Case Information

*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN

Hon., Lferold ~oCiaokim

Asaiotant Di8triat Attorney

Your lettsr

ask 611 opinion of thi

set out has been refs rsiiznea for atten- aon.

art.0 of your letter am roirowe t

a inaorporeted over the State ts glaosn or buslnese, re in Dallas County, oonncotion with the t in any way ba ldenti- onartor doeo not dssigz- am8 under whloh it oper- ary 00n0erlls. ’ gal question is, are the subsidiary erated under oorloue assumed or meer, sxmpt uudor Artiole 1069 of Ode Of tha state Or TeXMd? would p diatinotion under the earns etate or faote lr tho oorporatlon were a foreign oor- poratlon dut$ authorized to do business in Textm? *

Artlole 1087 of the Penal Cods, Rorleed Oivll Statutea or 1925, reada aa iotlowr,:

‘No pereon or pamsoas shall carry on or oonduot troneaot buelasm in this Stats *2 Hon. Harold MoCraoken, February 23, 1939, Pane 2

under nny assumed name or under any deEi&na- tion, name, style, corporato or otherwioo, other thnn the raal n%me or names of the in- dividual or individusls conducting or trans- aotinq suah huslnoon unless suah person or persons shall rile in tho of~loe 0P the county clerk of the oounty or oountios in w!liob suoh parson or persons oonduot, or trnnsnot or in- tend to aonduct or transnot nuoh business, a gertlfioete settins forth the norno under nhioh suoh business is or is to be oonducted transacted, and tbe truo or real full name or names of the person or parsons aonduating or traneootlng the SRVVS, with the poft-offi.ae address or the addressas of sal,d person or persons. Said oertiP2onto shall bo oxoouted and duly acknowledyed~ by the person or persona conduottnrJ or intending to conduot said husl- noss in the mannor no:*? provided for aoknowledc- ment of convoyonof~ of real astate." Artiole 1009 oP tha Penal Code oP the Revised Civil Statutes oP 1925 reeds as follows:

"The preoeding artloles in no way apply to any oorporation duly orgsnlzed under the law of this State or to any aorporntion or- ganlzed under tha laws OP any other State and lawfully doing business In this State.* There can be no doubt but that tho Legislature must have hnd in mind, in the passage oP Artlolos 1067 and 1069, both inaluslve OP tho Penal Code, ths neaesaity OP having of record, available either in the County Clerk'8 oiiioe oP the oounty in which the business is be- inC operated or the Sooretary of State's ofPlce, an idan- tirication of the parties operating a partioular business. It is probable that tha Leglsleturo, in the passage of Xxtiole lOW, assumed thnt aorporotlons would he oporated under their oorroot oorporate rume~ obviatlq the neoess- ity that they be,laoluded within the provisions oP Arti- ole 1067. .The language ot Artlole 1069, however, Is olaar and unambiguous. It will permit of no oonstruotlon other than what tha woxdihg of the statute oloarly pur- ports. It is fundamental that a oouxt will not assume

Hon. nsrold MaCraoken, February 23, 1939, Page 3 to oonstrue or interpret Q statute if there is no neoessity for it to do so. Larkin vs. Pruptt Lumber co., 209 SW 443. .'

It is settled by nnny decisions that them is no room for oonstructlon when the lag is oxpresaod in plain and unambiguous language and its moaning i6 olear and obvious. Trimmer vs. Carlton, 396 S?i 1077, _ Sly. ct. Internaticnnl G. N. i?y.,Co. vs. l.!allard, 277 SW 1051, Sup. Ct. Tex. p. Ry. Co. ~8. Forkins, 48,SJ (2nd) 279, Con. of App.

,In cclsas where the lam 1s expressed in plain and unambiguous lenGun@ end its meanin!: is cloer and obvious, the law will bo enforced cs it rends rogardlass " of its polio7 or the justice of its oxecutlon. V:ecver

vs. iiobineon, ZG8 $!7 133.

The rule of statutory ocnstruotlon ia olearly stated in Blaok on ,Intarpretatioa of Laws (2nd Sd.) page' 45, as f0110wst I .

*If the 1s1~ae.e the stetuta is plain and frea fro3 ombiEulty nnd expresses o sin&e definite and sensible ncaninr, the meaning 'is oocolusivoly presumed to be the mecnlng v:hloh \

t!:a Legislature intentlad to oonvcy. In other words, n statute must be intorproted literally. Zven thou& the oourt should be oonvlnoed that some other mcanln2 wss really intended by the 1aw;nakinC power, and even though tho literal interpretation should defeat the very purposes of tha enaotmont, still the oxpliolt deolara- _ tion of the Legislature is IA law and the oourto must not depart from it.", The rule of statutory oonstruotion is affirmed In Xlnder -VS. Xing et al, 297 5% 689, and affirmed In 1 SW (2niJ 587.

It is, thoreforo, the oplnlon'of this Depnrt- mont bnd you are's0 advised that Artlola 1067 does not require a odrporation operating under various assumed or buslnese names to register nith the County alark of *4 ,

IIonl l?+rold Irlobreoken, February Z3, 1039, Papa 4 tha oountp in whioh suoh business is bein,? oonduoted. There would be no dletlnotion under the mm state of ra0ts ii thu oorporntion ww.-0 a roraign oorporatlon duly authorized to do businem in Texas. !

TrucPting that this satistaotorilp an3w0rs

your inquiry, ure are

7cry truly yours , A?FilOVXD:

,