Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN h.tw~ry aS, 1958 Xonorabla C&aarlsyLockhart state Treasurer Auetln, Texae 3ear Kr. Lookhart: sour repuest isinsaoauuy for an abbt mentioned t,nArticle '104 entitled at reoord, and $@Elent murt have new a uhioh it amp be ss00dea, at this omao* Cirll sttatutm, read6 ae follovar /‘?-‘J Honorable Charley Lockhart. January 25, 1939, Page 2 .tlon;and.provid1x.qfurther that the provisions of this Section shall not apply to renewals or extensionsof any notes or obligations,and speOifioallyahnll not apply to refunding ot existing bonds or obligations. hnil , providing further this Saotioa shall not apply to notes snd obligationsor instrumentsscouring same taken by or on behalt of the United States or any corporate agenoy or instrumntality of the United States Government in oarrying out n governmentalpurpose as expressed in any Aot of the Congress of the United States." In Itself an abst?act of judgment oreates a lien on nothing. TNCI, when it is filed, reoorded and properly indexed, the law creates a lien to seoure payment of the judgment, if the debtor happens to own land in that oounty. There may be some similaritybetween a oontraot lien and the abstraot of judgment lien, a statutory one, but among their dlfrerenoes is the very prootioel one that the oontraot lien is given by a debtor in most instanoes able and willing to pay, vhile the other lien Is given by statute to help fame payment where the debtor is either unwilling or unable to pay, or both. It would not have beea an unreasonableview for the Legislature to take that 'the usually mrthless or near worthless abstract of judgment should not haV8 to bear the seme tax stamp as the usually valuable vendor's lien or deed of trust. Furthermore,the liens speoifioallydescribed in the Act ordinarilysecure payment of a negotiable inetrument,the long esoape of which rrom taxation probably preolpit'atedthe passage of Artio1e 70476, No suoh instrument is secured by the abstraot of judgment,even when reoorded in a county where the debtor holds real eatate. The Act speaifioallyenumerates oertain contract liens, and the general words following should not be oonstrued in their x-idestsense, but should be held to apglg to liens or the same kind or olass. 39 Tex. Jur. 2023 Shelton vs. Thomas, 11 6. K. (28) 254; F. &M. Net. Bank vs. liar&s,137 S, ri;.1120, Ja30, the oaption of the Act nay be looked to in deter- mining the intent of the Legislative Body. Popham v. Patterson, 51 S. Vi. (Zd) 680, Sup. Ct.; Tsxarkaua & Pt. S. Ry. Co. v. Flouston Gas & Fuel Co., 51 23.Y!. (2d) 284; 39 Tex, Jur. 226. The only part of the caption to the bill In whioh Article 7047s was inoluded is found in Acts 44th Leg., 3rd 0. S., Ch. 495, p. 2040, an& reads as follows: ~;: ,. ., .t:. .,, : TionorablsCharley Lo&hart, Ja11ua~~eCr,~l939,-8'3 ". . . mending Artloles 4839, and 7049, Revised Civil Statute8 of 19868 amending Seotlon 4OA, of Artiole 7047, Revised %jtatutss of 1925, as amended by chantm 212, Action 1, Acts of the Forty-seoondLeg- islature;amending Section 3, ChclQter73, Aots of the Forty-secondL8g:islatur-e';lovyini:a tax uQpn oarbon black, and provldlng for it8 oolleotloa; levying a tcr upon ooin-operatedmaohines, eremptlng aortain olasses of maohlnes, providing ior the aolleotlonor Prlor to said action of the 44th Legislature,Art. 7047 oontainedno pr8vlalon,requlrlngpayment OS 8temps on ang suoh lnetrument$, Artiolo 70478 a pearmr~r the fir& time in any Sorm in said Act of the 44th L . I?enae,the term ussd in the oaptlon "lovylng 8 stsGlp tax upon osrtain promlesorynote8, and rQvldlllg for the oolleo- tlon ther8oi.v reti#rredto what 18 now E rtlalo 70478 and no other part of the bin,' and is the 0~14'deeorlption of Art1018 ?oCVe ma in the caption. It oouk herdlp be argued that 8 JuUgment 16 8 protllfseory or judgment,if the mm8 must be imm8dlat8ly oon8tru8d out be- oause of an infJwri0ient oaption. 5iving'whateveretfact to the general rules of oonstruo-. tion that should be given, and oonslderingthe oaption, it IS our opinion that the Lsglslature~&id not intend to raqulre the stamps to be crrixsd to abstracts of jungment. Roth of your questions are answered ln the negative. The opinion of J. E. Broadhurst, Assistant Attorney General.,dated November 17, 1935, ho161 oontrary to tho above la hereby overruled as the opinion of thla2 spartment. * Youm very tmlp