Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN. Honorable George 8. Sheppard Comptroller OS Pub116 Accounts hl8tlR, TUXU Dear sir: MU h6V6 POW l6tt , Ilr which you 6lrC1OU6 a COPY Of 8 16ttUr you, rrcal 3. II. Ralsy, Assesror-Co1 J, ulth reference to the dlrtributlon a tax sale 10 cost due 011 the tt6r dated &In6 i0Wl faat8 6r6 n?aluy’8 16ttUr, as Sup- , UP6 bri6flJa by the State of Tuxas dlrtrlcts, filed a mm- let court of uharton 066 tb6h’ tU lielli3. Judgmntr the plaintiff8 f.or the aaouats &?lU8 iRtUl’66t,, pU!lCLltJ aad 608t8. 16 VU lasusd alld iP 6OCUpliaIIC6 laarrd Va J ldvsrtixed and sold. Th6 property, in a0190 06868, uas prUraha86d by lrrdl- ridualr vho paid 111Or6th8n th6 tU68, pUQalty, tit6rUSt UId 606t dU6 OU the prOp6rty. Your question is: What dlrpo8ltiorr should be R6d6 of th6 ex8sSa thus obtained? We pr66m6 that the tax 8alaa to vhich you refer wee6 mad6 under the authority of jub@ents IioaoraLle George ii. 3hepparC,, page 2 obtained In acccrdance with the prov?.aions of Article 73;i5b, V6rn0a’S AMOtSCed Civil 3tStUteS. Artlcla 7328, Revised Cirll Statutes of 1925, re- lotlng to the disposition of the proceada received by the shariif from the sale of land, sold under a Judgment Zore- cloalng a lien for taxes, ;rrovldea in part, as follova: 0 and after tha payment of the taxes, Interek; &x.~~lt~ and costs adjudged against it, the remfader of the purch886 price, if any, shall be paid by the Sheriff to the clerk of the court out of which said 6XeCUtiOn OX’other flual proceaa loaued to bs rUtain8d by him Sub- ject to the order of th6 court far a period of tvo years, unless OthUrUiS6 ordered by th6 court, aftur which tiIS6 th6 COWt rPay order the Sap)6 to be mid to the State Treaaurur, who Shall hold 8tme In trust to be paid to tha owner against whom said taxes uere aaaessed; provided any on6 claiming the Same shall make proof of his cLalm to the satiafaotloa of the 3tate TruasU.rur Uithin thr6C y66P0 ait6r the Sale of said land or lots, Sitter which th6 PUMB Shall be goverued by the lav regulatlag US- ChUat. . . .* Arttalc 7328 ua8 6akaadud La 1927, and the words we have above untieracored vtre omitted frca the bill au passed by both houaca of the Ieglalatura. Said uorda uere also omitted from the enrolled bill, and consequently from the printed statutes. This omiSalou, bad same beea legally done in accordance vlth the Conatitgtloa of Tex66* would have had the effect of so amending tha Aat of 1927 a8 to have caused same ts read as it aov appears in th6 prlatad statutes of Sxas a6 Article 7328; lo other vorda, th6 lav would nov be as same reads with ths words und6rraoruU by ua, omit ted therefrom. We have tad6 a CSrSfUl iIJv8stlgatlOn of the facts surrounclug .&his omlsslon, and of th6 lar applicable there- to. And from the applicable authorities we eW6 of th6 Qpin- 100 that this omls%ion of the uadaracored words from the amendment of 1927 was of no legal force or effect, and that Honorable George EL Sheppard, page 3 40 the under8cored vordr, ootvIth8teoding their omission from the ameudatory act of 1927, cemeln, and mey be properly con- sidered, a psrt of said lav. We are forced to Mid conalusloa by the following: The ceptiorr of said actr yof 1927 reads lma nda to es follovs; *Aa Act to emsod Article 7328 (7689) of the Revfred Civil Statute8 of 1925, vhIch Article r’b late8 to and providea for proceedlugs ln tax 8uIta atad the mallper provided by lav In ordinary fore- olo8ure auIta Iu the dlatrlat aourta of th18 atatet end vhiah Amendment to aeld Artiole 7328 provide8 that sales contemplated la tax foreclosure suits shall be mede In the memer pzeacrlbed for the 8ala of real eatete under execution; and dealar- lag an emerge~cy.~ (See lava of Texea 1927, Ch. 99, pa 260). Au In8peotiou or eald title, or aeptiou, diraloaea that the purpose of the amandatory sol, aa dlaaloaed by said title, I8 the SIMiIE PURPOSE of proridlllg “that ulea con- templated ia tax rorealosure auita ehall be made in the !nenner prescribed for the aale of real ertate under exeau- tloa.’ Said caption in uo rap mentiona or indlaatea any purpose to amend the statute a8 the same vould rtand amead- ed If the vorda underscored by ua vere left out of the lav. We thua have berore u8 l a ituetlo n here ao a&sad- etory aat expreiraea a purpo8e, In it8 oaptlon, to aaend a lav in one SpeCifiC partiaular, thua 1imItIw the emendmaut to that particular, but ootvlthstandiag thi8 lIaItatIon In the caption, then etteapting to further mend the lav by the omI88loa therefrom of a provl81on not meatloaed la the cap- tion, and not germeae to any purpoae rumad In the oaptlon. The rule of comtructlon applicable to thla 8itUa- t1On 18 a8 fO;llOVS: “Although an act mey be amended In aaj ger- mane particular by an emendetory act, the title of vhlch merely refers to the act or article 8OU.ght to be emended vlthout 8peCifyiUg In uhat the CUIIendnSXIt COn8iSt.8, y6t vhen such title 8t8ce8 the perticuler respect la vhlch the emendment CoDslst8* any amendment not germme to that spe- clfled 18 Invalid aa being repupenti to the Ia- v3bed constitutional provision. (388 Rutlege, et al. v. Atkinsc~, et al., 101 S.W. (2d) 376; Ward Cattle end Pasture Co. v. Carpenter, 200 S.W. 521; Arnold v. Leonerd, 273 3.W. 7998 Texas-Louislane P. Co. v. Parneravllle (Tex. Corn. App.) 67 3.W. 2d) 235~ EX parts Heart- sell, 38 S.U. (2d) Lo 3; Landrum V. Centennial Rural sigh School District go. 2, 134 S.W. (2d) 363; Also see 39 Sex. Jur , rectloa 48, end the ca8ea therein cited and In the aup- plentents thereto; also see CcastiCutica of Texas, Article 3, section 35). It la pleln to ua that th8 omlsrlon referred toby us is, under the authoritlea above citea, void end of no ef- feat under the Conatltutioa of ?eULS, said omiaalou not be- ing germane to the purpose of the amendment am aame was ex- pr8888d in the captloa of the ameadatory Mt. It aeceaaexIly follows that the omitted vorda (which ve have underscored above) remela end are a pert of th.8 lav, notvlthateadiog their 8eId onlraion from the aateodatmy act 0r 1327. We &e fortified In the aonalualon juat atatia by the decl8ion of the Austin Court Of Civil Appeala in the ce8e of Booty, et al. v. State. Thl8 decision was rendered la February of 1941. The opinion vaa urUtsn bg Mr. Justice Blair. In the Booty ce8e, the court 8aid that the sole question In the ca8e InV01~88 a aoaatruation Of Art. 7328 and the method8 of sales of property for taxea therein pro- vlded.” IO the oplnioa, the court construed said Article 7328 to be end read es VB hava construed It in thla oplolon to be end to read. The court, iP comment&g upon the provi- sion of 8ald Article 7328, la pert saldr ” . Vh8r8 there are blddar8 for the prop- erty dd*it 18 sold for more thra the amount 0r the taxes, the excess Shall be depo8lted vith the 42 Honorable 'George H. Sheppard, page 5 clerk of the court pendlq the tvo gear period for redsmptlon OS the lmd by the ovaer, to be disposed of by the jUdpeAtj that IiAless it i8 redeemed vlthln that tire, then the clerk shall depO8It the exce8a vlth the State 'Trea8urer, vho ahall hold It In trust to be paid to the ovner agaIa8t vhoa aald taxer v8re 888688ed, provltded such ovner or the one olaIailllg the same ahall meke proof of claim to the 8atIrractfoA of the Treasurer vlthia three yeara after the sale of the lead, after vhfah tf&e the fund is subject to the lav of e8ahut.” (See Booty, et al. ‘1. State, 149 S.W. (26) 216). Hr. Ju8tlce Blair, IA said opinion, lrsigned Ao reaaone for treatlog the rorda omitted from the 1927 uend- meat aa beiag 8till a pert of the hr. But ve cannot ae- sume that the Court of Civil Appeals 80 did vlthout good reason. Rather, Ye shall am.vae that the aourt vaa Impelled to ita aonclusion by the ame line of reasonlag vhlch her guided w to the 8a.m conaluaIoA la thla opInIaa. In 1937 the Legislature eluoted addltlmml legia- latlon relatlq to the colleatIoA Or delinquent tuea Qhlch la aov Article 7345b, V.A.C.S. IA regard to the diapoeItloA of the exCe88 emount of money reoelved from the “float aale" vhere the purchmer la other then a tulng uAIt, Seation 8 of the Act provIdesI "Bo property aold for taxer uader decree IA such 8Uit Shall be sold to the OYAOr Of raid prop- erty, directly or Indirectly, or to anyone having an lAtereat therein, or to any perty other than a tulng unlt vhiah la a perty to the rult, for leaa then the amouat OS the adQudged va luelforeaald of said property or the &ggregatO UlOuOt Of the JUdg- menta against the property la said rult, vbichever 18 lover, and the net proceeda Of any 8810 Of such property racrdeunder decree of court IA lald rult to cay perty other thm any rush tulRg Unit ahrll belong aad be distributed to all t-IA& unit8 vhich are parties to the ault vhlch by the judslaant IA 8ald suit have been found to hare tax lleaa *what - Honorable George H. Sheppard, page ci 43 such property, pro rata and ln proportion to the mnouncs of their respective tax liens aa sstab- llshed la raid judgment, but any excess lo the proceeds of sale over and above the amouat aecea- sary to defray the cost8 of suit and sals and other experwes hereinabove erade chargeable agalnat such proceeda, and to fully dlraharge the judgments agaiasc aaid property, shall be pld co the portles legally entitled to uuch exceaa. 3actlon 13 of the Act provides: “The provisiona of ihls Act shall be cumula- tive of and in addition co all other rights and reaedler to which any taxing uolt may be entitled, but as to any proaeediug brought under this Act, Lf any part or portion of thl8 Act be in conflict u1th say part or post%oa 01 aup law of the State, the terms and provisions of this Aat shall govern ae to such proceed3ng. Phe pr9vlsLoas oi Chapter 10, Title 122 of the Revised Civil Statute8 OS 1925 shall govern malts brought under this Act ex- cept a8 herelo provided.’ In view of the $r9vlaloa8 of this aectloa it be- comer apparent that Article 7328 aad Article E&5b should be read and construed together. Section 8 of Article 7345b provider, simply, that la thw case of any exams in the pro- ceeds of sale over and above the amount necessary to pay the cost of suit and sile and other expeaser and to fully dls- charge the judgzeata against said property it shall be pld to the parties legally cncltled to such excess. To determine who Is legally entitled to such excey we must refer to Article 7328. By the provislonu of that Article, ve flnd that the sbcrLff must pay the exaeas tr, the Clerk of the Court out of which said executlca or other final process is- sued to be retainod by hire, subject to the order of the Court, for a period of tvo yeam, mless otherwise ordered by the Court, after which time the Court may order the saae to be paid to the Stats Treasurer, vho rball hold the 8)Me la trust to be paid to the cvncr against vhom aald ;axea were assessed; provlded, any one claiming the ‘same shall s&e proof of bia claim to the satisfaction of the State Treasurer withlo U-see years after the sale of aald land or lofa, after vhlah the aame shall be governed by the 1aU regulating awheat. 44 Eonorable George H. tieppard, page 7 We believe the procedure outlined above .fs to be followed In all Instances where the sfieriff has an excess of money derived from the “first sale,’ In regerd to the disposition of exceaa funds col- lected where the property is. bid i;1 by one of the taxing units at the “f,lrst sale* and held for the two-year period and later sold at the “second sale,” we refer you to thle department’s Opinion Ho. 0-6OG0, copy of uhlch is enclosed. ‘Trusting this Sully answers your inquiry, me are Yours very truly By Ax?. 4-d ii. 9. Bob biBD : db Enolosure