OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Tams W. Cbzndler 

County P.ttorney 

Bobert6cJn county 

Frenklin, Tena 

I&rch 15, 1939 
Honorable Thomas E. Chandler, Arch 15, 1939, Page 2 

prior to Ueoeaber 31, 3938, terminating, the date oi thie oontmot." 

Yinoe the salver of the former County Attorney oould cover only hie tern, and the preeent County Attornoy has not waived, did the 

C~aalone~rs* Court exceed Its power in etlp 

ulatlng the above exoepttion or provlsi.on? 

Could the present County Attorney now take 

charge of the suits that were Piled by the QOIItraotor pd.or to January 1, 1939 (Deoaaber Sl, 

rest, tbetiine d&b or oat&mot I? 

(I gllEtTxos 4t 

Dobe tam oontraator bavb tim ri*t ta a 

lsp aaamlb~aon on any rboov4ry 4.4 the mttlbmcab::0r a tar malt after Dbarpbbr ail, 1988? 
Honorable Thoma R. Chandler, MarohM, 1939, we 3 

collect the $100,000.00 he had ~uarnnteed tc do 

by the expiration date or said oontraot, Decazber 31, 1938, (and to be exact, only e little 

lees than $80,400.00 has bean oolleoted by Ireamber 31, 1938.). Kould you oowider thiFs contract breaohed?" 

x8 will first endeavor to axuwer your Guestfon No. 1. 

Artiole V, Seotioa 18, of the Constitution of Terra, 

af$er pmvldln~ for the eleotion of four oooinmfssloners in eaoh 

ozunty, pmvlden as tollowsr 

bythicr Coiwtlttatioa aa thb lawa at the State, 

ar ar nay br kmreaS%ar gnmttrlboU+” 

,. 

Tiwe ir no wlmtitutlo~ pmedon or ,8tptUt9 8tatwg 

barore the aoust eaa aot? 

Tb9r9arenoT9xasagfpaxla~ 9ourtOa808 

quest&m, and there ls a mat gonfltcrt wwthe 

othbr fatstee. 
Eonorable Thomae B. Clxmdler, Marok lS, lQZY$, Page 4 

Igdlam held that Wan a quorum of a oity ~ouuoll *as present that 

a majority OS the votes cast (acme being present end not voting) 

authorized tile ccu~cil to act. In a foot note to the case of Law 

z~&rs. Ingersoll, puma, in Volume 6 of L.R.A., the follovAng 

: 

*Thle cnat~ emd the one next Sollowing, 

xiwlvl3.le oas 00. VII. xhtahT.ll.le, post. sls, 

by their shark oonfllct add interest to 6cmo 

questions ahlch do not often QOBIB before the 

aousts. 

*mua wbight or authority is to the of- I 

t 

I 

1~ 

1 Pth9awQrst~r‘~~~ . 

Ch t in a p xwwUa g under Ar tisle P $ ,b$ tb a 

that tu-thms o t the tultim 

fhmb p %wb nt tlna Yo tlng nut to te 6a m mmly 9o a - 

atwd’Artlolo O61, as& 1. rbally of 8~ v&tie to ualr fa t&s ew 

d &tat0 TO* OitJr oi MaAUea, thu wwt lib24 that a dty 

ardlnaaoe wtu lwella bm8aume 

belngth6raalpafatendi~meinthaaa8;p butthb4mtatblao 

t!??i!k- had not elm it, thh 

uld, whiohrcl are irurk ta stats may b4~ ui 8tu& th nPUd.ast 

*As mll ordlaanobb ut bb agqfravo4 by a 

Mjorlty Ya4b 04 thaw pruoat Mu robl!a& ata 

rPlrUb~@&ll8&8t~dthDbr*a8Sd~~~,:t 

mt u appbbr that Ste m nlrwnt at a a*deMy 

k~ti8bWS Vd8i?d3tb%8~~~~* 
Xonorable Thoms 1;. Chandler, Maroh 15, 1939, Fage 5 

In that ease the 'mayor and four oounoil~~~~~ Wre present, 

and two voted *yes", one voted "no", and the xtayor and one oouncllman aid not mte. The langu;uaCe in this ease indloates that JUdge 

Ryan, n?~o wrote the opinion, Savored the rule leld down ln the aaae 

0r Rushri~e ias co. VS. city or itushville, a. 

As indicated by the authorities on the question, tbi.8 is 

a very close an4 dirrfoult question to,dealde, edd we realize that 

we aan decide~one my almost as loglaallg 6s we oen deoide the other 

way. Ziowever, mreel like the uuurt did in State vs. Yates, 

after it haU reviewed the evenly balanced authorities on both 

of the question, in w&oh it said: 

'We ar6 inullaed to thb oplllion that thb 

pro 

bhar 

r x~&lcrth&ttho~Jho r.malnsllant 

lbr&mmMta auaatto the aotofthoeo 

l&o 40 vote'.* 

ml3 ruls was eated In camp V8r Thumael, 86 8.W. (84) mc, 

a11 tolla* 

r* * * lbierypsrsvalsoharge4withthe 

knowledg# of the law tbat ooraeirrdon~ aourtm 

oan be bound by their apmamte only when theq 

aut a8 oourts axd by orders Uuly pessed. HO 

rl@ts uan be ae 

agrwatm dth 

Wired aB aga$rmt a twuntyby 

&I8 

mlatiiolYbr6* uaurt~~ 

inairidual8eon1po6lagae~1~ 

Whir0 the evibnbb ahars that the ammlbalcmerr~ 00ur-t bae aoted w.kth kmmlb48e of the 

olroum~tanee6~ 0~4% that thb otbbr part@ to thb 
Ronorable Thoms fi. Chandler, Baroh 15, 1939, Page 6 

-allqed contract has innooently placed himelf 

in a situation uhihiah will oause him loss in ease 

the contract la not suataimd, it nay be concluded that the county is bound thersbg. Ths 

ratlliaotion or estoppel must be based upon aotion on the part Or ths oon!m.bsioafsrel oourt.* 

This rule or ratlfioation wan expressed in~the~oaees or 

Boydston vs. Rockmill County (Dr. Sup. Ct.) 86 Tex. 234, 24 3.X. 

272; ‘d.llisxs vs. Pure Oil Co. (Ter. Cams. A p.) 

and ~elvoston County vs. Oreshsm (Tex. Clv. if pp.) 

78 S.E. (26) 929; 

220 3.~. 560. 

The eontraot in qusetlon Is bated May 26, 1937, end wo 

do notknowwhat &s ~YRUW~~I& ala00 that date. It may or pray &at 

b.~&y~g~pa~%~~ Oopnt]r bRB Z%tif%ma it arid ifb m~gpab t0 a”’ 

. 

our mmwertoyourfirst cpzostAml.s that byvlxtam of t& 

two to one efrlamtive vote by the oomll#doaers' oourt the oontraot 

ls vttUd: and in addttion thereto the oontraat might be enforolble 

oonstlt\rte ratifloatioa and ortopanmur your seooad qm8Moar 

The &atute uhloh autdaorltw there idada ot wntraoti la 

rrzlolt4 78s5 or tam perlad ai*1 Statutva 0r Texas, 8auI it z06a+ 

b part, a8 fbllowm 

%heawer tbo -~donarr' ovwt OS any 

aounty after thlrtf dyr written acitioo to, tbm 

oouaty attonw 6r Qirsriot attorney te fflr 

6d.inquanttaJLsu%ta~hl.a iailaseto doso, 

&mlldeam tt neaorrmary or axgedicat, 88l&crourt 

may oontnaot with u4r osnpetent atturnoy to qofora* or assist in the m~orcrownt 0S the wlleotion~or any ddlnquant Btata aad Qouuty taxea 

for a per osat on the taxes.a 

This oiiros has heratetirat~held in Attorney &meral*r 

Opln.lon?&.0-237 dated February 14 lQS9,tbata Omr~&relom~rs~ 

court ldm3~.1*0&* term sn4ed IalbSs owl& notiluske a wntzaot 

of thJa kind uhkoh wan aot TV take Wteot until lQI!M, rtrem a mw 

aam&oslonwe* hurt would be in oitloe, on the @wand that tym 

CWaiouara* Court aould oat biad the rrsrt OaPnnLedoriemr* Court 

in pemonal matters fa? tJd.8 kl& Hamwcwr ya) till not ea 80 iar 

as to hold t&at the @Wxmmy aaplqed by tie QWUBL$88LOn~(l' Court 

in oontraut8 or thi6 klnd mUat ma00 work to the extcmt.oi nQt 

proseouting owmalafeedy flb4 $180 broaauea newa~sn~rec 

aourt an4 a ww ouunty Attorney himi taken orrioe, *vim tbeu6h the 

ooatraot speaftigally provideo t;hst the attorney 80 ~pbrail shall 
Honorable Thoms R. Ohasdlar, Haruh 15, 19959, Pago 7 

be allowed sir months after the temInatIng date or the oontraot, 

kich una also tie end of the CopBpisaiOner8' and the County Attarney*s term 0r orrioe, t0 proseauto suits already riled to rinel. 

judgment. In this oaeo the oontraot maker suah a provIsion and grants 

the attcmsy ID emplo~ad ths right to finish prossoutingthe maIt already flledt and we ballevs t&t the Caaraiselomrs~ Court had the ati- 

--thodty to grant tho attorney this privilege, Common saxme dlotates 

that tho attcmmyvho fllodths suit md startedltuould be Iaabotter position to prossoute the mit to 

omai 

udgeumt than some4 other attorn.ey,andthIs is exaotlywhatths C rsionsrs 

*on tbsy put that pmvidon In the sontrasb. 

thought InthIr sass 

Tberoanno antborItlenthatwomifl~& tbatbeardiraat 

4 a this sIt\atloat brrt wo kl%o*a tht the nU atat. %a 4 pae, 

On The Iar or 'Ooutraetr, &rd xd*, 8848, applies to thie 8~01 that 

mls bef.n6 a8 iollas: 

: 

~d,atfm we tho 8aooesrful bid.der far the 
Honorable Thorns FL Chandler, March 15, 1938, Pace 8 

wculd clearly have been entitled to com;Jlete 

the or Uer . * 

It ha6 been nu&gested thst the new County Attorney, who 

took office on January 1, 1933, haa oertsln interests in theee 

CGSeS. lie does have a vltel interest in the mite flled efter he 

tcke6 office, because he Geta e fee a8 ptided in me 15% 3.S 

he file6 the mlts (and.this w-a8 $lven Sor one OS the xumaone Sor 

Attorney Qanerel’s 0pWon x0. O-W?, referred to abow); but ba 

@.OOS Ilot have t&i6 interest iIl tU SUitEI that have @.bWdy been 

filed by an outaiUe tsx attorney bofcm he took atlice, and wh%ch 

suits are calf being pmcsecutod to Slnal judagmsnt. The zxmonhe 

dose not hnvo thla lntsrert Anthe tits alretiy Sil+4 by.ea out&de 

-ta x l tta r a ey la b eo a a m h8 wo tlld wt x*& v* l fee la th o a r 8uiC8 

ssla tk a tir Eyr i~ror ~f~~~~~rrr dsinp a F ti*~ib t 

1WSt 
';l;e cocstitutlonality of Article 7335 was upheld by the 

Supreme Court of Texris in the csses of Cherokee County vs. Odom, 

U3 Tex. ZCB, 15 5.i.. (Ed) 538; nnd Com~I.ssfoners' Court oGbEdison County vs. it~llace, 116 fex. 279, I.5 S.V.'. (26) 535. - 

quent to those cases the Commission oS Appasla, Se&ion A, in the 

case of ';nstemooG vs. Henderson County, 62 S.Z. (2d) 69, saldt 

"The power to provide for the colleotlon 

of dellrquent tares, ad prescribe the oompensation to be p&G for servicea rendered in that 

res;)ect, resides exclusively in the LegieLature. 

Under this power, tho cowzssi'oners* oburt av?ay 

be granted suthotity to mske binding aontrsats 

lookin@ to the aollaotioti OS deljmpuent taxw, 

and to tha paymeat 0r a 

88 amapamatlon Sin a0 lA= 

t as the aolleotioai3, 

oee putowed in that 

j Otlrenawrto your third qusstlon la t&t tba present 

Uouaty Attarmy oaul(la~tatthm praaenttiwtslr;s ohargeoitha 

muits that were fllead by the QWqueat tax attoraa 

tealnatiagdato of the awttraot (Deaauber sl, 1MB T 

prior bo ths 

1 In&ha ocm 

taltm ohrgge at themattbe l ndof rri,xmantha aStarftM.tazml~tlag 

&at0 if any ar8 8tlll on the daeket, 

We rlll PQI give aansideratlon to jour fewtla quwtlon~ 

Theaaatreetpzrovldea that RaEutsonCauatyimto paythe 

tu attarm em oyod war tb eantraot WI per aant cri the amouat 

oclleoted 0 E: al pl deliaqubat taxna, peaaltg and intuwt+ * * eotuellyoalleated* + +, OS vhlah sbaaed Rsrty (tuattaraayll8l.iwtmasatal in oolleotlx@ * + + ". 

We Mvea~eady held laour tmawarto Qu88tioatwothettha 

tax attomsg~ls entitled ta eix mantlm attertha tsa&mtAag tit* c# 

th4 aantrsat Daamnbat3l.,3.9Ei3, lnwhlohta pm86autato ii&ml IV&- 

Wat (Nit8 drSGdySl~& 

f, 

8.d we hare held inour M8mrto '4-S t 011 

three thatdurIng that I xmcnthe period the Ckuuty Ati~~rney aauld 

not teke aharga of the tsx suits ~l.re~Clg Tiled by the tax attomep. 

Eruita that ere Siledbythstar attorney bdn& theaimtmot perlo and eettled by himwithin 8i~mnthrr sitar tb0 tan&J&- 

ing date me alesrly aantanpkted by the aontZ%ot, and ths pOd8iOn 

referred te above that provides for payrnant to the attorMy of 1% 

OS the mount aallaated applisa without qwirtion to th880 Qaao6i 

OuramwutoyaurZ'ourth qubooionia that thsooat~ofor, 

the taxattora~,has the xtghtto alf4j4aamslmloaona mr@YO~ls 

the 8ettlrmeat of a ta%atitaSterDeasmiber sl.2938, pkwV%dti th8 

suit was riled by the tar stboxmy prior ta Deomaber 1IL, lQIBB, darines 
Honorable Thoms i.. Chnndlsr, Usrch 15, 193Q, Page 10 

the term OS tiio uontraot, ;-ad wu5 settled within six months OS Decelnber 31, 1938. 

:ist? will rlow t&e up your SiSth question. 

This contract does not expressly state that t&m is OS 

the essence. IS a law suit should develop tjotween the parties to 

the oontract, it is iqossiblt? for us to sey nt this time what 

gle&dings would lo tiled wd what evideme woilld be odmitted,'but 

it Keg be ttit the 1~ ouit would develop so that the rule in Taylor 

allin;: Co. W. ~knrican kg Co., 230 S.ii. 782;would apply, whioh 

rule is in vmrds CE follows: 

Vhether or not tinr, it3 of the essenoo~or 

a oootmot ls~a quetuttion at femt fbr a jury, 

UdLdSS the eaatraotwpre66lyat¶keeitso,ar 

utihss the tmbjeot-matter OS the oontraot is 

euoh that aoourtullltake judlolal knowledge 

ar the taatthat the pll't&OS obvlouely lntsn888 

that t3.w ahaul bs ab me 08-01) OS ths aoatraat. Suahwiuld bet&~ oaselnauontraatto 

deliver aotlm ox- wheat, or any art~ole OS nblah 

there Wi8 a aonatentl SulotQatinglm~t, a8- 

outalrsble by estab dab edE3rkutquotatWa6. 

*The modsrnteadsnoyls tohold that time ti aat 

Qs the a6banoo OS a aantraot woepttM*r tbs 

alrouwtaaoos above &atodr' 

Tbi.6 oifioe bk8 bonoti18d OntO MEWr~QWStiOW, 

and '10 hkIV8 vSnt~~O8 Our OpitiOa Ron there Wa(1 #Uah a &Jk Or authorltythstitawtante8 only to a me88 a8 torhattb8aourt8weuXd 

yobuuE'Qd3.l not ga 60 r= or be aa reaklese a6 to tsm66 what a 

. 

On aoootant cU the Saot that this may develop into a &XT 

qwtetlon,we believe th~titwouldbb inpmperfarus to attmptto 

GMweu it,. 

we wlu now endsavor to anaver your sixth quwtlon. 

In paragraph YII OS th8 aontraot it ie mvldad that $aberteon County is to pay ths~t~~attaney bnp%yed under 

%3 peroentot the amount 

otor OS taxes durine: the 

(t tt 

the &es:to:~ 

)iei t 

"iii% is "tii 

tal 1 11 tl 

t%?iS t&t%n~o%? In para&ra~h 

VIII it is pXOti’b8 that “thi8 WtiXWt 6htkl1 be iEl fQl’W inw. 8UW 

1, 1937, to Deoenber XL, 1938, + + * end at ths expiration or 6&d 

period thie 0mtraatehel.l teda6te * + *,* Tek%ng+heeepmVi6- 

ians a.low3 into oonslderation wwmii.6 aanolude that the aontraatcr 
Honorable Thomis Ii. Chrrndler, -oh 15, 1939, Page 

(tax nttorney) oould only reoeive oo~~~&~alons fro= 

1~ the tern of the ffintrnot whioh was rnxu June 1, 1937, to koember 

31, 1938, and that he oould not rsoeive commisslone rmi gnymsnts 

rnnde after that tiae; but there is another provision that mat be 

considered, and that is that pert of paragraph VIII which prorides 

as follae: wExoeut the oontraot shall be allowed s$lx months in which 

to Prosooute to final fudaumt suits 1-d mlor to i)eoanber 31. 1930 .- 

In oonstrulng this last quoted provision we held in our anower to your seo~nd question that this provision wa8 valid, end that 

ths tax attormy has the ri&t provided for in this p~uvieion. If 

the tax attorney "is lnstnueentsl In oollsotln~" these taxes by tirtusoShad.agflleda suit, that ie ifthssultoau~~edthe paynwmt 

of them taxoo, then surely the tax attor~~ey Ia entitled to reoslve a 

6omldon, be0mls0 ii the tax attQnwp oanaot rwelve these OoQalstdonn lt'would bo wsless (LI far a6 he *a8 oonoornod -to ~sseute 

to iinal judpent”~after Dewmber Sl, lVS8, suits that he had fU.od 

prior to that tlms, and tlm abare quoted pr~tislon from Sootion VIIX 

of the oohtraot weuld be meanlng&s~, &oh a aoaetnrotion weld not 

be 

10 8 

hes4 011 this ooatraot by aayoourt, but the rule axprsrssd ln 

ex.Tur.884wmldbo applkd,thatrPlsbslng ariollms: 

l 1 t la to b s 

Ouranswwto your ulxth queasttonlr that the 6outra6tor 

(thetaxattornsy) oeuld aoteoatinuste reoelrsoomml.emlonm oa 00X- 

~leationo -de by t.b Tax AmesmI”CIOlle~t~ after Dsoaaber Zl, lBS8 

with the eraeptlon that be is entitled to a ooamisrlon on money ml& 

totho TaxAeam61~0or-Ooltootoru~ta ml19f59, fish&was ti@trumu&al in aollsotlng by vfrtu6 of havS.4$ fhsd a cult @or to DOOOBIbar 3l,lUS, 

we4 till now enswer your mmutth qqeetlorb 

It 1s our oplnlon that mar 8x1-r to que8tian sit alao anSWSXVB I&IS qutw,loni. YOU se at tmat rate the ooauisnW #houla be 

paid, and that ie already set out at 18% ot the arsouat 6ol266t& 
Ronorablc Thoms S. Chandler, Um-ch 13, 1939, pnge 1% 

Cur mswer to your seventh qestion is that the contraotor 

(the tax attorney) could not receive oo.missIons fmlr.tha paymnt af 

delinquent tares cf't~ Ijeoe:ber 3l, 1938; wItA the ezoeption thzt he 

ie entitled to li cozA.solon on colleotlons up to July 1, 1939, whIoh 

he wae instrumnttil in collecting by virtue of ftavin(; filed 6 adit 

prior to Lkxxmber 31, 193& and his rate of cox~Ission lntlxme latter onses is 13 per cent of the mount collooted. 

tlon. 

Se wIl1 now discuss and aaawer your eighth, and last, quesXe are unable to find in the contract any wordo by which 

the tax attorney &uarsntees to solloot $100,000.00 In delinquent 

tsxm by Deoember 31, lOSe$ and, thonfiwe, ws oonaluds that ths 

repremntatioae and guarantyn to rhlohyourerer in your question 

w4r4 orallymade at th4 tlm of tbo ae~tiationsl~dluguptoths 

luaung oi the oontraot. Tha only ps+vldon lnthtr oontraot that mwtlons a ?guarantee* ie Seotlon XVI, whloh rsads as follows: 

*B;L1plxtiissZwrstoagmatotbsfollordng 

4hangs in tho fWo&6g pnnisions of this 6ontS!LOt, to-T&J &OOold PJlX’ty &f&l1 ROt X’OOaiv9 

say oomp~satdon uhatmsrer umbr and by rirtps 

of this aoatl'aet until Cm l?uadrsd Thouscud Dallams (#lOO,OOO&O) shall hambmm soLlooted by 

saib gwty or th0 64ixmd pit. .zr as, a04Whsa 

safd~Ttyaffhss~ndp~obalihaoeo~ot~ 

odQneHunaredThousarrrlDollan ~#lQO,OOO.OO)be 

ahall be entitled tc ad must be PaId the !Phire 

tom psr oent (1%) aolaskrlon set out abovo, .gnd 

thereaftersaibpartyoftbs astmdpartshallbe 

The above aomission of X3$ uhlo~h is w&hheld is a guarantee that One Ikudred Thoumnd Dollars (#100,000~~00) will be oollsoted shall be 

plaoed in osorow, payebB to ths .party of the so+ 

ond gmrt upon proof or the oolnotIon of the 

$lOO,OOO.OO, the benk or banks to hold the esorm 

money being, neuSad by prey of tti samad part., 

said bank or banks ta bs situated in Robertson 

colaaty, TexaII* party or creoond part rurtber agreea 

-not tc eend out any notlms or tile ~eu.ky suit qainet 

delinquent taxpayers prior to August IBth, A.D., 

1937v" 

This provlsioa ooulit not be oanstxwd a6 a 

tbs tax attonvry would oolleot $lOO,QOWQ 

guwanty that 

lb msrely pmofdee that the t&z attornsps 

upuntilhe has oolleoted $LOO,oOo*OO~ end 

amat be remembered that ha is entltbd to 6i.x mm&&w atiar DeOaab~ 
Iionmcble IZm?zs Z. Emadler, Wimh X5, 1959, Pags 19 

1, 1928, in d.i~h to wos%%ut% to findL jtipti suits alr%a& filed, 

2nd it nit?* bet&t the total of O,lOO,OOCi.oO will be reaoh%d tir 

hce%?r 31, 1938, xhflo be is so pms%outln~thoee suits, aud tha 

5% r;c;uld hua?titAed to hi% cou~nsation. 

In ragam to the oral agr%%nmt +u3 ntlioh yourefsr by wbi%h 

thetex attorney reprnreaented aail gwrante%d t&t h% would %oUeot 

p100,033.00, ~6 must. not overlook the x-tile stated in 17 Ter. J'Ur. 

844, cs r0u02f8: 

Ykcl evidenoe is l.radmlaalble tovary en 

unoontitLona3. pmmisato paynmn%y by shea 

p~orarcoat~~~~paroln~nttbatthe 

pxvdaorrPIouldnotb4raqulredtopayorthatlt 

we4 notabsolutaly payable - as, ror sxswplo, that 

itehouldbepagablso~yuponthe psrfolmllos0r 

h speoiried 6ondition or the happenin of a o%rtainoantingsnoy, orthat;Iaym%& should bsmads 

ootorapa~calar tun0.* 

i Am.1 86 8.8'. @U) lslr Robert &St. fohu Wtor Co. vs* Bpriqpasr, 66 

8.U4 o!a) 8991 aad Hldal 

'9" 

Oarmty Wati4r Jmpmclrwnt Diet6 Hoe 4 ter. 

Feutara Iat%& %r& 06.1 U.S. O&A.) 16 ted. (&I) 89% It may be 

t&still eUw wilt ooaur8 lnmlringthirr aontraottlat fraud,aoofdoat or aistnha will be alleged and thereby make oral rspremntatlons admlsdhle lu evldems, but we lmv6 only tlm oontraot be$wp 

uslnsnswering yourrirrsstions,andaecsaonlyba~~~dbgthe 

words or th% 00ntra0t* 

mraatswer toyouraighth qasstlonlstbatualerthe Rrcrts 

tbetyouhave &mm us ontMs questionwrido not oonsiderthat the 

contract has bean beaehhsd.