,‘- 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Eonorablo E. K. Eaaterling 

Oaunty itttoraey 

tefter8oa County 

Beaumont, Texae 

Dear Sirt 

na over t8lued oridtoE of hagaet aa, 

f tall8 DepaTtaent 

05dT gl.ve the MSr an ardor muea8%ag 

l r the ,fUa a t8 a 8 88t o ut. 

‘8 Loan Corporatton 

rmlmclt*1y l,ooo 

a t8ffereoa County, 

that all delimp~at 

S(18 &WOJW’t%88 be mid a#. 

0tloaL Oa l xtmhation of 

or mere plWp?Wti438 it apIn quite 8 nunbar of Inere are aanT gears of baok 

taxee due, ena C&IQ due to the fret 

that the owner8 and rorm8r 01imr8 luwe 

negleot8d tkletr &W&?8Ttie8 in quite 

a oaaber ot -888, w have dlrooreTed that 

the l We88ed dtit$o#I ai maid SUah pTepsrtles 18 tar la esoe8li sf true walsa8.* 
EOlloTabl8 E. W. &8t8rliZl& Pag8 e 

Art1010 7346, provides, in psrt, a8 folla 

"UhBDeV0S My OOlW~88iOWS8 OOUl't 

8hdl di8OOt8S thrOl@ IlOtiOe iTOt thd 

tax oolleotor or othexwkae that any 

real property he8 been omlttod rr0m 

the tax rolls for any year or year8 

8lau8 1864, or 8hall find that any 

plWWiOU8 R8W88ROnt8 On a4 l’Otd property for the'ysws mentionad are intalld, or have been deolared lmalm 

+ortby rea8on by any di8trfot oo~rt 

in a suit to enforoe the ooll8atioa 

of taxes on eald prupertl88, they may, 

et any aeetln~ 0r th8 oourt, order a 

llet 0r 8uoh properties to b&made 

in trlpllaate and rix a aoap8wation 

th8SdOs~ tb 8Uid list t0 &OW 6 

008Iplete de8OsIption Of 8Uah properti88 and iOr Wh6t to-8 8uoh proper 

tie8 vere oaitted irosa the tax roll8, 

or for what yeas8 the a8wa8aent8 tie 

foOnd to be Invalid mb 8hOdld be aanaeled enU re-awease&, OS to huts been 

deolared Invalid and thereby oaao8led 

by any dlstrlot Oourt la a malt to enforoe the oolleotlon or taxe8. lo 

rs-ai8e88ment 0r any. property skifill be 

held against 8ny lanooeat gmrehaser of 

the 8ame ii the tax reaorde 0r any 

OOU5tf fati t0 8hO~ aqY 88808RMRt (for 

any year EO re-assewed) by wh1oJ1 sa.l4 

property oan km ldentiflod and that the 

taxes are onpaid. The above exoeptlon, 

with the 8ame limltatlon, shall al60 app ly l 8 t0 all p8t Jud t8 O? aicrtriot 

OOUSt8 OMOeliS@ hT61 r d a8808UW3Ilt8)" 

Artiole 7347, pxyotide8: 

"When wld list haa been .o made up 

the ~~S8lOIl@r8 OOOrt Mfc 8t laJ I&- 

lng, order a oaaool&atlon 0r 8uoh propertie8 in eaid list that~8r~~ahOwn'to han 

beea prevlou8ly adw68ed, but whloh 
632 

Honorable E. Vi. Fmztarllng, Page 3 

688e8mRtB are rquna to be Invalid and 

bar8 not been oanOeled by any rOm8r order 

Qf the ooamle~loners oourt, or by dooree 

0r uly di8triOt oourt; an4 8hall then 

rerer 8uoh 118t 0r propertle8 to be a8- 

8e8Md or re-08ee88ed t0 the taX a88e8wr 

who.8hall prooeed at oaOe to make an a8- 

se88a8nt ,0r all .stGd pro 

d6te criren br 86id u.St P 

ertfe8, fro8 the 

the aertlfioate 

or th0 Comptroller 08 to a88a8wnt8 or 

re-O88e88EOllt8 aads br this ta* 688e880r 

Sk11 mt be IWOe886~ 08 t8qUh8d U&8? 

Artiols 7i307, but he &all furalah ~a11 

blank rorm8 needed, that UnitQrritr w 

b8 had in all oountie8), and rrhen.oQplatOd shall eubdt the aeme .to the 001i 

riSSiOMl-8 OOUTt, VhO 8bau p888 Ll~ll th8 

valuation8 fir8d by him; ma, when approved 68 to the VihlU88, 8htil ObUSO the 

taxes to be oomputed and extended at the 

tax rate In effeot for each 8e mto. ~yeor 

mentlomd f586id list; and, r n addition 

thereto, shall oau8e to be added a penalty equal Ip amount to what wul4 be 8%~ 

per oemt Inters& to the date 0r naklng 

,+ald liet rr0a the date 8wh propertIe 

vould ham been delinquent had mame been 

properly raadered by the owner thareof at 

the time and ror the year8 '8tated la aaid 

list; pmrlded, th8t the osrtltlaate of 

any tar oalleotor given during hi8 term 

of otiloe that all taxeb bare bean paid to 

the date or such oertlfioate oa any oertaln pleoe or propmrtp, whloh 18 rul4 

desorlbed ln 8UOh oertIrloat8, or ii the 

tu roll8 0r any ocuatf fell to rrb0w aq 

aslreesraents ugalnst 8uch pr0perty suftloient to ldantiry it, ad that tha 8ame 

vae unpaid at the dot68 stroh roll8 m8y 

hare beon l xemlaod to aeoertala the oonaltlon or any property as to taxes unpaid, 

thl8 ehall be a~bar,to anj re-a88esluunt 

Of 8tiuch prOpeX%y Wder this 16U iOr 84 

year8 prior to the date or moh oe*lflbate, 
633 

.Eonorable P. W. lEa#terliag, Page 4 

or 8u0h 8xamlixitlonO; provided, that the 

property reterred to, when n-a88e88ed, 

8hall bq h8ld by an Innooent purohawr, 

who ha8 rolled upon the aorreotae88 at 

8uoh oOrtlrlaate, or the tar roll8 heretoSor8 referred to.* 

An 088OO8mOat 18 II0t Invalid Where the 80m0 18 

made In good ralth, regsrdle88 0r the aaunmt 0r over a8- 

808WOnt. AlI Invalid O88e8-t 18 Om uhl8h -8 void 

ab inltto beOau88 0r non-oamplianoe with 8tatutory requlmasat8 8urroundin& the a88esMent or one whIoh wa8 mde 

rraudulently or one fn whloh a fmdasentallywroilg 8OheW 

or a88e88meat we8 adopted. 

In your letter you rerer to thl8 Department~8 

rul .ing on Siou8e Bill 100. 455. Thi8 OpiniOa i8 HO. 0.9J0, 

aad le nddre88ed to.the Emorable Oaorge 8: Sheppard, 

Comptroller of pub110 Aoaoaat8. The following portloa ot 

thi8 Opinion dlreotly -r8 ths qUO8tiOIl ;yoU pS'O&BOWd ill 

YOUr btt8r: 

*From the opinion of Judge. sharp, 

la i3tate.t. Mallet Umd and Oattle Co., 

88 9. 6. (2) 491, H quote a8 tollowar 

**Tha rkle haa been rapeatsdlr anno9noed that, in the abseao8 or rraud or 

lllegallt~, the aotlon ob h board ot 

equallsat~on upon a partloular a88esma8at 

18 fiII&dg cod, furthermom, thnt 8u0h 

valuation dll not be 8et asida marelv 

upon a 8honing that t;hs 80m $8 in faot 

OXOe88iVe. If tho board fairlyand 

horia8tly endeavor8 to rix a fair an4 ju8t 

valuation ror taxing prirpo1u8, a ml8t0ke 

on it8 part* under maah o*aw8tanoe8, i8 

aot aubjeot to nriew br the aourt8. 

T8Xti8 Md PaO%fiO w.~ CO. V. aitl 0f n 

hISO (Tex. sup.) 85 6. 9. (2) 24a; Rowl85d 

V. aity 0r Tylar @OX. am. iipp.1 s 8. vr. 

(2) 756; -8dOw V. Bak8r (Tex. '00~ 4pp.j 

229 9. Py. 49s; Duok v. Peeler* 74 Tu. a6S, 

11 S. W.~llll; State v. ChlcryEo R. I. & Q. 

l?y. 00. (Tex. Cam. App.) US 8. ~6. 949; Sinday LakeIran Co. we Wakeii~d, 847 8. 8. SSQ, 
634 

Ffonorable X. 1. Sasterllng, PagO 6 

3s 5. ct. 495, ae L. M. 11M. However, the 

rule has been deolarud that If a board of 

equallsatlun adopt0 a mm0e thkt 16 Illegal, 

arbitrary, or fundamentally wrong, the daolslon of the board PB~ be attaoked and set 

Amidei' 

wOther oa8es use the languag? that *aa 

a general rule, the doolslon of a hoard of 

l quallzatlon up o a n partbular l we6mmnt, 

in the abamos or fraud.or lrregnlarlty,, 

ill oonolusire.* Fort Arthur Ind; Sohool 

Dint. V. Bauaer, 64 9. f. (21 4lg; l?ederIthen so umd the word8 *finaL* 

and ~oo~elnm17** mean the 8am0 thing. The 

value of the propert? as fixed by,the board 

of equalization is roe aejPdioata, mbj88t 

only to being set atide for fraud or the 

adopt&n of a fundammtallyrrongmethod 

of 'aamsngnsnt." 

As pointed out in the Opinion just quoted, the Oourt.8 

ham utirordy held that the Commbmlonere~ Court d-8 .mot 

hare the authority to re4sao~~ property upon'tho only ground 

that the original aammment wan based on an over raloatlo& 

In the oam of Xlnkson v. Lorsnto Iad. &ho01 D18tr, Court of 

01711 appeals of Tezas,~ hmrlllo, 109 S. W. (2) lOQ8, th8 

Court sale am follouu: 

'The general rule la that an attaok 

OS the oharaotar hero made by appellant 

upon assemment valuations made by a 

board of equaliaation oanuot be justified 

in the abssmo of all.agatlona and proof 

of fraud, or eomsthlng equitalent thereto, auoh as lsok of jurladlotloa, an obvlous rlolatlon of the law, orthe adoption 

of a prlnolpIe oP~nmthod of establi8blng 

raluatlon8 or maHag asseesaentcl that la 

fundamentally wrobg and whloh wm.Xts in 

a substantial Injury to the oomplafa& * 

Mere dlffereaoea of.,oplnlon, honodl$ euterta.lnedd, though 8rroneoua; will not 

warrant the interf~ren@m of the OOUrtB. 

Drussdow r.,,IIker (Tar. Corn. App-) 889 
635 

Xonorable W. B. Ihaterlktg, Page 6 

s. I?. 493; Yenardrllle Xndopendent School 

Dlst. v. Moser (Tex. 011. App.1 90 8. W. 

(2) 598, 599; Lubbsok Hotel Co. v. Lubbook 

Zndepandsnt Sshool Dlst. (Tar. Clr. App.) 

e5 S. w. (2) 776; slmklns T. city of 

Coraloana (TOG CIT. App.) 84 S. K. (8) 998; 

State v. Xsllet Umd k Cattle 00.. 1.26 Tax. 

S92, 88 9. U. (2) 491." 

In the oase of Msderland Independsnt Sohool Dlstriot 

T. Carter et al, Ccmrt of Clril hppsals of Texas, Beauwnt; 

z". W. (2) 487, the Court said: 

*We folly reo~~lzo the rule oontendod 

for by ths appollsnt #at ths deolsloe of 

a board of aquallsatlon @ori a partioular 

assemwnt, in the abssnoe of lllogality 

fraud, or. somethln(l equivalent therets, 1s 

00nolus~vs. It is unquestionable the sst-, 

tied rule. in this state that the omrts hsn 

aa supenlaory oontrol wer boards of oquallXatlon. Stats cr. Yallst Land t Qattle CO. 

(Tsx, .Sup.) 06 S, 1. (8). 471, and Youardville 

Sndo ondont Sohool D&at. vr Jfoser (Tsx. Oir. 

APP* P 90 8. W. (Z) 598, snd authorities oltsd.* 

We are of the opinion that the Oomdsrloner~~ Oourt 

of Jefferson County, Texas. wuld bd umuthorissd to~paas an 

order.authorizlng a ro-assessmsnt of ths property in question 

under the faots eot out in your letter. 

B&R5 

~*Rov~sJQ 12. 1939 

Yours very truly 

ATTORREYOItRXRALOt’1%IPS 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 06 Ttig 

APPROVED 

n 

0PlNt0~ CoMMIlTEE 

,“i%a3-