Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN QcaAwC.~- A-- Eon. Tom L. Hartlot CrImlnal Dirtriot Attorney Hidalgo County Edloburg, Texas Dear eirr property whhoh #hall not neoesrarI1~ br the value at the t&r the 488088mcnt or the taxer wa8 mad01 provldoa, t&t the buraa of proor #hall be on the ownrr or owner8 of such property In 88tablIshIng tha Hon. Tom I..Hartley, p4c.e 2 *iair value' or adjudged raluo as provided In this seotlon and, prorldrd further that this sect Ion shall only apyly to taxes which are delinquent for the year 1935 and prior years.* Secti-n 8 of said Artiole provides as roil0w8 : *Sec. 8. No property sold for taxes under decree in such suit shall be sold to the omer of aald property, directly or lndlr6ctly, or to anyone having an interest therein, or to any party other than a tar- ing unit rhlch is a party to the suit, for less than the amount o? the adjudged value aforesaid OS said property or the aggregate amount of the judgments against the proper- ty in said suit, whicPerer Is lower, and tha net proaeada L:f any sale of euah proper- ty made under decree of court In said ault to any partp other than any such taring unit shall belong and be distributed to all tax- ing units which are partits to the suit wtilch by the judgment in said suit hare been found to hava tar llsns against such property, pro rata and in proport loo to t hr aDDunt# of their respective tar liens as established In said judgment, but any exaeas in the pm- coeds ot sale over and above the mount nec- essary to defray the costs of suit and sale and other expenses hereinabove Pad0 cbarge- able against such proceeds, and to fully discharge the judgments against said proper- ty, #hall be paid to the parties le@ally en- titled to #uch excess." L . Hon. Tom L. Hartley, pace 3 SectIon 9 or Eaid ~tlole provides in part as r0110v:8: 9. Sec. If the property be soU to any teXin& unit which is 4 party to the jud(pnmt under decree or court In raid rmlt, the tit18 to said property shall be bid in and held by the taxing unit purchasing #ems ror the use and bener'itof itself and all other taxing unite which are parties to the suit and alch hare been adjudged in said suit to have tax liens against such property, pro rata and in proportlcn to the amount of the tax liens in favor of said reepeotlre taxing unite as a#- tabllahed by the judgment In #aid suit, and costs and expenses shall not be Fayable un- tll sale by such taxing unit so purchasing saw, end such pro-erty shall not be sold by the taxing unit yzrchaslng same for less than the adjudged value thereof or the amount of the judgments against the property in said EUit, *?hlchever is lover, slthout the v:rltten consent of all taxing units which in said judgment have been found to have tax liens against such property; and v:hen such property is sold by the taxing unit FUrChaSing same, the proceeds thereof shall be received by It for account of itself and all rther said tax- lng units adjudged in said suit to have a tax lien against such prcpertp, and after raying all costs and expenses, shall be distributed among such taxing unit.8 pro rata and in pro- pation to the mount of their tax liens aealnet such property as established In said juC#nent. Consant in behalf of the State of Texas under this Section of this dot #my be ~loen by the County Tax Collector Cf the ccu.nty in which the property is located.” Hon. Tom L. Hartlry, paer 4 Seotlon 10 of said Artlclr reads as fol- lows : “Sec. 10. The purchaser of property sold for taxes in such foreclosure suit shall take title free and clear or all liens and claims for taxes against such property delinquent at the tine of judg- ment in said suit to any taxing unit which was a party to said suit or which had been served with citation in seld suit as re- quired by this Aot." Your first question relates to the authority of the tax collector to consent to the sale of property by one of the taxing units, rblch property It holds for Itself and several other taxlnc units, ror an amount less than the ad&deed value. Seat ion 9 of Article 7315b above quoted provides hpeolrlcally ror the sale of property by a taxing unit for an amount less than the adjudged value where said taxing unit obtains the written consent of all of the other tlulng units whloh In a judgment have beer. round to have tax liens against such property. It is also provided therein that con- sent in behalf of the State may be given by the oounty tax collector cf the county In which the property Is located. Ye see, therefore, that the Legislature has specifically provided that tha consent for and in be- half of the State of Texas is to be (ilven In your Case by your county tax collector. There oan be no question but that the Legislature aated within its authority in plec ing this duty upon the tar COlleCtOr. Tour second question is concerned with whether or not redemption receipts ror the yeay’s 1937 and 193S ehotildbe e,lrm to the purchaser from the taxing unit. Section 10 specifically provides that the purchaser of tb pro-arty takes the sazneclear of all tax liens 48 or the date of judgment taken against said property. me date of the judgment in your case was my 20, 1938. Hon. Tom L. Hartlry, Pago 5 Arti 7336 Or Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes prior to 1939 protiaod In part as r0iim8: *All ad ralorrm and poll taxes shall baooiu#dollnquent It not paid by July rlrst or the year next suooeedlng tha year, for which the return of the asses#m#nt rolls of th 8 county are made to thr Comptroller of Fubllc Acoounts." This statute was In force and effrot at the tj.me the judgment ~48 taken In your case. Therefore, as of the data or your judgment, neither 1937 nor 1938 taxea were de- llnquent. Therefore, thr taxes assessed for those two years still remain as ralld liens against the property and would have to be paid in full before redeaptlon receipts oould be issued for said years. Your third and fourth questions deal with cer- tain fees that have been edjudgad 4s court costs. You ask whether said costs should be paid prior to the appor- tionment to the taxing units of the prooeeds of the sale of the property by the taxing unit selling the came. Your attention Is called to the portion of Seotlon 9 whloh reads as r0ii0w8 : n * l *and when such property Is sold by the taxing unit purchesing same, the pro- oeeds thereor shall be reorltad by It for ao- count or itself and all other said taxing units adjudged in said suit to have a tax ;Ien against such property, and after PRY- ng all costs and expenses, shall b dlstrlb- ut,ed among such taring u&s pro r4E4 and in proportion to the amount of their tax liens against such property as est4bllshed in said judgment. * The Legislature has here speoIfIaally provided that all oo#ts and expenses In the suit shall be paid prior to the apportionment to the rarisus taxing units of thair respeetlve shares and proceeds 4t the tax 8418. Bon. Tom L. Hsrtlry, pago 6 It 1s oallrd to your attention, howerer, that the ooste and lxpenser inourrrd In suoh a tax suit 4rc, not payablr until 4fter ~410 of the property IS mddr by the taxing unit which purchased the same at the orlelnal sale. In Seotlon 9 the Legislature specIrloally provided “and costs and expenses shall not be payable until sale by such t4xIng unit so puroki sing the 8sn1a.~ You are, thrreforr, advised that none of the court costs or ex- penses which Include the non-resident notloes and pub- lishers’ Seer that are ret out In your letter may br paid until after the property has bren sold by ttid;;kng unit which purohasrd the sang at the first sale. such sale, however, said costs are to be paid first out of the proceeds of said sale, Our en8wers to your questions must 0s necessity depend upon statutory oonstruotion, as we have no judicial authority which construes the sections of this statute In question. We tFUEt that the above dIscu##Ion will sui- rlolently enlighten you 4s to the c@estlon# propounded in your letter. Yours very truly