. . 

ENERAL 

Honorable Alex R. Tandy 

County Attorney 

Parker County Courthouse 

Weatherford, Texas 76086 

Dear Mr. Tandy: 

Opinion No. M-1001 

Re: Whether Parker County Hospital 

District was properly charged 

for portion of attorneys’ fees incurred in defending tax injunction 

suits against County and others. 

You initially requested the Opinion of this office on two questions 

which, through subsequent correspondence and telephone conversations, 

were reduced, in substance, to the following: 

Was Parker County Hospital District properly charged with a 

portion of the attorneys’ fees charged in connection with defending two 

suits to enjoin the collection of taxes for Parker County for itself and for 

the political subdivisions carried on the tax rolls of Parker County? We 

answer this question in the affirmative. 

We have examined the facts submitted to us both by you and the 

attorneys involved. These include: (1) a letter from the county judge to 

the attorneys confirming their employment in defending the two injunction 

suits, and (2) your most recent letter in which you assert that your inquiry 

is motivated by the objection or complaint of the Parker County Hospital 

District. From these it has become evident that the matter covered by your 

question has been fully and finally resolved insofar as all parties involved 

are concerned, except that the hospital dist.rict does not want to pay for its 

proportionate part of the attorneys’ fees. 

From all of the materials submitted, we will briefly summarize 

the material facts. 

Parker County had entered into a contract for the collection of delinquent ad valorem taxes in the usual form furnished by the Comptroller of 

Public Accounts of the State of Texas and “approved as to substance and form 

-4882- 
Honorable Alex R. Tandy, page 2 (M-1001) 

only ” by the Attorney General. The compensation stipulated in said contract was in the amount of fifteen per cent (15%) of the taxes, penalties 

and interest collected, and is authorized by Articles 7335 and 7335a, Vernon’s Civil Statutes. Thereafter, an original suit was filed in 1969 against 

the Weatherford Independent School District and Parker County by Brazes 

Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. , hereinafter referred to as “Cooperative, ” 

seeking- to enjoin the collection of taxes on property owned by the Cooperative. Subsequently, the Cooperative filed a second suit against Parker 

County in 1970 to enjoin the collection of 1970 taxes. Both of these suits 

were consolidated, and Parker County filed a compulsory counterclaim 

for the collection of 1969 delinquent taxes and for 1970 taxes. The Parker 

County Commissioners Court employed the firm of attorneys representing 

the county in the delinquent ad valorem tax suits to represent the county and 

the other taxing jurisdictions (including the hospital district), for which 

Parker County assessed and collected ad valorem taxes, in the two separate 

and independent tax injunction suits brought against the County. While the 

hospital district was not made a formal named party to the two injunction 

suits, it was constructively a party. It was included in the judgment as entitled to recover a portion of the taxes. The County Tax Assessor-Collector 

was made a party, and he had a mandatory duty to assess and collect the 

hospital district’s taxes, with authority to act in all respects according to 

the laws of the State of Texas relating to state, county, and district taxes. 

Section 16, Acts 59th Leg., R. S., 1965, Ch. 35, p. 93, S. B. 283. Furthermore, under that statute, Section 17 made it the duty of the County Attorney, 

District Attorney, or Criminal District Attorney not only to represent the 

county in civil matters but also “to represent the hospital district in all legal 

matters. ” In addition, the hospital district is required to contribute sufficient 

funds to the General Fund of the County to pay all additional salaries and expenses incurred in order for these officers to perform their required duties 

for the hospital district. 

The attorneys employed by the County to assist the County Attorney 

representing the county ,and the taxing jurisdictions represented by the county 

were entitled to be comp,ensated a reasonable fee for their services, apart 

from the fifteen per cent (15%) statutory fee to which they were entitled for 

shy separate litigation in the collection of delinquent taxes. The amount of 

th&?fee charged and paid was below that suggested for such services by the 

minimum fee schedule, and it is not contended that it was excessive in this 

respect. 

-4883- 
Honorable Alex R. Tandy, page 3 (M-1001) 

Following a judgment in favor of the Defendants and CrossPlaintiffs, and pending appeal, an agreement was reached under the 

terms of which (1) all court costs were paid by the Cooperative and (2) 

recovery was granted to the State of Texas, Parker County, and all 

political subdivisions and districts whose taxes were collected by the 

Assessor and Collector for Parker County, for their taxes, penalty and 

interest due for the year 1969, and taxes and interest due for the year 

1970. Parker County Hospital District is a political subdivision whose 

taxes are assessed and collected by Parker County, as hereinabove observed. Parker County Hospital District was created in 1965. Acts 

59th Leg., R. S., Ch. 35, p. 93. Under the provisions of this Act, District taxes are assessed and collected on county tax values in the same 

manner provided by law for county taxes. Section 16 provides in part: 

‘1. . . The Tax Assessor-Collector of Parker 

County shall be charged and required to accomplish 

the assessment and collection of all taxes levied by 

and on behalf of the District. ” (Emphasis added. ) 

Furthermore, that Tax Assessor-Collector, in assessing and collecting 

the taxes levied by the District, is required to deduct from payment to the 

District a one per cent (1%) fee for assessing and a one per cent (1%) fee 

for collecting taxes. The balance of the taxes are then deposited in the 

District’s depository. 

“In all matters pertaining to the assessment, 

collection, and enforcement of taxes for the District 

the County Tax Assessor-Collector shall be authorized 

to act in all respects according to the laws of the State 

of Texas relating to state and county taxes. ” Supra, 

SW. 16, pp. 98-99. (Emphasis added. ) 

The suits ultimately resulted in the recovery of the delinquent 

taxes due all taxing jurisdictions, including those due the hospital district; 

and in our opinion the hospital district was properly charged its pro rata share 

of the fees attributable to the delinquent taxes recovered in its behalf. Parker 

County Hospital District also was properly charged with its portion of the attorneys’ fees charged in connection with the defense of the two suits to enjoin 

collection of taxes for Parker County, on its behalf and in behalf of the political subdivisions carried on the tax rolls of Parker County, including the hospital district. 

-4884- 
Honorable Alex R. Tandy, page 4 (M-1001) 

Section 17 of Chapter 35 also fortifies this conclusion. It reads 

as follows: 

“It shall be the duty of the County Attorney, District Attorney or Criminal District Attorney, as the case 

may be, charged with the duty of representing the county 

in civil matters, to represent the hospital district in all 

legal matters; provided, however, that the Board of Directors shall be authorized at its discretion to employ additional legal counsel when the Board deems advisable. ” 

(Emphasis added. ) 

In the instant case, the Board of Directors did not see fit to employ “additional legal counsel, ” and we must presume, therefore, that such 

inaction on the part of the Board amounted to an authorization, not actually 

needed, of the actions of the attorneys employed by the Commissioners 

Court in their behalf. It was not necessary for the hospital district to enter 

into a contract to pay the Delinquent Tax Collector any fee; nor was it necessary for the hospital district to have been a formal party to the injunction 

suits or to have been consulted during the proceedings in order for it to be 

charged its pro-rata share of the court costs, or expenses of litigation. The 

Court itself recognized this and necessarily proceeded on this premise in 

rendering judgment specifically for Parker County and for the use and benefit of all political subdivisions and districts whose taxes are collected by the 

Assessor-Collector of Taxes for Parker County. It may not accept the benefits of the services and the tax monies collected without also having to share 

in the obligations or expenses incurred in that connection. It may not receive 

the benefits of the contract without paying the reasonable value of the benefits 

so received, same being its proportionate part of the attorneys’ fees in question. See Angelina County v. O’Quinn, 429 S. W. 2d 211 (Tex. Civ. App. 1968, 

no writ); Hoffman v. Davis, 128 Tex. 503, 100 S. W. 2d 94 (1937); Sluder v. 

San Antonio, 2 S. W. 2d 841 (Tex. Comm. App. 1928. ) 

SUMMARY 

Parker County Hospital District is properly 

chargeable with a portion of the attorneys’ fees charged 

pursuant to a contract by Parker County for defense 

of two tax injunction suits brought to restrain the collection of taxes for Parker County for itself and the po- 

-4885- 
Honorable Alex R. Tandy, page 5 (M-1001) 

litical subdivisions (which include the hospital 

district), carried on the county tax rolls. Acts 

59th Leg. , R. S. , 1965, Ch. 35, p. 93, S.B. 288. 

Prepared by Kerns Taylor 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. E. Allen, Acting Chairman 

Jim Broadhurst 

Marietta Payne 

Sig Aronson 

J. C. Davis 

SAM MCDANIEL 

Staff Legal Assistant 

ALFRED WALKER 

Executive Assistant 

NOLA WHITE 

First Assistant 

-4886-