OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
By way or re-arr1risafAoe,
Rlllmgelnquota ycu the
Ciroct holding qzithe polnt of the Supram Ceurt oi Pou6
'Y'horule hw btaosropwtedly anaouneed that,
la the absenoo of fIroudor ilhgulity, the motion
or a board of aqiralisation upoa a partiouiar8eswm-
ZLwlt16 fltml~ and, rurth4rw8r0,tbst rush value-
tlon will not be set amide wroly upan % shmiag
tiletthe oQT4 16 lc feat exw6uioo. If th6 board
fairly and honeatly ondeetors to fix a fair and juet
valuation for taring puqiomes, a idetfa4ro on it0 prt,
uador au& oircuw6tanao8,Is sot sub mt ta review
by the oourts. Tex5.6 Q Paaifla 4-y. 4 0. v, City
of a Ywo (Tax. Sup.) 85 8. B. (s4, e4q Rcwlaad
V. cjityof Tyler (To%. Cm. App.) b 9. U. (eQ)
9561 Bruewlow'I,Baker (20% Corn.App,) S%O 8. 1.
4931 Duok I, Ponler, 94 Tex. SW, 11 8. 'I*ll&l~
Stnt4 v. Chiuago, 8. I. & 8. ity,Co. (Tar, Cw.
App.) INS3S. U. St%* %cntbiyLairsIren Co. ?a Rbko-
field, E49 0. 8. S& SS 8. Qt. 4%X5,68 L, Ed. WM.'
In the abwe.qiaotud dam the Supreso Court 18 eaylng
that the faot that LCIaxaeeaire raluation ww pla44d on ro-
perty does ;sot0s itsalr outbariso a rearaerwont of 8o.fd
property. You are aeooi-dlngly no aaviaod.
Pour4 r4ry tzury
0
APPROVED
OPm4lON
cmMMn-rEB
ByceJ~
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion