.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
BoaorclblrYarrin R. brown, Jr,
CriIdnal Dirtrlot Attornay
Host ;;‘orth,
Tsxrr
2sar Sir:
lrttsr of JmnmrJ
lnlxi cf t&la de-
ayer pay bo re-
as rtrsted in pour
COOat.~dth Td@X'8?300 t0 th. PIylPODtOf the85
tares and upon rraminetlan of th8 moordr r0una
thet the taxer io? thr,yr?r 193E oc t&St. ar-
tloulrr property mrc drlinqwm and unp~f a.
Ron. Mervin E. Brown, Jr. - pa&r E
The foster@ rem onxlou8 to dl8~08b of the
prOpOrfy end paid the taxer rgein for the year
19% on thlr partloular traot and there ua8
i~suod to thoa rrasnrptlonreoript Ro.5436 oa
Kay 16, 1939, rhoulne payaent of f4LUO.
*The pay8Wnt olado br the ;I;s8tem Raolty
Ooapany on Kry 16, 1934, for the tcres whloh
wm duo and owLnf ror tbo year 193fi. MB not
pO8ted on the book8 or the tax oolleotor of
Terrant County, Que to 80~ nee.llgenoaon the
part of one of hi8 an~loyeir, which mcligenae
ooMl8tee of idme to Fropsrly DOBt the book8
or tha oriiar . . .*
You do not etv.te !n your lettar rhrthar or not
J. E. Poster and Son 0: thslr at:orney had kam;.ledeeor
the first payaent having been made or of the rirrt re-
deaptlon reoelpt harlw been 188ued. From the raotr
(Itsted, hosever, ue are la.:to bellere that they he6 no
such knowledge an! tblr opinion ~111 be written bsocd an
8uoh a rupposition.
In your letter you rsrer to an opinion rrlttea
by Absistant httorna;l~eneril 5. Ii. broaehurat, amid
Karoh 83, 1937, eddreB6ed to F!onorclblo GeOr(3eH. Shoppsrd,
rr-hfoh opinioa held that whore & taxpayer maker 6 paymat
of taxen on property for l 7ssr on +hloh tax68 hate been
prevlotml~ paid, that lluohrsooad ptqsmnt by him 18 m
voluntary papaout rud therefore tba taxpspr cannot re-
cover hi8 8eoon4 puynont. The que8tlon asked Kr. Eroed-
hunt In that opinion wua In referewe to a 8ltutloa iden-
tioal with tha rltuttlon in your 0a8c-baoau#e in that ease
al80 the tux oollectlng oitlolalr had no,$lgentlJ felled
to port the first DatPent on the tax rooord8. Hr. ho&d-
git rallod on the barb 0r city or Houston i. Ftilzer,
. f;. (24) 666.
Thi8 department 18 unable to oonour la tyhFsAon
expresrod by Kr. Froadhurrt a8 rdmmd to above.
osn br no quo~tlon but the peymnt In your dare waa aadn
under a aletako of trot antinot under a alut8ke OS lam,
arrualtq of c?our80, that tho taxpry8r 888 ontlrel~ Ignorant
or the rh pyaent. The oourte of Texas have elway8 re-
ooenirad thr proporltfon that a pupat under a airtak,
of isot ir not a rolontary paymnt. Th8 Suproao Court 0r
Tour8 ln th8 oaao oi County of Calrceton ~8. J. C, Gorhaa,
-
Eon. Karrln H. Brown, Jr. - Page 3
49 Tox. 279, rtated as rOliOU8:
wWoarm of the opinion that thor have
not, baoauao in ottahoase it la voluntarily
paid, end It, under the olroumstanoea, ir not
ooatrary to good oonaoienae for the oonnt7
to ratein it. It wad rolantery, booaoee it
xaa rlthout objeotlon paid uuder a mlrteka of
law, ii it 188 lllegel, and thara WOE no
miatako or fact in paring it, and no deceit,
?raud, or oompul6lon used in oolleotlng it,
or in oeu8ing it to be paid, on the part ot
the oounty or of any of it6 offloers, that
pretented the will of the partlea peplng it
from be:.ngrreely exercised in e0iq the
oat..
The oollr‘t rurther 861d:
*wh*o money la paid under a mutual als-
take or law, the mirtaka 0r law, in and 0r
itself, la no ground for recovering it back.”
"A mistake of feat on the part o? oue
rho a 8 and dacelt or rreud and oompulaion
iEd+ 0 part 0r one who recelvb8, under whioh
money la paid, are eaoh and all legal17 re-
Oounlzrd 06 raotr aS?T0fent fn and 0r them-
8o~to8 to parrart the will of the party doing
the rot, 60 thrt it oould be said and held,
that the will did not ~onour with the sot done,
therabr rallarln~ him from the roa~onalbilltr
?or and the aonaequancea ot the aot. The60
are auoh laOt8 as it 18 practlo6bla to judl-
01611~ lntaatigate, and iher la no great pub-
110 pollof In foreatallin~ their iarertl~etlon,
when they exlrt ln a degree ~11 derlnad, end
praotlaall~ oapabla of exerting a oontrolling
lufluence upon the aota of the part-lwho ha8
paid the money PO it may then be raid, agalnrt
hi8 will, or at least in the abaenoa of It6
Sreo ex~rolae.a
The same dlatlnotlon was reoognlted br tha
Beaumont Court oi Clrll Appeal6 in the OaBe ot host
T. Yowlerton ConaollUateU Sohool Dlatrlot SO. 1, 111 S.W.
(al) 194.
Hoa. Marvin 8, Browa, Jr. - Paga A
On the bar18 of the abort l uthorltlar, thla
departmat ruled la Opinloa No. O-1268 8ddroraod to
Xoaorrblo ?. M. Trlmble, llr*t l88lstant Stats Suporin-
teM80, to the lifr o tht a Itpayment under e mutual alatab
of fast rr8 not * roluntery paysmat and, thereion, tk
8ru oould ba reruaded to th8 taxpapr. ia rumlaatloa or
the 0881 rrllcd oa br Mr. EroAhurst, that or Cltr or Houston
vD Poltrr, Ouprsnr Court of Texem, 8upr8, ladlautr8 that
that 0880 ~111 not brr: out the oonolu8lon dsrlrsd there-
rroa by m. Frondhurrt. The Suprema Court rtated 88
roil088 t
“The tax88 w8re palA la ldvaaoe, mad 8oem
to hare beta oo1leat.d iron *bout 1867 until Ju-
ly, 1889, from 811 butohcr8, but eppellea *OE+
macoi: bu8laere la 1881. This la the 8tronge8t
oabs aeelnet roluatazy peyamnt the widen04
ad**, and 18 It atiilolont to *artala the vor-
dlott That 8 tar ioluntsrll~ p*id oanaot bo
roowered, though lt bed not the essblanoo of
lqmlltf, 18 ~811 rettldl and 08 *aid by an
ll~eatarg 3frltor, ‘wsry mea I* *uppo**tlto
know the la*, an& it ho voluntarily mnkoa 8
payment whlah the law hould not a~apel hia to
make, he aannot aftermrA8 88rlga hi* lcaoranoo
or the law 88 the reason why the 8tate shoulG
furnlmh him rlth lreal rcumedle8 to mower lt
The aonaludlq
1*-u. of thm Court in the 8bwe
quotation rroo&zer a papmat under a alstoke or
t&t
raot 080 be retnraml. Eouwer, the Court raid tbet bemuse
OS mpllgeaoe in thr partloalar 0088 the puyaent oould not
be f.SuaAud. The court reasoned that the toxppsrrr oould
hwr lnfonaca hiaaslt tram the reoorE8 the’. t&o pamrat
188 illegal and, th8r*rora, h4 we* n*ellp.*nt ln not 80
aobg. Our prar*nt 088~ 1s ta be al8tl.I%@lrlmd ir- the
Rouston oa8e beosurs la our oa8b a0 lxrzdn8tloa of tha r8-
cord8 wea as&a by the tsxpspr sad th@ reaorda ioilecito
blrDlo8o to him the prorloua payment. Ii them raa 8~
nagllgwaos ln thla oam It us8 on the part of the county
orrlalal8 sad not on the part of the taxpatmr.
Ia dl8ourslag the proporition geast8lI.y.61 Cor-
pu8 Jpcl8 980 18 of latsr88t:
. .
Boa. Xarrla Ii. Browa, Sr. - Page 8
“3ubJeot to the axooptloar harssftor
pointad out, an aatlon at low oay be aala-
talaerlto raoover taxer rcbloh hare been
rronefully aad lllepally a**ee*e4 8n4 aol-
l*cted, a* where the toslag authorities had
no pow*r to levy or aollrot the partlcul*r
tax or to ss~sss the prrtloulrr propAy,
or rharr the rume smoxmty hod been tnioe
*rseeesd 8ad trr,(L; . . .*
Ia dl8ou8sIag the dlfter*ac* betweeP * mlstak8
or 1s~ or root, 61 forpus Jurl8, 991, st~:t** a* r0110Ps;
*It Is a @noral rule tbct tares rclun-
tarlly paid under a rlsteku or lew, with tull
knoWledge Of the isOt, oanaot be recovered
baok, unlors racowry 10 sxprcssly or i~~lled-
ly suthoriud by 8:stute; but the rule doer
made by the taxpayer hlwalt, end 18 th* r*-
sult 0r hi* asgl*,ct 0r *cm8 local duty, or
%her* the raots *blob mottle have lhoua th*
mist.ke mere wIthin his ovfapo88*seloa OF
wltbln his roaoh.”
?:hIls the situation rbloh oonfronteb thr Suprwne
Court or Texas ia the City or Houston I. falotr as** plaoad
the tnxpsymr in the oategory’oi beriw aabe the papent by
8 mlstaka bus to neeleot oa his pert, 8ucrh 10 not the oaso
ia cur pr888nt sltuatloa. katbor, our oare hem? fell*
within the rltuetloo rhero taxes WET* psld under a mlrteko
or hot wblch mI8tek8 was nude by tha r*v*au* ofrloers la the
foraioi 8 ltut*mcat to the taxpayer sad ln the takl.n6of
lom offlol*l aotloa oa the Qorrsotlon of the tax rsoordr
oa whloh tho tsxpoyrr rollad. Ia our os80 the taxpsiyrr
exasiabl tha rwordr to d stormlno whether or not tb
taxer had baen peld ~4 the roaords Ql8oloseP that tha asa*
had aot been paid but was buo and ~1% aad me a lien
8galnat his property.
ft Is the oplaloo of this depcrtnent, th*rsfor8,
that the payment by the turpeyar in this 0880 was u&Or 0
Eon. Marvin 8. Ltrwn, Jr. - P3pr 8
ahtak~ of frot end thet ho mey rooovor the mount oi
tsrea paid 88 oounty taxer iron the oounty.
Rovever,
desplto the d~4ouu5iOa preriourly
ooatelned In thla
oplnisa, the tarpeyw la unable to re-
oover the mount paId by him ae rt-:to taxer. hooordlA& to
tho teotr eet out in your lrttrr tho caoaad g.ayzmat was
made on Yey 1, 1939. There ir. nr, doubt but that thlr
money heo been pald Into the &tots Trezwry. TM4 dqmrt-
mat provlously ruled tbat where taxes were Iilefelly ool-
leoted and peld into the State Treasury the 8-e oould not
be rafunded to the tcxpeyer beosusc of Article 8, Seotion
6, or our Conrtltutlon, vih?oh p~.ovIies that:
Vo noney shall be drcnn fro= the Trearury
but in pursuance cf. 4 spooIfIo s;propriatIon
nade by low.”
This opInIon w&s No. O-1044 sdCratsaC to Honorable c40. H.
Sheppard, Conptroller of f:ublIo Aooounts. A oopy 0r the
113734 IS f3nclos~d ror your inrora4tl3n.
It la the oplaloa or tbls departsont, themfore,
that the oounty should refund to the tcxpayor the Fortion
or the sooond tax pegmnt whloh ms made ror oounty tax
purposes but .,that the tarpsyer say not be rerunded the pay-
ment oeda by whim ao st*;to tsxor, wbloh psyneot bar boon
paid Into the btete ?reuiury.
Yours vory truly
p?pTOPXZYCiZlWi;:iAL
OF,TEXiG
Illy Goldborg
Aa5iatunt
BCsbt