.
F&r &ployee Of a l.loeBmxt
deiler in Oil~~W gas
seauritiee,who a&e ae
agent illsoouringoil
mi ga6 hmm~ for the
dealer, is requiredto
obtainslioeneeunder
the Texaa SecuritiesAd.
Dear SIX
You have requeetebthe opinionof this Departme&
upon the foll.qdngfaotual+Ilationr
%vin YOU plebe ravise me if l per~0n ~b2
acceptsemploymentfor a dealer in oil and gas
seourltielis requiredto be lipeneedunder the
Seom~ties Act.
*The faata in the cam &e theme: a holder
of a licenseemployedam individual&r the pur-
pose of seour~ or takjnga block of oil and
ga8 leases. ?he leaem were taken in ,thename
of the baler; thy employeeoontaotedthe laud
ownera,offeredto lease the luxt for and in the
rune of the licenseddealer. The oonlpen6atioB
agreed to be paid for the taking of thie block
of oiland@e lsaeeswae lOmute per wre for
each aore eo leaeed. The m&Loyee did not sell
or attemptto cell such leasesnor &Lb he deal
in wuch leasee,other thw to plaoe them in the
bank subjeotto accepmoe by the dealer. Such
employeewae a Hotly Public and In the esetutics
of such leame took the a&knowlHI&wnteof the
variou8 land ownera."
The fsctualsituatim etateb above is preatioally
identicalwith the faots set forth in the opini011 Of the
’ .
HonorableD. RiohardVoges - Page 2 (V-221)
SupremeCourt of Texas in Fowl&r v. Hulte, ~38 Tax. 636, 161
3. W. 26 478, (1942)wherein it was held a8 followe:
"If the plaintiffinerrorFowleraa aoon-
dition precedentto the performanoeof the servi-
ces for which he wae employedby defendantin
error Rults, prOcuringthe exeoutionof the oil and
grs leases by the lami ownere,were requiredto regi-
ster ae a dealer under the SecuritiesAct, then any
peinon employedby en oil company,or other prorpeo-
tive lessee,to obtain or assist $b obtainingoil and
gas leasesfrcm land owmre would be requiredto
registeraa a dealer in securitiesbefore entering
upon the performanoeof his duties. There is in our
OpiUiOIlIlO laEIguaf$O
in the Act to juf3tifythatCoU-
atractionof it and thrt oonstnmtion is not neoeaaw
to the aocomplislrmmt of the deolrrtdand obviouspur-
pose of the sltrtute.
‘ore
the amendmentawere enacted." (Empha~~ie
added)
The foregoingdoctrinewas again affirmedby the Supreone
Court in Hkrren V. Hollingsworth,167 5. W. 2.i735 (1945);but no
referencewae made thereinto the amendmantto Article 60&, V.C.
S., by the Forty-seventhLegialatuzmin addingSection 33b thereto~
(Chap.363, Sec. 2, Aota'l$kl, 47th Leg. p. 593) aiaoe the tranaao-
tion Involvedsroae prior to the paeeageof the Mendment.
Th6 SupremeCourt in the owe of Lewis v. Davis, 199 S.W.
(26) 146, 149, hae definitelyconetruedtb meaning of the above an-
phasizedsmendmenteto'the SecuritiesAot,aa Pollowe:
"The SecuritiesAct, Regular Session,44th
Legislature,Chapter 100, was emendedin 191 by
adding to It Sections33a and 33b, Acts ReguLar
Session,47th Legislature,Ohspter 363. section
33a relates to the renedy of the purchaseragainat
the seller. Section 33b providesthtno person or
companyshall bring or maintainan actionfqr the
collectionof a oonmieaionor compensation*ror
strvioearenderedin the sale or purohaeeof eeouri-
ties, aa that term is herein defined,without alleg-
ing and provingthat such perrson or companywas duly
Honwable D. RlohardVoges -Page 3 (V-221)
lioensedunder the proviaicplstireof aud the seouri-
tiea ao'soldor uumhased were duls renirstered uuder
the pr~visi~nah&&f. We do notoo&rue this
tiea se0tm to intend, on r000uat of itause of
the worde 'saleor purchaseof aecuritiea'mb 'secu-
rities no sold or ptmhaoed', to work ohmges In the
generalpurposeof the Aot and 80 to amend it as to
requirethe procurdngof penuitsor licensesby those
who buy securitiesand the registrationof meourities
‘forthe protectionof sellersagainstbuyers.
"As ii pointedout,in Fowler v. Hults, 138 Tei.
636, 161 s. w. 28 478, t,h securitiesAct in rI.lof
its many sectionsm&as carefuland detailedprovision
for the registrationof dealersin seourities,that
is, praom engagingin the buaiuesaof sellingaaouri-
tics, end for permitafor the ifmum3caof qeourltiea,
that is. securitiesissuedto be sold -- all for the
protectionof buyers rgainet+lera. The Aot doss not
mder'uka to prescribea plm for the ragistratiooof
of buyers of securitiesor methods for the proteotion
of sellersagainstbuyers. Had it been intendedby the
amendmentof the Aot made in 1941 80 raidoallyto ch8oge
it LB to make its variousrsquirementsapplicableto
buyers aa well as to sellers,that titentionoertaialy
would have beanmore clearlyand explicitlysham. The
ressonablaconstructionto be pLsoed ou Section 33b is
that it maone that a peraon,who is requiradby the te?ma
of the Act to registeraa a daalar, ealemmanor agent or
to obtain a parmit,may not briug or maintainan action
for commiaaionor ocmpematlon for his servicaeperformed
~8 such dealer,sale- or agant without alleggingand
proving that he wa8 duly licensedand the securities
duly registeredunder the Act. A comtruotion of Section
33b LB intendingto ohmge all of the va r io usq ectiom
and provisionsof the Aot so aB to make thaw apply to buy-
ers em well as to sellerewould be contraryat least to the
spirit and purposeof Section36 of ArticleIII of the Tax-
Constitution,Vernon~s Ann. St., which prohibitsunandmanlx
of laws, or sectionsof law@,by referenoe.“ (BktQhaS IS
edded)
In view of the foregoingdecision,the employaaof the
iioenseddealer in oilaud gas seouritlssis not subjectto the pro-
vision of the Texas SecuritiesAct., @rticle 60&x,v.c.s.),ana ha
need not 8courc a licensethereunder.
AB employeeof a llcenaaddealer in oil * gas
leases,who acts a8 agent for such dealer in scouring
oilaud gas leraea,is not subjeotto the proviaica?a
of the Texas Se&ritits Aot (Article60oa, V.C.S.),
end need not mecurea lioensethsreundar. Fowler v.
HonorableD. RiohardVoges -Page 4 (V-221)
Huts, 138 Tex. 636; Lsvia v. Dwia, 199 S. w. (26)
.
Yours very truly,
AlTORIU!XGElyEBALOFTEXAS
BY C.K. Ri6hrds /a
C.K. Rioharda
Assiatknt
APPROVED:
Price Daniel /a
ATTORIfEYGENERAL