CQPT 

oRl%x OT Tm ATT9RNEY OZNERAL OT TNXM w+‘-J 

AUSTIN 

Ronorablo W. R. Imy 

county Auditor 

nrrant aouaty 

Port Worth, Tsus 

Dear 811~: 

OQInIon No. C-1559. 

Ret Rhsthar or not It Is naoessary to record liens on 

motor vshIoles subsequent 

to the sfiaotlre data or 

Z!ouSs ,BIll No. 407, 46th 

LegIslaturs. 

Vfs‘are in reoslpt OS your letter of Sept*mbsr 9, 

1939, in whioh you requsst an oplnlon ot this Department as 

to whether or not it is nsoessary to raoord liens on motor 

ro~.Ioles In ths county olark’s office shoe the passage of, 

the CrrtIfIoate of Title Act, 

vm wlmv&l tn0 ‘ya?ul ywl.+Aa. 4fupvaL UplK w.hfLw 

or not th8 csstfrioats of Title Act suQanadas or repeals 

ths gsnsrel rsoordfng statutes as to motor rehlolrs. It Is 

nscsssary, thsrsrora, to consider the law oonoernlng the raglstratlon of motor tehlclas prior to Ootobsr 1, 1939 and also 

to oonsldsr ths siiaot of tha pro~lsions of the Cartfiioata of 

Title Act upon the sesa. 

Artlols 8490 of ths Rsrissd Civil Statutes provldss, 

In part, as r0im8: 

*mery ohattel mortgage, dssd OS trust 

or other ihstrument of writing, intendsd to 

operate as a mortgage, or lien upon-parsonal 

props&~, and stary trassrsr thsrsof, whloh 

shall not be aocompanlsd by an Immediats 

dsllrery aad be Sollowed by an actual end 

oontlnued ohangs.or possssslon of ths propsrt~ 

mortgaged pledged, or afrsoted by such tnstrusent, shafl be abaolutaly void as against the 
Hononblo W. E. Yanoy, Pegs t 

orsdltors of the mortgagor or person making 

sus, as l galst subssquent purohassrs and 

mortgagsos or lisn holdsrs in good raith, 

unlss~ suoh Iortrumant, or a trus oopy theraof shall be iorthulth deposited with and 

f&a In the oriior 0r ths oount~ o&erk or 

ths oounty whsrr the prop@rty shall then be 

situated, or Ii the mortgagor or person makIng the same be a resident of this gtate, 

then, of the oounty of whloh he shall at that 

tlma be a realdent; * * * ** 

Article 5497 of the Revised Civil Statutes reads as 

r0ii0rrs t 

“Chattel mortgages and other instruments intended to operute as mortgages or 

liens upon personal gropsrty shall not bo 

reoordrd at length, and all persons shall 

be thereby charged with notlos thereof, and 

of the rights of ths mortgages, his assignee 

or reprrsentatlves thereunder,- 

Article 5497a of the Revised Civil Statutes raaas as 

‘That all chattel mortgage6 hsroartor 

given as security for money advanced ior Thor 

purohaso of motor vehioles shall, when regIstersd as roqulred by law OS chattel nortgages, be and are superior to the alain or 

0laI~8 Of other OreditOrs even though suoh 

motor rshlcle or vehicles are daily expo8ad 

ror sale. Yr0da0a, however, any such chattel 

mortgage shall be void as to bona tide purchassrs when such motor vehioles are dally etpored I r0r 8ala.e 

A pro or oonstruotlon of the above quoted titioles alsoloses thres ma s or legal operations of said Laws. 

?irst, ArtIols 5490 makes unmoordad chattel mortgages 

absolutaly void as against subsequent purtbsers and mortgagees 

or lien holders in gcod faith. This provIslon Is Inherent in 

our reoording statutes and Is necessary and InQIsgensable Sor a 

proper operation OS suoh lawsa 
Honorable W. R. Yanoy, Pags S 

8000na, tha mcoraing statutes quoted operate to 

give oonstruotiro notice to the world of a duly reooraea 

ohattsl mortgage. It is to be remembered that Artlols 5497 

uses the words aand all persona shall be therrby ohargrd with 

notlor thereat.* It would be Im.cossible to enumerate all o? 

the oases a80ia8a by the oourts 0r this state rhioh SO hold. 

The proposition Is olsarly l tatod In the oass of Nurray Company Y. Deal,, 176 8. 1. 718: 

*from the time the mortgage Is so depdSItl d for registration, It beoomes aonstructlvs 

notios of the mortgagees lien.” 

et al., 

See also the cases of Thorndale Ueroa’ntlle Company, 

v. Continental Gin Company, 217 S. pi. 1069, and the 

Supreme Court case of Cr.rshear vr Watt, 44 S. W. 67. 

The third majOT prlnolple Of law wllloh IS a result 

0s our recording statutes Is that the priority 0s liens Is 

determined by the date of tlllng for reoord of.such liens. 

AS a general rula the one first riled ror reoord takes priorlty over those later rii0a. See Smelser Y. Baker 99 S. ?i. 

377; Third National Bank of Springfield Massaohusetts, et al 

Y. National Bank or Comeroe, ot al., 159 S. Vi. 668; J. AZ. 

Radford Grooery Conpany V# Pace, et al., 172 S. Ti. 146; Dallas 

County State Bank V. CrIsison, et al., 231 8. W. 857; Ridgill 

v. 3, L. Wilson RardwaTs Company, et al,, 178.5. Vi. 068; Moors 

v. First State Bank of LIvingston, 127 8. R. (2d) 536. 

House Bill No. 407, Acts of the 46th Legislature 

went into effeot on.Ootobrr 1, 1959 , It is the opinion 0s hi* 

Department that It Is now unneoessary to record, liens against 

motor vehLole8 In the county clerks* ofrloes. This conclusion 

Is ba8.a upon thrss reasons. 

First, Hours El11 Ro. 407 Is a new enaotment dealing 

specIfIoally with motor vehicles and oonoerns the same general 

subject as the general recording statutes. There can be no 

question but that the recording statutes and IJouse Bill No. 407 

ars’both designed to protect the Innooent purchaser and the lien 

holdsr . Housa Bill No. 407 was passed beoause the Legislature 

found thst the general reoordlng statutes aid not offer surrioient 

proteotion In the cases of motor vehloles. That this is trus 

may be seen from Seotlon 1 of House Bill No. 407: 

*Tlii8 Aot shall be referred to cited 

and known as ths *certItIoate or Tftle AC b 
Iionorablr 1. t. Tansy, Fags 4 

and In tha enaotaent hsrrof it Is hersbt 

asolaroa to be the lsgIslatIve lntsnt and 

p Plio oolic~ or this state to losrm and 

p&vent th th rt or motor vahlslas, arid 

the i8porctIoi Into this State~of and 

traSrIo In rtolon sotor vshi6188, and ths 

lootlvely, are to be lIboral1y oonstrued to 

that end. The following tens as herein 

defined shall oontrol In the enforcement 

and oonstruotion 0s this hot." 

That the Lcgl~slature considered the present law Inadequate to prevent the thing set out In Ssotion 1 of the Aot 

Is further emphasised by thn eaergency clause of Bouss Bill No. 

407, which reads as follows, in parts 

** * l * and that many 11s~ have beon 

craatsd against plotor vehIolu to the serious 

tinanolal loss OS a large number of persons, 

and the fact that an early adogtlon of this 

Aot will operat3 to materially safeguard 

dealing In motor vehicles and using the sams 

as security * *- * *O 

5vIng seen tae LegIslature~r tindine that the present 

rioording statutes ars Inadequate as protection In the oases of 

motor vehlales, ths nest ooasldaratlon $8 whether or not ths 

Legislature can rspeal or suaprnd tha operations of the general 

reoordlng statutes as to motor vehloles by suoh an l naotnent as 

House Bill No. 407 without 8peoIiICally stating that the aam 

are su8penara. In this oonneotlon a number of rules of statutory 

ooostruotIon are Important, 

The queatlon of repeal, 

on8 of legIelatIve Intsnt. 

whether express or Implied, Is 

See Rogers Y. w&ous, 8 Tex. 6s; St. 

Louis 5. K. Railway Company Y, Kay, et al., 65 Tex. 558; ?irst 

Ndtlonal Rank va Le8 County Cotton Oil Cornpaw, 274 S. F. 127; 

Berry Y. State, lb6 9. W. 626; State y. Texas and N. 0. R. Company, 126 S. Vi, 65; Fortinberry Y. Statr, 48 S. Oy. (M) 146. 
Eonorable Vi. Ii. Tanor, Paga 5 

seai0n 66 0s Houss : Ill No. 409 is a general mpealin olaurr whioh roads a8 roilowsr 

*All aots or parts of l ots Iason8,irtsat 

with the provIsIvns of fhir Aot are hereby 

rapsalsbs 

A uensral repealing olauss Is dfsotlrs to repsal 

prior enaotmahts to the extent that thsy ars lnoonslstent dth, 

or repugnant to ths terms or the later statutr, Ths Supremo 

Court of Texas tn an op’lnlon wrlttsn by fudge Gains8 In ths 

case of Caddls, et al. Y’. Terrall, Land Commlssloner, 110 9. vi. 

f~~io~~canstruIng a general repnaling clause which reads as 

“All laws and pa-rts of laws In oonillot 

with the provIsIons of this Aot are hereby 

repealed .s 

had this to say about the proposition: 

*It Is’clear that there Is no express 

rspeal; that Is, the provisIon In question 

Is not directly 

repealed, i! 

ointed out as expressly 

But 8 no8 the affect ot a ganera1 provIslon repealing oontlIcting laws 

evinces that the Legislature had In mind 

that something was to be repealed, ths 

courts will be leas inallnsd against reoo& 

airing rspugnanoy In ap.plyIng suoh a 8tatutr.Y 

The language above quoted was also quoted In the case of 

J~bnson Y, Jo&son, 55 S. W. (Rd) 15.3. 

Thera is another rulr of stututory conetrwtlon whioh 

is dlreotly apQlIoable to the case at hand. Whers it Is.apparent 

that a statute Is bntendsd to ombraoe all the law upon the subject tilth whloh It deals It supersedes all iOmeT laws relating 

to the 8ame subjeot. Thfs rule of construotlon was Invoked br 

the Comlssion of Appeals of Texas in the case of First National 

Bank ve Lee County Cotton Oil Company, supra, In a ease whIoh wa8 

In many respeots analogous to our present sItuatIonr That oass 

construed Artlole 579 of the Revised C1?11 Statutes of 1911 which 

provided a means of fixing lIabllIty of drawers and endorsers of 

bill of exohange othb than by protest and notics. The court held 

that the uniform negotiable instrument act of 1910 repealed Article 
Honorable 'II. P. Yanoy, Page 8 

579 bsoaure the later 8Ot tmat84 of the 8aBo 8Ubj8ot matter 

a8 th8 fOZS8re Th8 uniform aegot1ablo inrtrumtnt aot oontaln8d 

'a g-mm1 rspaalfng alatur whlohaa8 exactly idantioal with th8 

@n8Ed r8QO411ly OhU88 iIl ROU88 Bill NO. 409e Th8 COUrt 

qUOt8d irOB the ea88 Of St. hi18 8. \5. mi1-J’ ““““~TV~8Ka’, 

.et 810, 8Upr8, in an Opinion WittOIl by tUdg8 0dbS8. 

language m8 a qUOt&iOil i?Dlp th8 Oa8. Of mg8l'8 1. WatTOur, 

8UpIT4, in Which ths sUpre88 GOtUt Of TaXa ip88kily thrWgh 

Judg8 WhMi8P, 8aid 118 rOiiOW8: 

'A 8ub88qUOnt 8tatUtO HV181~ th8 

8ubject mettAr of a former on8, and evidsntly lntsnded a8 a 8ubstituts tor it, although 

it ~0~1tam n0 expr486 WONTS to that dreot, 

nurt opsr ta to repeal the formsr to ths 8xtent to w'~ioh it8 ?rov181On8 9~3: revlred and 

su~plement8d. So thcugh a aubeequent 8tatutr be not re>ugmnt ln its provision to a 

for18sr one, yet it it was clearly intsnd8d to 

prsrcribs the only rule whioh should govern, 

it rsjmal8d the prior statute** 

The Court in the Firat National Bank oaso al80 quoted 

frtm the language of the case of Stuts v. Howton oil COlUU1881On 

0r ~02a8, 194, s. 8. 4321 

“The rule 18 well 8Ctthd that, wh8n 8 

8Ub88qUsht statute 8hOw8 by it8 OOuteXt that 

it wa8 intended to eimbraoe all the law upon 

tha rubJ8ot dealt with, 8uOh 8tatUta will, 

by irpllo+tlon, ~881 all rormrr lawn NlettIlt to the 8-0 8ubjeOt. The OOrrsOtM88 

Oi that rub 18 not contrarerted, and it 18 

UQneOeB8ary to Cite authWitie8 in 8UppOrt 

or it,- 

The Roger8 and the St. Louis Railway 011808 word both 

aited and followed in the ca88 of Stats V. Tesa8 & N. 0. R. Company, wra e 

The S?;prems Court Of Tesa8 first rxprs88ed 1t88lf on 

ttir mattsr in 1049 in the oa8e of Bryan v. Sunberg In an opinion 

written bg Judge :;heslsr. Ths Court said a8 follows; 

-But when the new 8tatUtO ifI it8eli OOm-. 

prehend8 the entire 8ubjeot and orsater a n8w, 

entlro, and independ8nt eystua re8peOting th8 

aubjsot matter, it ir UniVsrMlly held to r8- 

pot&l and 8UjJ8r8ed8dall plWiOU8 8ybta8 and 
Honorable H. E. Yancy, Pagr 7 

law8 r88pecting thr ram8 8UbjrCt Mtt8E." 

It ir the opinion of thlr DepaABent that; a8 to 

mOtOr VCSh101t38, th8 irgi8htUre ha8 nDx‘ 88t Up a new 8y8t8m 

OS law for the proteotion oi innooent pUrOha88r8 and lirn 

holderr. TlAi8 8Jlt8m i8 80 C?OrPpletO in it8elf n8 t0 8UpOr88d8 the operation8 of the general recording 8tBtUt88 U8 to 

motor V8k~10108. 

In the Sedond place it I8 the opinion ot thi8 Department that tiou8a Bill No. tO7 repeal8 the operation or th8 

genema moording etatutas a8 tc mctor vsl:Iclee because it 

oontllct8 with them. 

Pihere there 18 a 'general statute in foroe and' then 

a speolilc atatute is peased, both statutes rsmaln in foroe 

excf?pt that the seoond 8upW8edeI3 the first a8 to the 8ubject 

'matter contained In said special 8t3tUte. Fortinberzy v. State, 

mpra, and Towsend I. Terrell, 16 S. W. 1063, An examlnetlon 

of the pertinent provl8ion8 of HoUSe ill1 No. 401 lead8 one to 

the inevitable conclurion th..t said Act 18 in coniliot with th8 

general recording at tUt88 a8 t0 motor vehicles. This may b8 

clearly been from an examination of the effect oi Hou8e Bill 

Ho. 407 upon the three major legal meulta oi the general recordln atatutea as 8et out previouely in thl8 opinion: 

In the flret place under the general reaording statute8 nt lien ia valid against a rubsequent purobe8er and mortg&e8 or lien holder In good ialtb Wiles8 the 83~13 is recorded. 

Hou8a Bill X0, 407 contains ihe iollowingprovl8lon8 concerning the validity of llenr: 

*sec.. 41. No lien shall be valid on 

any motor vehicle wi.lch 18 hersatter th8 

rrubject of 8 firet sale, or be enforceabl8 

against any such motor vetiol~ UnlO88 there 

is noted on the importer's or manufacturer*s 

oertlfloate the d&t>;, n3me, and a&rose of' 

the mortgagees who8e rights arise out of or 

are incident to suah ff.r8t sale by rG38vn of 

the exrcutlon of an., wrlttarr instrument by 

the tran8fere8. 

Qeo. 42. No lien on any motor VhhiCla 

shnll be valid as adalnat t&@&part188 without aotual ktlowledge thereof or eniOrCeabl8 
Honorabla w. t. Yanoy, Page 8 

a&art the motor vahIola of any 8uch 

third pert148 a8 th8 i88UanOs Of a QaCtlfloata OS title th8raof, unlasa an applloatlon for a new tltla I8 mad 

8crlbad ln thi8 Act and all fir x '::d*;$&,w .," 

quant llanr noted by thi8 Dapnrtmanttharaon~ 

'Sa0. 44. No llan on any rpotor vahloti 

to wkloh a raoaipt or cartitioata of tit18 

has been i88U4d ehall be salld 8s aginrt 

third part108 without actual knowledge thar8- 

of, or anforcsablr egalnst the motor vahiola 

of any such third Farties, unlaas the notation 

of said lien 8hfill Lave bean caused to be made 

VA receipt8 an6 cartlflCete8 Of title sn said 

motor var.icla, as 2povldad in.thi8 hot* 

"Sac* 46. iIn13 liens noted on a racolpt 

or certificate of title shall be velld as ageln8t creditors of the mortgagor in so far a8 

concerns the motor vahlcla,W 

Tba affect of the84 s4Ct.i.A8 18 thbt if the lien8 are 

not recorded on the cartifioata Of title the same are not valid 

da8:jita the faot that they msy bo recorded in the county Clerk’8 

Of iiO8. Also, under Section 46, if tha lien le,notad on the 

cartiflcatd of title, said llan la valid despite the fact that 

the 8eim.mfq not be racordad.in:.tha county olark*s offloe. 30 

the law 18 now that the raoordatlon of alien la immaterial to 

it8 valldlty. Suoh validity depends entirely u 

c: 

on whether the 

88ma 18 properly nqted upon the OertIfIoata of itla. In th18 

raspaot, Licusa Bill No. 407 end the general racordlng 8tatutar 

ar-: entirely in oonflI0t~ 

Secondly, under thp general raoordlng rtatutes the 

recording of a chattel mOrtgsg* in the county 019rk's offioa 

constftutas constructive notlca to the public. The operation 

of this law 1s com;.Jately done away with,'by SaOtiOn8 33 and 51 

of Hvusa Bill Ko. 401 w:~lah read as followlrr 

%380. 33. No motor vM.lcle msy be 

diOpo8ad of at rubrraquant sale UAl48s the 

owner dasl(;netad iA the cartlfloata OS 

title shall tr:.nsfer the cartlfloata of 

title on form to be pr.8oribad by the Dapsrtmont before a Notary i-ublla, whloh 
Honorable w. E. Tanor, Pa50 9 

fo rl m hall'lnol~de, amon l uoh other 

mtterr a8 the D0p,eeent may determine, 

en eftidevlt to the erieat that tha 

l lgner ie thr omrr of the motor vehlole, 

and that there are no 110ne a & a b el t uoh 

motor vehlel0 exoopt ruoh a8 are ehown 

on the 00rtirf08t0 of title and no title 

to any motor vrhiolo l hall pare or vest 

until l uch trenrfor be so ex0outed. 

"860. 61. It 8Mll hersaftrr be unlawful ror any perron; qlther by hiae0lr 

or through any agent, to offer for ealr 

or to sell or ~to offer as l 0our1ty for 

any obllgatlon any mctoz i&i010 regietsred or licensed In thI8 State without then 

and there having In hi8 po8aeaeion tha 

proper raoelpt or osrtitIcets of title 

ooverlng the motor .*ehIclo 80 ~ffsred.~ 

It mayaleo bs pointed out that. the oaptlon of Hour0 

Bill No. 4O7 contains the following; language: 

-ProvIdi 

7 

thet ruch'oertiiiiate shall 

conetftut0 not 00 of ruch llene and mortgagee, and prescribing the priorltles OS 

liens and mort*508 as againat all partIe8.a 

Furthormor0 

olerk'r orflae sitar 6 

lien8 which are r0oorded In ths oounty 

otober lrt cannot 8orv0 a8 oonetruatlvr 

not100 becauer oi Sootlone 48 and 44 of raid Aot, above quoted, 

ubloh etate that eald lien8 are not valid unleea noted on tho 

ee.rtIfIoate of title. 

earn es notlo,. So 

IS raid 110~ at0 not valid they oannot 

In thI8 rslpeot the 50n0ral recording etatutes are in oonfliot with Houee :I11 No, 4O7. 

Thr Third legal reaillt or the gsnsral reoordlng rtatutes, the ertsbllshmsnt of priority of llane, has bean sntlrrly 

supareedrd by House Bill No, 407 a8 to motor vshIole8. Under 

the general reoordlng 8tatut.w the priority o? 110~ I8 determinw Q..,tha data thoes liens wars fIlsd,for rsoordation In thr 

obmty olnrk'r ofilcs. Seotion 45 of Hours Bill No, 407 raedr 

ae iollow0r 

*All lien8 on motor VrS.ioler shall take 

prloritr according to the or&r of tls0 th0 

same are recorded on the reoelpt or oertifloeto of tit10 of all ruoh r0oordlnge to 
Honorable v. 5. Yanoy, Page 10 

be made by the Departaant.* 

80 we rind the lm now that the prlorlty of lien. 

In dateraina(; by the order of the tiaa the 8ema era reoordad 

on tha.raoaipt o? oartifloata of tltla. Of naoa8elty thin 

deetroy thi priority 88 rat up by the goner.1 raoordlng 

l ta tutee 88 to rotor vehlola8~ 

It 18 our opinion therefore, that the provlalon8 

o? xouea BIll~No. 4Q7 &ra 4fraOtly in oonfllot with the ganera1 reoordingsetatutae l nd.aa to motor vahicla8 must o? neosealty euper8a6e auoh Caneral recordIn law8. 

It in the opinion of ttlr Department that it will 

not be naoaeaary to raoord a lien on a motor vat;lcla In the 

county clerk*8 0rrl00 artar the affeotlva data 0r xouea Bill 

No. 407 for the third reason that the operation OS House Bill 

Noa 407 suepande the U8.fUln.88 of the ganaral reoordltq law8 

because of the term In Article 6490 "In good faith.* The COUX't# 

here oonetruad ttle term in meny carea and have held thet certain 

f&Ot# Pay .Xi#t which make a 8Ub8.qU.at pUr0h.a.r or . rubs.- 

quent lien holder not one in good faith. A very good statement 

en to whet Is meant by the term "good faith" a. urad in the racording atetutaa wee made bjr the court in the ceaa of Burlington 

State Bank, at al,, v. Marlin National Benk, et .I., 166 8. W. 

499: . 

*The exprareIon *good Salthe em wed 

,ln the statute providing that a ahattel 

mortgagn ehall oeaaa to be valid a5eIn.t 

,tha oredltore oi the pereon making the 

811118 or uortg5.88 in good faith e?ter the 

arplratlon of one yasr rrou iillng the 

name unlearn en l r?ldevlt of reneral In 

fIlad,~~la l ynonymoua with ~ooa8olenoa~, 

It ambfaeae thoea oblI5etlone which are 

Impoeed u?on one in dealing with property 

by the cIrcumetanoa8 eurroundlng It at tha 

tine* 

WA want of that oautlon and dlll5enoa 

w!.loh an ordinary man op. ordlne~ prudsnoa 

In aoouetoaad to axarclae In meklng guroherar 18, in judslqent of law; a want or 

good faith." 

See al80 South Tax.8 Emplamant k M.OLfn.ry Co., et al. 
Honorable W. l5. Yencr, R&a 11 

.~ 

v. Aeahuao Gene1 Co., t69 8. w..lO97, arrInad by the Comnlealon or Appule in UO 9. Vi. beli Tlrrt Ilational. Bank of Stevenvilla v. Tho~peoe, at el., 888 S. W. 0S4, 

Vndar Hour6 El11 Ho, 407 before l motor vahIole may 

be offered for ula o? offered for l a o ur ltthe y, owner of the 

mama runt obtain a oartlfioate of title. Toot any lien to be 

valid and prior to a eubeaquant lien the eama would have to be 

notad on raid oartlfloata of title. Let ue 8uppoea l l ltuetlon 

where e parbon Wieha8 to puroha86 e ubad aer from another o? 

rimhem to take 8 lien eelnat bald oar* In oaaa 0s 8 purohaea 

it would bs naoeeeary ror l trenefar 0r maid oartIflcata or tIClo 

to be mador In a oaaa where ha wI8haa to obtain a lien upon said 

oar, aald lien would have to be no.ted on the oartIfIoata of tltla 

end ha would have the opportunity to axamIne th:! mama to mea If 

there ware any prior llenr noted thereon. Ha knowe thzlt a lien 

not noted thereon 18 not valid a8 a&net him. Suppoae, however, 

there axIete a valid lien against the oar and the mama In noted 

on bald oertIfIoata of title but hem not bean racordad. In the 

flret plaoe thin oartlflcata of title would be construotlva 

~notIoe to & auoh a8 to keep him frou being e 8ub8equant mortmagma In &ad fait:! un-Zar Xrtlola 5490. In the l aoond place, 

even If It oould be meld thnt the oertIfloate of title war not 

oonetructlva notice to him. still tha oeaas would indicate that 

ha oartalnly, could not be a &ood faith purchaser or mort~agea 

having had opportunity to aremIne raid certIflcate of title 

wl.loh would ooma in him po88aeeIon. By this line of raeeonin& 

we reach the oonclurlon that lf a lien Is cot noted on the oertlfloeta or title it cannot be 8-t up against aUb8~iqUant purchaear 

or nort~aagae. If raid lien 18 noted on the oertlflcate OS title 

'than there oonld be no good faith ~uroharar under Artiola 5490. 

In this we7 the entire affaot and operation of the reoordlng 

atatutaa a8 to motor vahicle8 ia oblltaratad~ 

For the raaeon8 di8ou88ad in amwar to your firet inquiry, it in the opinion of ttia Department that it i8 uenacee8ary 

for a lien to be recorded In the offloe of tile oounty' olark. 

Nothing In thla opleio~, however, rhould be taken to mean that 

llane oreetad and fIlad for records prior to Ootober 1, 1939, are 

not valid. 

The oonnlualon ire have raaohad in construing our Texas 

l totutea In l Imllar to the oonoluelon reeohad by the oourte of ‘ 

other etatee in oonatrulng their Certiflcata Of Title Acta, The 

following quotation by the Supreme Court of Appeal8 of Vlrglnie 

In ths oaaa of C. I. T. Corporation v. Quy, et al., 195 9. IL 659, 
Honorable W. I. YAMr, Page 16 

la dlraotly in points 

“In l ddltltin to the l ta tutee no ted 

the Motor VahIola Coda of Vlr&ia alro 

doe18 with thle 8ubJeot. AOtb 19SS 0. 

Sit, pa 61Si hot8 1934, o+ 868, p* 580, 

Within it8 dafInltlon, a oonditlonel 

eel8 18 en l nouabrenoe. Pladmont ato., 

Corp. v. Com!nonwaalth, 146 Ve. 2&; 135 

8. r. 678, Re~IetretIon card8 end oartlfloatae of title era leruad by the Dlvlelon 

of Motor VehIclae. They and the llene theraon appearlag are aurrloIant notice to oradltore end ~urchaeere and do not herb to be 

recorded locally,* 

The Faderal DI8trIot Court, Eartarn DletrIct, PennaylvenIe, in the oaea o? In ra Tall 16 Fad. Supp. 987, held 

the Penneylvenia CartifIcate of Tltfa Aot to be a recording 

8tatutar 

Sea elao the canes of Tnfleld v. Butler, at al., 

264 N. PI. 546, S~~prama Court of Iowe, and Mrylend Credit 

Finance Corporation v. Frenkltn Credit FIneno Corporation, at 

al,, 180 8. B. 408, Supreme Court of Appaalr of Virginia. 

Xhlla it 18 the opinion 0s thin Department that It 

18 unneoa8eary to record ohettal aort~agee on motor vahlolae 

In thaw oountr olerk’e office, In all probability many pareone 

who take aortggae againat motor vshlolae wilLuleh to reoord 

their 116M in the OOunty alark~8 Off106 an a eat&r Of praoautlon. TO18 will probably be true until the oourta of thla State 

daolda whether or not 8UOh raoordatlon 18 na~eaeary. In much a 

oaaa you era advlaed thqt the oounty clerk 8houl. record the 

mortgsga 

wall em 1 

en hen bean haratOfor6 done, and the 8ame oherge a8 

he mama l teuup tax 8,hould be a880880d againat the party 

wiehlng e mortgage racordad~ 

Yours .vaty truly 

ATWBNXI 0BRER.G OF TBUS 

ASWiOVED NOVEMBER 7, 19S9 

(a) Oereld C. Menn 

ATTORNEY O:~ERbU OF TKUS BY 

Ba:R8: lw 

(a) Billy Goldberg 

A.#i#tMt 

APROVED OPINION COW’ITTISE RY (8) B. W. ‘B., CHAIF@IAX