Case Information

*1 OFFICE OF TIIE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSI’IN

nonornbh DflA 1f. faOk8OA

Distri6t IittOl'Aey

nous ton, Texda

Dear Sir:

dCr Ue- 8A ~QffiOiol latlnc to the OOA- , Title 122, Da- statu.tos AliAotntedl apply to the r0ii0ma 5~ arrondoue deaorlption whloh' roparty AOt omad by him aA& In the rroneoua a6QeSSWAt.

arronaous dasorlption la Lot 18, Houstcn, which he did not own, R, I3look ~160 !:outh llouston, ~whloh he did OWA. The taxpayer ~alzs th%t ha ha?z oellad

tbla error to the attention of ths office of thaw

ne?asgor but that th6.prOporty cata beok on’ tha rolls ur.dar the e.rron,eous doeoription on& the tax-

payer ~nadrartently failed to nota the erroneous

deeorlptlon IA the list praparad the ottlor of

the Irssa8sor Sor hi8 sl@mtUra; but 190 i%nAot~'

assume for the purpose6 of this OplAiOA thst,thlr

fact hsa bean aatabllshad.

I

242 p-F3 2 tionorsblo DCA .X. Jaokson

62. Is suoh payment a dlaoh3rga of the taxes OA the~proparty aobunlly oanod by the taxpayer?' Are tha . taxse~dellnqusnt OA ths propsrtf eotuallg owned by tha . . a.

taxpayer notwIthotindin&.thls pnymont?

"3. If suoh pny.mnt dlrohnrgee the taxes, murt this bs ylend dofensivaly In a tax ioreoloeure suit

ln a distrlot oourt, not having yat brati filed, or may tha Uoiniulssioners~. Court eorreot th&,‘!rolla’ao es to

sbow that the taxes harr’ bean psld? Thlo ‘quertlon taxes appssrIA8

lnvoltes the .proper prooadura share .RS dollnquant have in feat OA the .dclInqucAt roll .

been paid.” . .’ involves the 0onstruotIo~ The mmv6r to yonr qiaestion of hrtlole 733R.. Ch. lOi TIkle..1224 %llnghrAt~ Texee,. V. C.S.,

For oonvenlauoo wa.ouote this statute insofar aa ralavsnt $ihla oplnlon, a8 follovk?r .’ .: ”

1 i lRsa1 estots which A& hdye batin ran&wed for taxer and paId under erroneous desorlptlon eiten.In aaseeemsnt rolls, or lands that may hava baon.dulO'as8as'aad'rAd tax60 . . - - .-.. jl6lU OA On4 .6848tXK!l43it, or laaas wnl6n may hav6 beeA asoerard ..~:y :,., : :: .' nnd tax68 paid thcreoa:In a oo*mty other' t&&the one in' :' whlOh th6y are looated, orlands ?rhIoh may hnocr been mold ,.- to the S&to atid UPOA whloh ‘taxaa, hava bdikti oaid snd throuah

error note Oredited-IA t@e cs#easmaAt rolls,~ ihall oo’t br - deemed oubjsot to the- provbslone~ of thla .ohaptsi.* ‘.

The ~61~ gucstlcn.ls wh6ther or not In.vI6w of thi'a nrtlols of tha abtutes the taxpeyer udar the olrcumstanoe8 outlined in four.lettsr has in truth’and ln,taat fald hlr’ althou& upon aA erroAeou8 d6eorIptluA In his 8s6eo8- taxe8, mtnt.

X%ars of ths OPIAIOA that although thla taxpayer ' trroneously doeoribsd th6 property actually Owned by hlm.In or Asssaaor arroneonsly desorlbed hl6 rendition, It, ho ncoortheleoe by vlrt&e ~of’ artlola 7338'aupra, I8 protsoted and has paid his the.3 upon n coryeof degop$ptiOA Of t K taxes as'etf6otlV6l ^[6] OgCd 1Md SOtUsllY aa thuu.g!h ho had prlld'- by him. #\r w6 view It thIs'~,artloIo of th6 3t3tUt8 Wa3

emoted the L6fjf0latW6 for .the oxprnsa pur OS4 of tflkl,ng 6are of 4 situation cuoh~.ng grosanted,in'yuur E etter. If lt 1s not su~oaptIbl6’of,thls oon8truOtkm thcut to OUF mInda it la more or lass meoAlA~lasa end IncffeOtlve in~aboom llrrhk ine the purpose wkioh we.:thIAk the Legislntu2e had iA 6$Ad Lo ltr anaotment.

243 Eonoreble lJan ii‘. Saokson page 3

We bslieve that outi viaws are sustained by judioial &,hoPitJ’ as herelnsrter pointad out. In the ease or Down8 et w v. Yiilson (Galveston Court of 01~11 ~ppenls) 183 S. w.

803, the Oourt there oons’t~ued and applied~ Artlola 7694 which i# .4rtiola 7338 of the present oodlrioation with whloh we are hero oonoarned, wb.Gra %t was contended by a mortgagee entitled by virtue of the provisions that he was

of the deed or trurt par- a.ltting the aooaleration oi the entire indebtedneae upon the failure to pgy texes by the mortgagor before they boom& delia- :I. quent to fOr8OlOse his lien baoauae tha mortgagor had tailed to pay taxes before they beoama delinquent; in other worda, it ~63 oontendad that the mortgagor had failed to pay hia taxer, although he had paid tnxas upon the land owned by him under an erroneous deeorlptlon. The Court of Civil Appaala dld not rustaln this vim, but expressed what we. think is the oorreot applloatlon of thia etatute ln the following langueget

uAppellee~s~oontentlon 1s that ae the tax aasasa- for the pears &nt and reoslpt. for pe$?nsnt of taxes and 1914. show thst appallants aseersed and paid tams on on thd T. Kalkar-and John ?Joors leapae, the land eltuated md doee not show that he assamed any~ land on the Wing- field mrvey, 60 muoh of the land aa was on the XlnEfleld survey wne not dsssaeed nor the taxes pald.thereon Sor said, ‘. years, and that thcroiore appellea had the rlGht, unaer the terns of sold dtmd of trust, to deolare all of ~the ‘.

notes @van by nppellants brine her ‘cult at tha tfme she did, and that to her due and payable, and to

the suit was not thererore prematurely brought. ArtloIe 7694, Retlaad ..G. 3tatutas of 1911, provides that, real eat.qte whiah tllay have been rendered for taxee and paid und62 erroneoul desorlptlon Given In aeaeeement zolle shall hot be deemed subject to tho further paynent of taxes, and shall not be hold delinquent as to payment of taxes,. under the provisions of ohaptrr 15 of said atotutae, relating to the assearment end oolleotlon of taxes. iie do not think that it oan be reaionebly oontended, and osrtainly not justly oontended, that the oolleotor of taxea ior Qrime8 county oi~ould~ be authorized, under the law above referrafl to, to aooept paymant of taxes due by appel.lata Upon * their said dereotlve aseeasmeut whan tandersd and ior which he had issued his receipt, and then th?reaiter

oolloot a seoond tax upon the property 80 detaotivaly

aaaeesed, beoauaa ssid property had not bead aaeaaaod .in oonformlty u4th the law. Under the ‘law the pay- strlot ment of the taxes upon the l&O aore .9f land by DOWIN though under a deieotivr or erroneous~demoriptlon, WSB , (, .,,~ ‘;. “.

~. :

nonorabls Dan, U. Jeokson raea is

a rull dlsoLarge OS the toxoe duo on Bald land (?KotdIol:le v, F.oohalle, 125 i3.W. 741 Hollywood vr Vlallhauran, 28

civ. kpp SLl, 68 S.W. 329)”

i:e thlnk~ to the 8amo eifrot 18 the holding la thr *t/e of Hollywood V. GellhiVM*n, 68 n. m. 329(5saliatonio~~~t or Clvll Appeala) ln w!lIoh a writ OS error wtsa denied.

WO.1 an notion In trespsaa t!) try title by :Wlheusen, thm ,ppgllee In the oeae,-who prevailed In tha trial oourt, who ola;aed under a tm deed, where it WM oontendsd that nolly- rood, ths sppellant h&d sot f.aId the t,xea slthouch he hed =ade mi erroneous aseessnsnt and paid taxes thereon; Thr

oourt hold thst the taxes hod been pold, .anp aooorded to him dlrposlng of the’mstter, the protaotion of the statute in the sama lsny.uaKa 3s It Is now, Art1016 7338, supra. the oourt raldr 88 It then sxlntsd, which lr 3n .- .!

. . ,The ruit for taxes aaeinst ther ‘unkaown ’ .: ownar WI; browht virtue of ohaptar 5a, tilt. 104

Caylae’ Ann* civ. LX ., which was pnsaad In 1897. After fully and olaarly settin:; forth the nod6 of prooedure In the oolleotlon of dsllnquent texoe, it *, Ia provided In artiole 5232 I. ‘real e&ate whioh mny ha+6 barn render&d- for taxes end peld under

arroneour desor,lptlon given In aaaesamtnt rolls, or , : lulds that any huve been doubly aeseseed end tare8 .?a18 on one esoaasmant, or lands whloh ‘may have been

aseessed and tnraa pald thareon Ir 9 oounty other than the ona In which thay ar6 looatad, or lends whioh may.

have basn a016 to the stata end upon whioh taxes have 3. ,baen ,I:oId and through arror not oredltod I5 the eeeessr

.cant rolln, ah311 not be .deemed eubjaot to the pro-

rlnlonn ot thSs ch.?q$ar;’ ?!nder the. pr’tIole r-uotod, .‘Y none of the provisions of the law embodIed ln oh,pter ~“.

5n bad my opplIontlon to the land of the appsllant,

Ha had sasaesed It, and had Fplld tha taxaa on it.

me fsot of the 3aaee~nent mat have been known to

the aaeaaaor, and whan the ault was brou&t, arid

the sffidovlt sodo that the land belonged to aomd

unknown cwnsr, tha court found that the asae8sor

and county attorpay know that It #aa the homestoad

of ~ppallants. 7nowInc thsie i~ofct, the ault wan

filed, rrooaas was obtolnad for unknown owmr8 by

* the aftidavlt of thr’oounty nttoraey, and the home-

ataad of ~gpallantn sold for toraa whIah thry did

not owe* They had done all rrqulred of thsm’by law,

Is rrnderlne their property for aad then texatlon,

paid the taxer; but beoauae they iaI~Lod to append

245 paca nonorabla Dm ii. Jnokdon the property trio wora8, '!Jahon adaltlon,~

t0 thQ d4sOriFtiOA Of have lost their lsnd, glthou&h the they neS> +jud@d to - . . . . .- repreaentatlvas Or tne at-at9 icnaw whet land wag mg~t, s& glthourh there ia no faot found that would tan& to astablish thnt the dasarlptlon was not all that should have baan rsr It oamot be reasonably hold that the fc1lurg fo &rod.

attaah ‘Lisbon addition' to-the dasorlptlon or the lana " ohowod that a difiarant Lot was randarea ror taxation by arpallants from the one aseaasad to an unknown owner ht the ns80ssor. There wssb as baford statad, no proof that thara were other lots ~6 ‘in block 1 In foakum than the ens in the Xahon add;tionk WG ma of the opinion that. under the fasts, there was no law under whlah tha suit for tha taxes oould be p~oseout8d, snd the -obtainsa, rore- judgment aloelne a lien on the property, was null and told, ml.

thllt lt aould be attfiakad under a plea of not guilty, the error ahd ln the jud@mt will be noticed hare In ,- that tha sbsanao of Sssi~mants~of error.*

3a.thlnk the oaaa nf Texas & Q. Rallwsy Co. t, ITall St UI., 125 9. W. 71 (Tsxarkano Court of Clvll Appaale) euetalnr thr views expressed us in prlnolpla, olthou(lh the rsats are adt altoeathar 41m11ar. IA this doolalon eourt in eiiaot hald that there ,waa a suffioiant dasOrlptlon and that.tha

dcaoriptloA in tha assassman6 aouia not br naoassarl~y alasalriab 49 SA 9rrOA4OU4 dasorlptlOA.

It follows fros what wa have said above thot hour first quastlon Is answered iA the arrirantioa. Ana that .tha flrat p3rt of your .caoond questlon, namly, “1s such payment a.

dlsohsr[e OZ the taxoo on the property satually ownod by the t9x~nyar,m is agawerad in the arfirinativet and that.the SSObAa rnit'of that question, "ArS the taxes daliAqueAt on the

property aatually OWAOa by tha.taxpayor notwithstanding thi8 papilent," slrould be aAawarad in the na(jatlva.

'i;a do not deem It necessary that any ault ba fii9a to aorraat the eltustloA, iO2 wa ballava this prOVlalOn is by .foroa of Its own tarms aufflolant pro- oi the atqtuta tootion to the taxpayer; bran peid by the taxpayer, we ballava Since In law the taxes have actually

the 00mmi8810na~s' OOUrt hoa the authority to aorreat tha daliAc,uaAt roll8 to shor thi8 but whether the aorraatlon 10 made or aot,,,thr State trot, j ~\

’ pamb mnorsbla Don. G’. Jaoktion

end aomtg oannot raoovar taxoo sgnlnnt thin taxreyar

nd e suit ticula be a more tutlle gesture. In other wor48 It IO o ?lCht Inherent IA the law Itself, and not NJ a

aare dotenslva right taxpayer would hat8 la thr . thfn muit t&it suit 8hOUl.d be fllatl aealnrt him.

%%llBtif@ that thi8 Will. 8llti8t8OtOrily 8B8lV8r your qUd8tiOll8, we SW8 /

!. !

. .

PIRST ASSISTANT. Al’l’ORNXY C+;rmTHI&n w

-.i,

LPL1n~