Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

224 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN iionoreblaGeii.2. ShepraFd Ccmptrollerof Itiblicrhoounte iustiu, :reras Dear Sir: Stiote and county did OOQedQ or 8he aale*" opinioa in rwpons* 80 tllssequQQt~orlQ: thu status 03 the Stab and Cauntp h 8tate and CounOy tare8 are f6,r hat proasduxe ~hodc3 be taken to xoll2at Xf lruohtame am sot barmd e dcm.eto eolleot the taxes ahorn on the tax roll?" ?iehare been fuxzdehcd with a copy of ths judggwmt referred to and it ia dated.Ootobez Zsl,3.938. It is therein 225 Ronomble Gee. IL Sheppard, Page 2 reolted that the defehdantewere not indebted to the ia- plaaded party defendant, the State of Taas, and thu last paxagxaph of the jud@nsnt reads a8 follower "And it is further orderad, adjudeed and de- Oreed by the Court that the purohaser of proparty 0014 fm taxes herein shall take title froe and olear of all liene and claims of taxes againat suoh property dellnqusntat the time of judggsnt in this suit to any taxing unit --hlohwas a party herein or whloh has been semed with oltatlon aa xaqulred by this Aot." dxtlole 734Sb, Vexmu's hotate& Ul~il Etatutee, providin& a method of prooeduxe for the,foreoloruxeof de- llnquent taxes and under whloh thlr aotlon apparentlywas brought ooatalna deotloh 10, reading as follower "The purcheser of property sold for taxes in euoh foreclosure suit e&l1 tske title frs6 and Oleax Of al.1 lfene CUR?018If66iOr tEXQs a- a&nat auoh propsrty dellnquant at the tlraaof juddmnt In eald suit to say taxing unit whioh was a party to eald suit or whloh had bean 8exVed with oltatlon In mid ault as reqnlrad by this lot.n FXOIEthe OpiAiQA Of Judge Kb!cSatl iA the OcUa Of Yeida ~depUK%ent 3ehool pIat. YE. City Of &Xia, 13) E. 1, (2%) 118, we quote aa tollow~: *In this oonneotion,it I6 not oontended that the statuta under oon6lUerationuRdaxtakrs tllredtlyto release any tax88 to any on6 but it la,oontanded In afieot that rlnce the kot auther- ix65 the ~iidntm to join (LBdeiendlnts all other taxing units having liens against the pxop- arty and further pxovldes that the purahasex of the property eolc¶at such foreclosure ealo shall take title thereto free oi all liens fox taxee owing the tnxlng units that were paxtlee to the suit, it Is posalble for the representatlvosOf a taxing unit by taflin~ to appear aad file OlalB 22 Ron&able Ceo. H. Sheppmd, Page 3 for the taxes due to th~?!leby viva anG release to the property owner tiic11~ for suoh taxes. .'ereuogziizethrltit 1s ~oosiblo, ondor the Aot In question, for moh repreucntntivrs,by their oareleasneaaor otherwise, to fall tn properly foreolose the liens held by the taxing unlto nblob they represe&, b\itthis la a dangrrrlnher- mnt in all ~ovtvnmont~lfwctiom prformed by human agents. It has always been poo:Sble for oommissloneralcourts by failing to amesa prop- erty at ita full vfllue, or for attorneys by railing to properly prove up their da068 in tax auib, or for jurore by improperlyrocrolvlng question8 or tact in rnror 0r the tax debtor, to thereby deprive e tnxlng unit of Its jdat dues, but the mere el-imtonae of this pos~bllltp does not rendor all.our ter Lawa unoonotltutional. It iu presumed that a21 public offiolalo will honeatly perioxm their ofrlaial dutlee, Anderson v. Polk, 117 Tex. 73, 297 5. Y. 219, and the statute and oonstitatla?alpro~islone in question m& betoonstrued in the 11&t of thnt pxesuap- . When so mnstrued, tha atatute la not un- oonat.itutional on the grounds stated.* If e propar ,citatlocme duly eexved upon the county tax aolleotor de pada, 9.nthe first paxagxaph or Section 2 of said Artlcla 73l,5bmnd if all the proaeedlne;s in the aam were remler it is our opinion that the State or Texas and county of Crosby were precluded from malntaln- l.ugany rult for the colleotfonof any taxes against the property demaribed in the judpant which were delinquent at the time such judgment wae taken. fIowever, it no oltatlonwae momed, the state belne notified elmply by re&stered mall in the maner auggeeted in the seoond paxa- gxaph 0f Seotlon 2, the aatlon 0r the State and County r0r euch taxes would not be barred. KS believe the above euffiolmtly enawers your first question. Your tfr.Faxxar has today adrio& ua that you will not need any Qxpxerelon from us in reply to your second and third questions.