,‘-
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Eonorablo E. K. Eaaterling
Oaunty itttoraey
tefter8oa County
Beaumont, Texae
Dear Sirt
na over t8lued orid-
toE of hagaet aa,
f tall8 DepaTtaent
05dT gl.ve the MS-
r an ardor muea8%ag
lr th e ,fUa a t8
a 8 88t o u t.
‘8 Loan Corporatton
rmlmclt*1y l,ooo
a t8ffereoa County,
that all delimp~at
S(18 &WOJW’t%88 be mid a#.
0tloaL Oa lxtmhation of
or mere plWp?Wti438 it ap-
In quite 8 nunbar of In-
ere are aanT gears of baok
taxee due, ena C&IQ due to the fret
that the owner8 and rorm8r 01imr8 luwe
negleot8d tkletr &W&?8Ttie8 in quite
a oaaber ot -888, w have dlrooreTed that
th elWe88ed dtit$o#I ai maid SUah pTe-
psrtles 18 tar la esoe8li sf true walsa8.*
EOlloTabl8 E. W. &8t8rliZl& Pag8 e
Art1010 7346, provides, in psrt, a8 folla
"UhBDeV0S My OOlW~88iOWS8 OOUl't
8hdl di8OOt8S thrOl@ IlOtiOe iTOt thd
tax oolleotor or othexwkae that any
real property he8 been omlttod rr0m
the tax rolls for any year or year8
8lau8 1864, or 8hall find that any
plWWiOU8 R8W88ROnt8 On a4 l’Otd pro-
perty for the'ysws mentionad are in-
talld, or have been deolared lmalm
+ortby rea8on by any di8trfot oo~rt
in a suit to enforoe the ooll8atioa
of taxes on eald prupertl88, they may,
et any aeetln~ 0r th8 oourt, order a
llet 0r 8uoh properties to b&made
in trlpllaate and rix a aoap8wation
th8SdOs~ tb 8Uid list t0 &OW 6
008Iplete de8OsIption Of 8Uah proper-
ti88 and iOr Wh6t to-8 8uoh proper
tie8 vere oaitted irosa the tax roll8,
or for what yeas8 the a8wa8aent8 tie
foOnd to be Invalid mb 8hOdld be aan-
aeled enU re-awease&, OS to huts been
deolared Invalid and thereby oaao8led
by any dlstrlot Oourt la a malt to en-
foroe the oolleotlon or taxe8. lo
rs-ai8e88ment 0r any. property skifill be
held against 8ny lanooeat gmrehaser of
the 8ame ii the tax reaorde 0r any
OOU5tf fati t0 8hO~ aqY 88808RMRt (for
any year EO re-assewed) by wh1oJ1sa.l4
property oan km ldentiflod and that the
taxes are onpaid. The above exoeptlon,
with the 8ame limltatlon, shall al60 ap-
p ly l 8 t0 all p8t Jud t8 O? aicrtriot
OOUSt8 OMOeliS@ hT61 r d a8808UW3Ilt8)"
Artiole 7347, pxyotide8:
"When wld list haa been .o made up
the ~~S8lOIl@r8 OOOrt Mfc 8t laJ I&-
lng, order a oaaool&atlon0r 8uoh proper-
tie8 in eaid list that~8r~~ahOwn'to han
beea prevlou8ly adw68ed, but whloh
632
Honorable E. Vi. Fmztarllng, Page 3
688e8mRtB are rquna to be Invalid and
bar8 not been oanOeled by any rOm8r order
Qf the ooamle~loners oourt, or by dooree
0r uly di8triOt oourt; an4 8hall then
rerer 8uoh 118t 0r propertle8 to be a8-
8e8Md or re-08ee88ed t0 the taX a88e8wr
who.8hall prooeed at oaOe to make an a8-
se88a8nt ,0r all .stGd pro ertfe8, fro8 the
d6te criren br 86id u.St Pthe aertlfioate
or th0 Comptroller 08 to a88a8wnt8 or
re-O88e88EOllt8 aads br this ta* 688e880r
Sk11 mt be IWOe886~ 08 t8qUh8d U&8?
Artiols 7i307, but he &all furalah ~a11
blank rorm8 needed, that UnitQrritr w
b8 had in all oountie8), and rrhen.oQ-
platOd shall eubdt the aeme .to the 001i
riSSiOMl-8 OOUTt, VhO 8bau p888 Ll~ll th8
valuation8 fir8d by him; ma, when ap-
proved 68 to the VihlU88, 8htil ObUSO the
taxes to be oomputed and extended at the
tax rate In effeot for each 8e mto. ~yeor
mentlomd f586id list; and, rn addition
thereto, shall oau8e to be added a penal-
ty equal Ip amount to what wul4 be 8%~
per oemt Inters& to the date 0r naklng
,+ald liet rr0a the date 8wh propertIe
vould ham been delinquent had mame been
properly raadered by the owner thareof at
the time and ror the year8 '8tated la aaid
list; pmrlded, th8t the osrtltlaate of
any tar oalleotor given during hi8 term
of otiloe that all taxeb bare bean paid to
the date or such oertlfioate oa any oer-
taln pleoe or propmrtp, whloh 18 rul4
desorlbed ln 8UOh oertIrloat8, or ii the
tu roll8 0r any ocuatf fell to rrb0w aq
aslreesraentsugalnst 8uch pr0perty suftl-
oient to ldantiry it, ad that tha 8ame
vae unpaid at the dot68 stroh roll8 m8y
hare beon lxemlaod to aeoertala the oon-
altlon or any property as to taxes unpaid,
thl8 ehall be a~bar,to anj re-a88esluunt
Of 8tiuchprOpeX%y Wder this 16U iOr 84
year8 prior to the date or moh oe*lflbate,
633
.Eonorable P. W. lEa#terliag, Page 4
or 8u0h 8xamlixitlonO; provided, that the
property reterred to, when n-a88e88ed,
8hall bq h8ld by an Innooent purohawr,
who ha8 rolled upon the aorreotae88 at
8uoh oOrtlrlaate, or the tar roll8 here-
toSor8 referred to.*
An 088OO8mOat 18 II0t Invalid Where the 80m0 18
made In good ralth, regsrdle88 0r the aaunmt 0r over a8-
808WOnt. AlI Invalid O88e8-t 18 Om uhl8h -8 void
ab inltto beOau88 0r non-oamplianoe with 8tatutory requlm-
asat8 8urroundin&the a88esMent or one whIoh wa8 mde
rraudulently or one fn whloh a fmdasentallywroilg 8OheW
or a88e88meat we8 adopted.
In your letter you rerer to thl8 Department~8
rul.ing on Siou8e Bill 100. 455. Thi8 OpiniOa i8 HO. 0.9J0,
aad le nddre88ed to.the Emorable Oaorge 8: Sheppard,
Comptroller of pub110 Aoaoaat8. The following portloa ot
thi8 Opinion dlreotly -r8 ths qUO8tiOIl ;yoU pS'O&BOWdill
YOUr btt8r:
*From the opinion of Judge. sharp,
la i3tate.t. Mallet Umd and Oattle Co.,
88 9. 6. (2) 491, H quote a8 tollowar
**Tha rkle haa been rapeatsdlr an-
no9noed that, in the abseao8 or rraud or
lllegallt~, the aotlon ob h board ot
equallsat~on upon a partloular a88esma8at
18 fiII&dg cod, furthermom, thnt 8u0h
valuation dll not be 8et asida marelv
upon a 8honing that t;hs80m $8 in faot
OXOe88iVe. If tho board fairlyand
horia8tly endeavor8 to rix a fair an4 ju8t
valuation ror taxing prirpo1u8, a ml8t0ke
on it8 part* under maah o*aw8tanoe8, i8
aot aubjeot to nriew br the aourt8.
T8Xti8Md PaO%fiO w.~ CO. V. aitl 0f n
hISO (Tex. sup.) 85 6. 9. (2) 24a; Rowl85d
V. aity 0r Tylar @OX. am. iipp.1 s 8. vr.
(2) 756; -8dOw V. Bak8r (Tex. '00~ 4pp.j
229 9. Py.49s; Duok v. Peeler* 74 Tu. a6S,
11 S. W.~llll; State v. ChlcryEo R. I. & Q.
l?y. 00. (Tex. Cam. App.) US 8. ~6. 949; Sin-
day LakeIran Co. we Wakeii~d, 847 8. 8. SSQ,
634
Ffonorable X. 1. Sasterllng, PagO 6
3s 5. ct. 495, ae L. M. 11M. However, the
rule has been deolarud that If a board of
equallsatlun adopt0 a mm0e thkt 16 Illegal,
arbitrary, or fundamentally wrong, the da-
olslon of the board PB~ be attaoked and set
Amidei'
wOther oa8es use the languag? that *aa
a general rule, the doolslon of a hoard of
lquallzatlon u p o anpartbular lwe6mmnt,
in the abamos or fraud.or lrregnlarlty,,
illoonolusire.* Fort Arthur Ind; Sohool
Dint. V. Bauaer, 64 9. f. (21 4lg; l?eder-
Ithenso umd the word8 *finaL*
and ~oo~elnm17** mean the 8am0 thing. The
value of the propert? as fixed by,the board
of equalization is roe aejPdioata, mbj88t
only to being set atide for fraud or the
adopt&n of a fundammtallyrrongmethod
of 'aamsngnsnt."
As pointed out in the Opinion just quoted, the Oourt.8
ham utirordy held that the Commbmlonere~ Court d-8 .mot
hare the authority to re4sao~~ propertyupon'tho only ground
that the original aammment wan based on an over raloatlo&
In the oam of Xlnkson v. Lorsnto Iad. &ho01 D18tr, Court of
01711 appeals of Tezas,~ hmrlllo, 109 S. W. (2) lOQ8, th8
Court sale am follouu:
'The general rule la that an attaok
OS the oharaotar hero made by appellant
upon assemment valuations made by a
board of equaliaation oanuot be justified
in the abssmo of all.agatlona and proof
of fraud, or eomsthlng equitalent there-
to, auoh as lsok of jurladlotloa, an ob-
vlous rlolatlon of the law, orthe adoption
of a prlnolpIe oP~nmthod of establi8blng
raluatlon8 or maHag asseesaentcl that la
fundamentally wrobg and whloh wm.Xts in
a substantial Injury to the oomplafa& *
Mere dlffereaoea of.,oplnlon, honodl$ eu-
terta.lnedd,though 8rroneoua; will not
warrant the interf~ren@m of the OOUrtB.
Drussdow r.,,IIker (Tar. Corn. App-) 889
635
Xonorable W. B. Ihaterlktg, Page 6
s. I?. 493; Yenardrllle Xndopendent School
Dlst. v. Moser (Tex. 011. App.1 90 8. W.
(2) 598, 599; Lubbsok Hotel Co. v. Lubbook
Zndepandsnt Sshool Dlst. (Tar. Clr. App.)
e5 S. w. (2) 776; slmklns T. city of
Coraloana (TOG CIT. App.) 84 S. K. (8) 998;
State v. Xsllet Umd k Cattle 00.. 1.26 Tax.
S92, 88 9. U. (2) 491."
In the oase of Msderland Independsnt Sohool Dlstriot
T. Carter et al, Ccmrt of Clril hppsals of Texas, Beauwnt;
z". W. (2) 487, the Court said:
*We folly reo~~lzo the rule oontendod
for by ths appollsnt #at ths deolsloe of
a board of aquallsatlon @ori a partioular
assemwnt, in the abssnoe of lllogality
fraud, or. somethln(l equivalent therets, 1s
00nolus~vs. It is unquestionable the sst-,
tied rule. in this state that the omrts hsn
aa supenlaory oontrolwer boards of oquall-
Xatlon. Stats cr.Yallst Land t Qattle CO.
(Tsx, .Sup.) 06 S, 1. (8).471, and Youardville
Sndo ondont Sohool D&at. vr Jfoser (Tsx. Oir.
APP* P 90 8. W. (Z) 598, snd authorities oltsd.*
We are of the opinion that the Oomdsrloner~~Oourt
of JeffersonCounty, Texas. wuld bd umuthorissd to~paasan
order.authorizlng a ro-assessmsnt of ths property in question
under the faots eot out in your letter.
Yours very truly
ATTORREYOItRXRALOt’1%IPS
B&R5
~*Rov~sJQ 12. 1939
ATTORNEYGENERAL06 Ttig
APPROVED
0PlNt0~
CoMMIlTEE
n ,“i%a3-
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion