223
.._. .
.-Y ..
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTlN
Q-G-
*-.-
Hononblo ftrd T. Porte
county Attornry
Kaufmea, Teur
mlar sir:
In row Utter
the iollmtag hat
18 dealer lrllr
ohe8er who 80ia mioh
0 the proririo~ OS
~17 in ri~r 0t th0 rO0t
tiOn 0t 8Wh tire8 and
tgagr ana therefore it fr
oh aortego ir r.ll&
? letter of Hay $9 1940, rrlatlngto this
enkna that. the tbe# and tube8 in queetlon
the the tho mortge$a wa# exoOutod.
titlelo 1666, Vernon*0 Penal code,,tads 8a r0110rrt
*Ii •~ perron hm8 glren or dull hrreaitor
give any mortgage, deea of trust or othor lion,
in writing, upon any perion or novablo property
or growing 0r0p or fam proauoe, 8na 8haii re-
move thr rams or any part thereof out of the
224
Hon. Boa T. Porter, Page a
Stat., or out of the oounty in wh1oh it wa.
looated at the time thr mortgese or lien wz8
oreated, or shell eel1 or otherwire dlrpore of
the sume with lntsnt to defraud the psraoh
having euoh lien, either originally or by
transter, he shnll be oonfined ln the poniten-
Mary for not lass than two nor zore than
fire yeara. Proof thot the nortgegor removed
euoh prnperty out of the county in rhioC it
was located nt ths time the mortgage or lie&
m8 created or that he rold or othexwlro dlr-
posed of the saao either orl~lnelly or by'
transfer and that the mortgagor failed to..pap
the debt or any part thereof when.duo for
whioh tho mortgage or lien was gi'len,or shall
fail to dollrer posee:sion of said property
upon demand of the mortgagso, shall be prima
ieoie evldenoe thst ruoh property wan removed
or dispoesd of with Intent to defraud as prooldoa
in this Aot."
A8 seid in 10 Am. Jur., p. 800, *a ohattel mortgage
upon appurtenances, fixturrs, and the like generally ooYer8
personal property that is intlzataly oonneoted with the
operations of the estebll.kTent or plant whioE 18 mortgaged.'
Tires and tubes nre just as necessary to the preotioel
operation of an autocoblle a8 the wheels. To allow a aan
to remove each pert oi the automobile whioh is not described
with sufficient oerteinty,to ldsntlty it when taken fros
tne vehiole would be to per&t him to dispore of eyerythlag
exoept the license plate, the ohas &ml the slyins heed.
We do not believe that the Legislature eY0.rintended Article
1558 to be oonstrusd with such strlotEee8. In the firet
plaoe, we think a aortgago upon an automobile OoYars the
tires and tubes m ite whealr at the tize the .zortgaGei8
&Yen, without any further deecriptlon. Hmevor, we do
not have to rest our opinion on that alone, ior oortelnly
the additional provision *together with al1 to&a, extra
rimr, end other equipment now atteohedW would OOYer the
tirea and tubes il they nerd not already included ae being
a part o? the automobile.
Froa Irvin ~8. Auto Finance CO., 40 9.w. (aa) 071,
by the %aoo Court of Civil A;.pealfi,
we quote:
*In the case at bar, tha Pinance COWanY,
when it took the nortgago in question, OYidently
c
225
intended to tmrr 8eoPrlt~ othOr then just the
lutomobllo who0 it a080rib0a th0 property es
'en 8utomblle, 6 spare tin end tub0 en+ lll
rqulpmont.' Cloerly the mortpgo w0tia
l
Oovor eny 4na 11a&aont thst wOntwl$h or
balonfed to the lutoaoblls la qurstlon.
I'm
l ~?
In the oaso o? @Tare= 0s. Stetoi T8 8.51. (Ma)
917, the a4frnaant h4a b88n eonrloted or airp08146 0r aort-
gaged property, to wit, wool. The aO80tIptI4n oontelned In
the aortg8pg;e -8 of owtaIn 8bsop, 'together with . . ,
611 wool grown end shorn irollthe lbmo dororlbea sheep.*
The juagmat ras rOw80a en& the oeme remeniloa,but we
think the Impl~oetlon 1s that suoh l desorlphlon rer
ru??lOlent upon whIoh to beso 8 prosooutlon. The aosorlp-
tlon oi thr wool WI 80 grneral that onoo rbrerea from
the sheep it 009l.d not be id0ntiri0a es thet grown OA the
pertlouler sheep without the 8Id of Oxtrueour tostllapny.
Prom the oplnioa in that 0488 we quoter
*By bill of ororptlon lo. 1 th0 eppol-
lent oomplelor of the lotloa ot thi trial oourt
In sustaining the state'8 objeotioa to tho Sol-
lowla~ tertIs.ay Of the appellant: *Some-
on8 hea to pay th0 poturago out them to
c. 8. word; met. we8 what I u80a it Sor the
rhook In the .u! of (W.9: nhloh I ro0oir.d
for the 8.10 or the wool.* !l'ho c o ur l
ttteohrm
to the bill the folloring qu~l?ioetlon, to witr
*The alrtriot 6ttorneT objrot to th8 question8
end laswors redo before tho Juv end his
objsotion rar rurtela8a, but ho did 808 re-
quest the dxoluslon of thi. .+Idenoe aor we8
the same 8xOluded bf thr OOUrt. The jUr;r
ho.rd 411 thr quratloku 4Aa easwors thorn-
to.* We bollerr th e
lppelleatt8 oontratlon
murt bo rusteinrd booeuse the mortgeso up-
on Its ieoe dlroloror the feat that tho egpel-
lent war perturing hlr 8lwep In C. R. Vford*8
‘i”‘:~t~~~~~~~~r~~~~~~~a~.M-
ore n on the wool
as woli a. tho Sheep, end I? the eppollent
so&a the wool end eppliid the money to thr
p4yWAt or tho rent au8 to word, then ho
00tia u0t be gulltr or rnuaulmtl~ aiBDOB-
Ina or mort~qed propert es t$. word we8
226 ,
Hon. Fred T. Portor, Page 4
entitled to prlorlty of pqnent out of the
sheep and wool, and lo rupport of the views
hereio expressed we refer to the following
cases t Rogers v. Grigg et al (Tex:.CIT. App.)
29 S. W. 654; Gorzm Co. T, Jones (Tex.-Clr,
App.) 248 S. Vl. 448. Again, if the a?pel-
lant thought that Word was entitled to be
paid ths amount due for penturiag the Sheep
out of tCe wool, whetter in iaot he vfas or
not, and the appellant under suoh a belief i
sold the wool ~AU had no present iatentioa
OS defri1~4i~gthe bmk, then ho would noti
be guilty Of frhUdUl8Atly diSpO8i~g Of mPt-
gaged Drogerty because ths fraudulent 1;
tent, which 1s the girt of the offense, would
bs laoking. We are con8tralaed to holll that
the appellant should ham beeri permitted to
teatifg that he rold the wool and used the
prO8eeUS of tha sble in pepant Of the rent
due !ir.‘.YorQ for pasturing the rheep, eAd
this 18s~ sk,ouldhave been subnltted to the
jury Under appropriate inetruOtiOn8 beoeure
the fraUdUleAt intent whlah 1s the girt of
the offense was e question to be subnltted to
end betamined by the jury?*
In 0pi~i0~ the description OOAteiAed in the
our
aortg%.ye 1s suffloisntto embrace the tires and tubes with
which the oar was epulgged at ths tize ths aortgage was
given end that a ooAvictioA based upon the fraudulent Sale
thereof muld be austelsed if all other elements of the
offense are ale0 proven.
BY L&iaLAL-
GloAAR. x&WI.
Assl8tant
0
APPROVfO
OPINION
COHMll-rEC
a&e