OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
We roorired your 10
whloh made 88 fbllorrrt
# a6 Drmented to
low 0p1nl.0nwill
13@rtha requert tar an
0, ',bOthe porltlon 0r the
01an:rrt iOrth. That
Honorable Orville 8. Oerprntor, &meea
r*nt texor on aerteln mployore, and ao-
rordingrj, Qonloy paid unuploynrrnt Lrrs
thereon. Durtag the month or AU&u&,
1986, the Oamalrriondetennlnod that Qonley
wea not the aployer but, rortb purpoae6
0r the TUW unemployment Oompeneation Aot,
we8 the egent ar the ainolalr Rerlnlng Oompany
dete of ,theoriginal law to end inol&ing
the datr af mid rultng, rwultiag in l
dOUbi* pa)glrt Of tW8 011 the 8~3 O~piOy~O8.
Theraerter, itoailry
eppliod tothe oo~01i~sion
for 8.retud ot tb terar that ho had &maid,
end he WEB raiunded all of raoh texrr tlm
#lo detb of whioh wea not eerlirr than one
yuer prior to the datr of hllrap lloatiin,
a8 p0~ide4 for in SWtiOn 14 (dP ot the Abt.
Hi* epplioatfon rOr rMWl wer deuled with
r*rpootiti7jtuclr in the emount of $16R.R4
thet. he6 bwc4@ &te more than on0 year prior
to thr det, or hi8 appli8etion.
*ThhrTOXes ~ql@lOgpsnt ConaprnratfonAot
we8 ‘ua&~drd,etfeathe April 1, lOSO, and old
Sootlon,14 (d) use umandodto BOWseat1 on 14 ( j) ,
in nhioh the period. or limstetion wao rxtendod
rrem on0 par to far.
Honorable OrvIllC ~3. Carpenter, pa&e 3
‘?yaythe Comirrion meko a.refund of thin
&amt~~of~#l6t;Eb to either Copley or tho ginolair
Refining Ocqpany under OIther of the oontentiona
sbtorsprorrnted?*
i!iibreotion
(41, Artiolr SiSlb-18 Vornon'e AAAO-
tat.6 ~1~11 Btatutrs Of Tofaa, wbioh extended tho period
'of limitetidn from QACIto four yeam, reeda es follows:
wWhero SAy olaployingunit has made a
mymeAt to the OolaniraiOA Of" OOAtribUtiOAs
alleged to b6 due, and it Is later detarmlnsd
that oU@h OOAtribUtiOA8 W@Jl-eAOt dU(1,‘iA
whole OS iA.F4Tirt,the 8lEplOyi~ UAit ElSkiAg
suoh &WJlWAthay m8ke 8DDliO8tfOA t0 th6
Commirbion.ror SA adjustment thsrebf iA OOA-
AeOtioA with OOAtribUtiOA ByBlQAt8 then due,
or, for a rerun4 thereof because suoh adjust-
meAt 08AAOt by Bed&, sad it the ~%I!JUL~IJS~OA
shell dote-s th&t euoh oontrlbutlone or
penalty, or eny poktlon therrof were err~n-
eourly oelJooted,,tkn Qommlsrlon shall allow
EUOh~kid~~O@i~ UAit,to 'lMk# aA 8djUStiieAt
therae? wltiioutInte*err$In ooimsotion with
oontzibutloit-payment8then duo.by auoh .uaploy-
iq6 Unit, or ii,etWh abjU#tmAt OAAAOtbo
Rae, the coapri8oion~shell rarund odd
own
fund mey be 6'0madr'on,.the~OlYAllIei3IoA~:
initbat~vew* (~underroorlng our6)
fn via+ ‘oi our @piAiOA NO. 0450, dated kieroh
17, lOM, in,whI@h we held that tho' refund aou$ht by
v. T. oonloy wee barred ee to all OOAtrfbUtIOAe dU0
prior to oAe.yeer betare, the date of applIc8tlon, the
eole questfon to be oonrridorodhere ia whether the ex-
EonorebXe Omllli 8. Oarpentsr, Page 4
to&ion or thr gW&&od oi limi~etlon by the Legieletun,
In fh@ hubeo#tian~‘#4t out ebovo, would NVIYI e aewe
0r~eotIoa llror4y birred. .Tho err00t Of the AOt ellow-
Ing en idju&mnt,?r~ tOre8 crrro~oouel$paid I8 the eanm,
in a0 fe2 ‘U OoSetitUttfOml Inhibition8 er0 OOllQerA~d,
ia the feYu& or nmp ior 8Uoh pepumt.
n13.lrgleletIoA has proOp0otIve roroe and 0fr00t,
~~e~~tfoepootlvef: tuber r~preeely provld~d IA the law
. Heetu 8Ad Rebortr v. Dome Irr. Dl~t..,S39 S. a.
993, C. C. A., (writ of error refused).~
'IA trOetiAg the eubjeot oi retroeotivity or
rrtroepeotitity, the ConnIerlon of Appeclle in AmrIo
SUrrty Oomprny 111. Axtoll OO,‘, S6 8. W. (Zd) 7.90, quot-
ing rrom lqaorpue Jurie r-4, 6eOtiOA 778, said:
?*A ret?otpi?otivr taw lo OAO tht re-
Ivmto, 6 pretloue
frrent legal 8rr00t
uader the law whOA
oQnurotion the 'tdrme
It IO trnnOoOererJYor u0 to dstmmim the quoe-
tiOA 88 to wh.th.k~th.~~(rielet~o OQuld hare Mde the
itettiterdm8OtiYO;iYai 61080 lxeminetiOA 0f A&IOU
%~erb-U;‘Lubeertioa.(j “, dgae not dIlclOloer
enf lrgis-
letitr .Intmt tlWIt@;~ 4 8$?58,~8bellhew #UQh @itrOt. YOU
.~arOt~~f~O,~~vl~~id~thZt It I8 the.opl+bn of.thIe de-
partant ttmt ow Opinion go. O-459,enewmiag our quen-
tlon in~.thr.aO$~t~tO,'vtil~eppliO0 to thie aleIm.