shall sell the saute at pub110 cutory to the higheat bLdde* for aash at the p~4~olpal entramoe to the oowt house in the oounty vhsrsln the land lies, after &lvlng notloe of ssle in the manner ncv prb- aoribed for sale of real estate undelr exeoutlon, prc- vided when nctioe 15 given by porting notl~es, one of the oald netloea ahall be ported in a aon8plouous place Honorable 8helbyiC. Long, Page 8 upon the land to be aold. Said notioe shall oon- t&n a legal deaoription of the land to be sold; the date of its purchase by the State, the p~lcs for which the land vaa aold to the state; that it will be aold at pub110 outory to the hQheat bidder for cash, date and plaoe of sale. All aslea contemplated here- ahall be made In the manner preaaribed for the #ale of real estate tider exeoutlon, iind tha sheriff la hereby authorleed, and It Is hereby made hla duty to rejeot any and all bids for said land vhen in his judgment the amount bid la insuffioient or Inadequate, mid In event said bid or bids are rejeoted the land shall be re-advertised and offered for sale aa pro- vided for herein, but the aooeptanoe by the sheriff OS the bid ahalL be oonoluaive and bindIng on the quea- tlon of the auffloienoy of the bid, and no aatlon shall be auatalned in any court of this State to set aside said aale on grounds of the ineufficienoy of the amount bid and aoaepted. * + *. The sherL.ff aball aend the amount received from auoh sale to the State Tr’eaauVgr after deduotlng the amunt of the county t8xe8, interest and penalty of the county tax vhioh he ahall pay to the county treasurer . The ahnriff, in behalf of the Stats, aball exeoute a deed oonvey&? title to said pro#ertp vhen sold and paid for.’ We t.hZnk the Port Arthur &dependent sohool Dlstrlot o&u be aub- atituted fop the vord. “a&ate in the applloeble part of the atat- ute vithout oonaequence, We believe auah proosdure was olearly oontemplated by the Leglalature In the emaotmmt of Artiolea 7337 and 7343, =Prai Art~iole 7328, aupra, provide8 for a.aale of property bid ln and held by the state vhere it haa not been “redeemed vithin. thb time prescribed by law.” alearly under the holdlng vf the oourt In the aaae of Hlnlcaon ~8, Lorenao Independent School Dia- triat, 109 S, W. (26) 1008 (writ of error diamiased) and In vlev of our Opinion Bo. o-817, Artiole 728&s, R. a. 8. of Texas, governs the period of time alloved for redemption In inatarmea au& .a8 are referred to by you in your request. We have not by our oonolualon, exprsaaed In this opinion, foIWOlO8ed the poaalbility that an lndepeadent sohool diatriot might, under authority of Article 2791, m&we, and under tba h+lnga . Jionorable Shelby I. hong, peg.8 g in the ease8 of Olty of San Anton%0 vs. Berry, aupr8, aad XcOal- lam vu* Olty of Rlohardaoh, supra, properly prooeed to bring tax aaita for delinquent taxas Ln acme other l.avM aanwr. We do not find It necessary to oonaidar thla phase of the la*, alnob under the faota submitted by you, It is evident to ua tbat the indbpexuJent school dintriot has rlre84 prooeeded under the pro- vlaiotta a? the lav relating to oolleatioa~ipf state and ootmty delinquent taxes and that you only dealm to kmv If it la per- missible, In our oplnlon, to sell the property under the statutory procedure provided in 5UOh cattba for the aale of property held W fh# state, by virtue of the school dlatrlot having bid it in at a tax sale and aftbr having held the same by virtue of a aheriff~a tax deed over and above th@ statutory rudemption period. We have not ntentianed Article 7345-b in tbit oplnl&~ It VW enaoted and became effsotive In 1937. We find nothing in the prcviaiona of that Act indtcatinp; that it vaa intended to ap- ply in lnstancaa vhere f-1 ju@ent for deV.nquent taxes bad alrbady been obtained. We think this point cimld be said to be ruled by the hold.lnS in the ~888 of City of San Antonio OS. Berry, aupra, vhbh oourt said: *Aa vaa said in our or&irml statement the tram- crlpt’ does not ahov when the erlgiDa1 petltlon vaa filed. l + l It is alear, we tblak, that if the ault ma brou&t before the statute vaa paaaed, the pro- owdlnga .vould hot W ,affeated by Lt. Sot only is there nothing to ahov that it vea inthaded to abrblge any exiatlng renedi.ea oaaferred by lav l l + but it ii clear that this saWh3n tt&a to have only a fu$we e;$;t and uaa not intended to operate upon sxFbtl.116 .c I-t la our f'urthk+ro inion, therefomi, l&&t Artiole 7345-b 1.8 not oontrolling nor appPicable to the pmpoaM.on submitted by you. In your request you have.referred ua to Artiolea 7308 and ‘7313 of Chapter 9 of Title 122 of the Raviaed Cfvil Statutes of LPaxaavhlch you LndFoate in your opiaion al t ‘be atilloable to the proposItion eubrpltted by you, Ue do no a”bsllevr~thoae statutes are applloable. They are a part of Chapter 9 of Title 122 entitlbd %ok taxes on unmadered lands” and deal tith Honorable Shelby X. Long, Page lo instances of stmmary rale by the tax oollector. In our opinion EO. o-683-~, a aopy of vhiah is enclosed, we held that the Tax Ammssor-Colleator has no power to levy on nor sell real estate for delinquent taxes exaept after foreclosure of the tax lien by a court aa provided In Article 7328-A, R. C. S. of Texas. We think the aonclualon therein expressed is llkewise applicable to salea of real estate for delinquent taxes by an independent sohool district. We gather from the faatm stated in your letter of lnqulry that the procedure outlined in that part of Article 7328, not quoted above, vas iu all things followed and that at the aXI8 of the land for taxes, the sohool district beeame~the purchaser, and a deed vas made to it by the sheriff in’aaoordence with the statute. It la made further to appear that elnce the ovner did not redea the land within the period of redemption, uhlch has long aiuoe ex- pired, the district nov desires to eel1 the laud. Pour question is, what is the proper proaedure to be folloved in makiug the sale? We think this question irr-alearly ansveredSb~c~ha&art of Article 7328, which ve have f+ully quoted above. Article only refers to land sold to the State, but which ve have held also applicable to school districts, when lnvcaked~by tham, ve believe It would be proper for the sohool board to pas6 a reoo- lutlon and to atate therein the pertinent feats which are required by the quoted portion of maid Article to be contained in the sheriff’s publlehed notloe, and requesting him to sell said property as the statute directs. A certified oopy of the resolution should be furnished the sheriff. Suoh a reeolutlon may not be neoeasary, but it Is undoubtedly not improper. The sheriff will prepare and publish the notloe of sale in accordmoe with the statute; sell the laud and, in behalf of the sahool dietriot, execute a deed oonveying title to Bald laud to the puroharer. With reference to the notice of sale required to be given by the sheriff, under the Artlale above oonalderqd, ve oall your attention to Aata 1941, 47th Leg., Reg. Qes., Oh. 303, H. B. 193, p. 480, and especially to aubd. 4 of Article 2ga thereof. Ue trust that, in this manner, your Inquiry has been fully answered. Your8 very truly ATTORNEY QEWBRALOF -8 BYtA--Qq*~h Rarold l@Craoken Aasiatant &Ire.l Encl. %f$