History
  • No items yet
midpage
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
O-2489
| Tex. Att'y Gen. | Jul 2, 1940
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN i .= .s- ii.~ Oheppard ~onorabls Gee .

coz@roller of fublio Aocounts

Austin, Taxis -

up011 the dsath of a Con- that ruch pensioner had of hsr gonsio~~ ~arranie and hhd h&J. then, aocw.ulatinCf som $bOO.OO

worth.

1. n subjcot of inhcri- uAr0 tb se w3rrnnCs

tanca f os the benefit OS this Uaceusod pcn-

6ioncr?" Th0 ansivor to’ your concernlag quastlon

losuing of R duplicate warmnt to the heirs OS the .ripceesod

snorPble Coo l a. tiheppard, Page 2

;,np~cner is Controlled by our Opinioo Xo. O-2161,:i%1lt?h Ln part, a0 followe: ~AAA~,

“Your third question reads a8 follows:

WI (3) IS the payee of a Confed- erate Pension Xarrsnt which has been

voided by linitstion requests a du-

pliCRtc warrunt to be issued, is it

modatory on the Ztzte Cozqtrollor and

StGte ‘IXeasUrer to iS&Us SUCh dU?fi- CutC, provided the necos~ary require-

mnts for iz,:nuing du2l.icetc mrrmta

are iwtp

“In answer to yo*ur third question ooncarn-

a;, whether or not it is madatory on the $tnte to issue duplicate warrants on such

coz?troU.er uerranis which have been barred because they

kerc EOt prusontcd witNo the tvio yam period,

y2.z attention is called to :,rticlo 4366, Vzr- iimotfited which reads as

wfi'8 .'l.ril Statutes, ~vLionn : .’

-1 I ;;1.t . 4505. The Comptroller, * when oatlafied thLlt any original

vmrrmt drswn u_oon t& State Treasurer

hi.8 been loot or destroyed, or when

tiny oertificate 01' other evidence of

indebtedness ap?rovad by the auditing

bosrd or the iJt;ite ,tis been lost, is

authorized issue a dqlicato v;sr-

rtir?t In lieu of t& ori@nil wurrsnt

OX a du>lioate or r, copy of such cer- or other evidence of indebtcd- tiriosts,

ncss lieu OS such original; but no

such duplieatwvmrrant, or other evidence shall issue until the

Of indebtedness,

W,llicmt hcs riled wit!1 the Conptrollcr

his affidavit, atsting that he is the

true ovzer or such instrument, end

the SRZX is in ruot lost or dcstroyod,

oil311 ol~o Sil.c vjith the Co?~gCrOllOr E to *’ ;it In double the mount OS

ci2l.n TiiCh t:qo or jlora Good and sUS-

Siciant sureties, payable to the GOVCl'-

nor, to be npproved by the ComptrolLer,

md Conditioned thnt tha agplicnnt vii11

knorjblt Gbo. H. Sheppard, Page 3

hold the State hamloss and return

to the Goj.nptrollor, u3on demnd being aode t huref or, such duplicates or

l or the mount of money nxned Co>lbE+, therein, together with all costs

Sny aoorw agafnst lectlng the State on col-

sam. A.fter tho itlsuanoo of @aid duplicate or copy if tho Coaptrcl-

lar should ascortafn thnt the saze was

fl?,,roporly Lxx.ted, or ,thnt the aypll-

Cant or party to ~~ho.21 the 5s.w uas is-

sued w’~is not the owner thmeof, he

shull at once desanl the return of

suid duplfcute or copy if unpaid, or

the cmow~t paid oats by the State, if

60 pald; end, upon f~tilurs of ths party

to return swe or the axou~t 0.7 money salt shall bo Instituted

Onlled for,

up011 sali5 bmd- i’n Travis County. *

“It is our ogdnion that it is xmdatory on

the Gtuts Coaotroller and stata Tre;surar to Is-

SUC!l a warrunt, even th&h barred br;ccluse of l?Ct

having bee:1 presented wlthin cho tvi0 year pEtriO&, to ths Lc&slature who mul.d have

mjrg be present&

the authority order the mm p-2id.” (Unberaoor-

ins OUXU) ft. ohoula be pointed oit as atate in the above quoted opinj.0~ “if the csnditions psovidsd in Artix0.e 4365 hnvc barn c02pplied ;sJithtl, it is mudstory al the co2ptroZler these coditiou6 aust to JESUS o. dugllc&tc yiarrant. ZOW~V~F, very e1ose1.y. The mera affidavit of one olaiming bb follo~4 to bo ttb true o-,vRar, woo.la not in itself, be sui’ricient.

Article 4365, ss~ra, ia coucj.ss language, places a duty upon the Colqtroller co first satisfy hinwl.f that th3 wcrrclat i% questfOR h:\s beea.lost or destroyed. The Grnot kUlgUAga Of the -tioh i:, aa ~O~OV~S:

,+.g ,

j . 4114 1

mnorabl8 Gee. E. Sheppard, Pnge 4 Under tho facts as s&ted in this question where 8 period of seven yenrs has elapsed, oinoe the warrant8

ve*e last aotually known of a nu:%bar of natural possibil- Th9 warrants in question mlight hirv8 been iticzs arise.

assigned, they could have been given as seourity fey e d9bt, Or diSSOSCd Of any one Of sePera1 Ways. !?hs re- puired uffidavit ohould of cour3c include all mttsrs that &ght throw light on th9 lost warrants, Eiozever, ~the stat- tms leave broad discretion in the hands of the Cornptrollsr and also oomaads him independently to satisfy bitiself as to the exact status of the warrent in question, it ri0ula be Within -his power to rofrrse to issue a duplicate warrant notsithstacding tha filing of -the bond and the affidavit,

if he was not satisfied that the warrants in qu99tion were not assigned, pledged, or disposed of in BOLW proper and regular macner.

In mcwer to your second question, w5 3b0uia deternlne tho type of instrument and nature of such a warrant, In Taxaa Ztxisprudonce, Volume 11, p. 605, Sactio?l 118, we find warrant doscribed in this manner:

Chile rrarru?lts are, in the ordinary form

of commercial p&per, they do not povseos the

quality of such paper, they are not negotiable

instrumuts * * *.I* IIo~~::Bvcr, warrants z.ay be aosiSn9d and the assignee has ever right of the original payee. See Speer V, Stute, 55 S. W. 9 24) 95, 123 T'ox. Cr. sop, 185; City of Bclton V. iIarri8 TLYl3t Wings, 275 S. Y;. 014, affirnad ES5 S. Vi. lG4.

It is a vi911 sottlod rule that a warrant is evidence of an obligation oa the past of the State or one of its divi- sions to pay n certain ~~'11 of macy. Obligntious cf this nmm arc troatod as p9rnonal property nhd are the subject of inhoritancs~. !'~arrants, by th8i.r nature, Piould be Chius- ifiod v;ith ot!mr non-negotiable obligations due the estate Of the decoaced. ,I

You are theretors respectfully advised t&hat under the facts as you state thez, and provided tkt the statute in quo&ion is clomly folkmod, the Coiaptroller is author- ized to issue duplicate Confederate p9n;lon Warrants; and in ahswor to youx second question, that Confederate pencion war- rvnts are the suhjcct of inhoritcnco for tho beucfit of the dccoased ~nnior,ar (s estate. .r-- \ \ . . . . . _ ..:. . . . Yours very truly :;,,;..'-'i So 6

Case Details

Case Name: Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Court Name: Texas Attorney General Reports
Date Published: Jul 2, 1940
Docket Number: O-2489
Court Abbreviation: Tex. Att'y Gen.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.