Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
IIonoreble R. C. Nerve8
County Auditor
Greyron County
Cherimn, Tom8
Dear Sir:
s, 1943, you inquire: d Colleotor of Taxer I deputler bdralnis- l d to bppllo~tloM a, to., under nd not- &I l Xotary Fubllo lt In oth er r o rdr, if l dr p- ;k;r*an rrridarit rOr transfer of tltlr, bring notary publlo, tory thr Eighrq Depmtmmtt Seotlon 35 or Certliloate oi Title Aat provides: *no motor retlole mar br dirpoerd or at rub- requrnt rele unless owner aeeigneted in the oertlfloate or title or title #hall tnnrrer the oertliloate
on rorui to be prescribed by the Department *2 84 Eon. R. 0. nea.rea, Fags 2
before a Rotary Fubllo, whloh fom ahall lnolude, amoog l uoh other matters as tho Department uaf d0t~r8ha, n l rridatit to thr l rfa0t that th0 lgnar la tha owner or the motor trhiole, an4 that tbare are no l~ona against auoh aotor lo- rroept auoh as or8 hI01a shown OD oortlfloata title l nd DO tit10 tb on7 motor wd0h 0bon pass or root until auoh tnnrier bo 80 xoouted.’ (Baphaala raded)
~rvrruant to this sootlon the Blghwey Dopartmant has preaoribed a Somu dononinntod aAaaIgment o? Tit18 * nhloh iom IO printed on tho baok of original oartirloate ror motor rehloloa. of title aaauma t&t your lnqulrr la direofad to this Instrument.
&%Ile the wording ai Seotloa & la pethapa somewhat awkward, 1t BOOM qqmsmt the phhm =berore a Notary that FublIo* war Intended to ralata to the 6lauao *the owner Ol tIflO* and that shall tranaier the orrtlfloata &it that tho neoooaary rrrlasrlt or the LegI8latare to require was ba taken only by a ?lotary Publlo.
This oonolualon would utomatloall~ answer your In- quiry were It not for the doubts raised by the following lang- uagr of tha Supma Court In the oaae oi Xarrla County v. -11, 173 S. U. (Bd) 6911
"But ?Iall ooatendr prior the 1941 amendment of Art. oeraa hla 0rfioe had no author- ity hke and oertlty the 8f.fld TLta In question his deput,i~ ic in taking thaa thtit thoreioro, wars sot ag as notarlea pub110 aa his d&p- utiea. lt IO true la 1941 tha lo ialaturr lerda by peolally aid umnd Art. prot t ding that in oopntiea with a population or b00,OOO ot MOM aa~oaaora and oollootora or taxes and their dopatiea should be anpowered dsInIatar oaths and rrrld~tlta oorering bills sale and appll- notor Tahlolel, oatlona ror thnater oto., and should be othorlzed to oolloot foe of i?b oenta
84:.
aw. 1. 0. Ranvea, P4gr
So? oroh tuoh oath o r l ffldarlt, the aam to ba a is4 or 0rrl+. Rowaiu, wa l o o ounted ror tnlnx that the l aao8aor oO~aOto? l lraady bad authority br tktoa of Art, tt46a, to tha abow amen&mu&, raa4lag @a ioltowrc
rior ! The Aaa4aaor an4 Collaotor of taoa shuwr, or sharlrf and kaaaaaor and Collaotor 04 h-a, at, l apouerod, to l drialatar huaby authorized 611 oaths nroaaaarr ror tha dlaoharee of the orrloO0, sad to ad- duttar thalr rrapeotlra iOr tha tranaaotlon
alnlrtu all oaths required Aota ol bualnraa of oriI88#.* raryeotlva 19S8, 44th UC;., 9. 416, oh. 164 BOO. 1. sea- tlon 8 ot thlr Act rOOftea thrrt it us8 paasd as rafarred nn l auaeooy neaaura boowtnr tha oltloua to wua not than allowed to l dmlniatu all oaths nooraa,rry tee tha traaanotlon of tha budnaaa ot sin08 the n(lIatrrtloo thrlr oiiloaa, of motor thr 8aa~a#or ad rehlcka hnd boon mado a duty d aclleotor, lt follows that ahanerer l n oath was naorraary tnnaaotlcn of that hafnaaa, tha aabe8aor and collaotor or hla d@;uty had tha author- lty to abrlnlater undar the ol 1055 l upn. Act it, That the Aot of do818 with matter in more tom8 does nr& wan that thr authority. did rproUic already ulat under tha broad language of tha arlSar l tatuta.~ langua$a oould ba lilted its context If this ircm and iron a litorrl lntW&vatatlon than, notwlthrtondIn& thr ment f on of a notary pub110 In aDOdon SS, It would a mar thet a tax raaaaaor-oollrotor and his Coputiaa era quaUS ad t&a ’ P nomeiar rurtbu xamInatIon or afr%drrlta In queatlon. thir oarr praoludcs I’JO~ a Oon&trUOtlon. Yhe oontroiara~ la Harris Cuantt v. Hall, aupra, oonormed “nriId8vlto Inaidant the 110enaea, tranafara, bills oi iaauanoo ot 8utcmoblla aervloeaa anr other utaaobllo a81a, daatroyed rohloloa ror thr ye4ra 19S8. 1bSb and 1957 (pp. 69&69S upn). or Imlo Aot was paaod in MS@. ‘.
3eotbn 23 or the Cwtirioato Tha tatatoa prrrorlblng torn8 eeoh of tar typ4a cb tb Iaatrumant mtlonod ln thr Court*a opinion rithu mu04 n- an w8~ridarlt~ without ageolf~lag beforr whw uoh quiti *4 846 d
_. Ron. P. C. Neavea, Page 4
srrldarlt should be eoutw? (Sootions 128, 138 and 1Eb of 06758 V. A. C. 5., ci041146 with the Iaauenoa or nrtlot dupllaate lloanao reoelpta the Irau8noe ot rapl8oemont lIoenae plates the. raglatration or rebullt autoaotlve veNoloa, ard ArtIOle.: 143 Y. A. P. C., prior Its repeal, 484llAg with bll1a 01 0010 ror transrer of titlr), tha datalla OS hrt or uoh iom the diaoretlon or the ~ly;~wa~ to vepartloont and said ?apar$naot also ueraly required a~ #Sri- dnvlt without nonlng tha par’e,Ue betore whm ruoh rridavIt should be taken ( %ptiOA 3b Of hrtlOl0 bb7ba V. h. C. S., fe*a of deatroyad va- refunds of rsgietra~lon dzt;t;T with 94 LiOOtiOA 23’0r the ~ertlfloate or Title kOt oontaln;d only a 6lmll&r re~;ulrement, we feel that Rarria County v. Hall, ug.ra, would justify the conolualcn that a taz assessor-oolleotor on& hla deputler Could taka OUCh al- in 3eotlm 33 thr ir~lrlature.ads tldarlt. iit nGt fiowcvcr, only to raquira rn affldsvlt but 8180 provlda ouch iiidavlt lubilo.” be Icaco “before a Yotary suo!i ~rovlaior la a psrtloulat Jrovlalcn whioh relates only to the type oi aifl&aVit iA thSt :‘OCtiGn. An in said in 39 “ior. 5eAti:Aed (114: hr.
*In 34~~ 1)r conf3lst betvmen a toneral prc- vlsio~‘~nG a, sr.eoiel provlsloo daal& nith tLe the fomer tcntrol~sd or llrlted aame subjeot, acd th:s la 00 whether the provlalcac. ty the iattar; in question are cGAtaIAsd in aam aot in difr- In other words, %hen a otatute , erent l naotmente.
arakor'r goneral pr0vlOl~ l p p Mntly for a ape0131 ;rovielcn rcr a partlculcrr ma* or olaaa, the former yIaldr and the latter patella in so far a8 thr L*rtloulur oe6e or olaee la cavserned.
In suoh olroumstanoea, uto Is rtearCed as thou&h it were AD exception geolrl pr~~le10~ stat-
or proviso, rucovlag scmethlng rror. the o;*ratlm 0r tka ~enerol la*."
The 1941 amendmat Ar$lole 7?4ds, naatlo?lsd above rrenaoted the provlalons of this Art- in Courtto opinion, in the originel iole whloh were oontalned tlot of 1953, find adds& ~olal p r ovision l pplioablr only to oGuntiea 31th a *5 . -
. Tha latter population ol uon thaa 600,000. pro+leioo is phlaly in4pplhablo to OFayron County beoauar thr popula- tlon of meld County ea rbom by the 1040 frdrrel oenru* 18 The rormer rorisloos ~wmrrllp wltb Oaths only 69,499.
rbc@ltW for tmnarat P on Of the bualnbsr of the oflioerr nanrd tbetrln. Skoe thorn provlnlona ITO genrrrl they met yield to the rpeolflo pkovlrion relstivr tha ease rubjaot IB hOtiOn Or th8 CbtuiCatb Of atie OO~tdWI AOL Stated dlffrrmnt4, th* prtlouler ~provlrlm~ or sootloa kake ail'idavit required t?srein an axcaption to the gen- era1 rule@ govrrnlng afiidavlCa the type. ocvered, by Article WMa.
Conraqumtly, you are rsrpeotfully adviesii nbitbm the tax rrrb0eor-oollrotor Gray6oa County nor.htr d8putien l otlng only in 0rtiOi.d orpneitirr may ttie the ardavlt regulred by teotion SS of the Csrtirhetr ot Title AQt.