October 23, 1958

Hon. Jack Fields County Attorney Calhoun county Port Lavaca, Texas

Dear Mr.l'Fields: OpinionNo. !GJ515 Re: Whether Union Carbide Chemical CompanyMctor vehicles are required to be registeredunder Article 6675a-2 of the Revised C':,vil Statutescf Texas and Arkicle EOirof the Penal Code when suchveticles traverse 0rGy seven-

tenthsof a mile ever a Statehighway in the course 3f their operation. Your request for an opinion reads, in ps.rt, as follows: "UnionCarbide Company owns and operates a chemicalplant located on HighwayNo. 185 in Calhoun County, Texas. "Themotor vehicles in question are used solely in connec%.ioa with she plant operationsof Union CarblAe, and are upon a public highway onlywhen necessary to go from lands owned by tne corporationon the other side or’ the highway. Due to the location of ingress and egress of saidproperties, it,is necessary for said vehicles to traverse the highway for approximately seventenths of amile. "UnionCarbide owns land altos; in equal portions on each side of the iiighway and eachportion of land is directly across thehighway from the other. "Thequestion I wish an opinion on being: Is the owner, its agents or employees, subject to prosecution under Article 804 of the Penal Code in view of Article 66aa-2R.C.S. of T. when operatingHon. Jack Fields Page 2 OpinionNo. WW 515

its unregisteredmotor vehicleunder the facts as above set out." Our answer to the above-mentionedquestion is no. Art. 6675a-2 (C.V.S.) Is our motor vehicle registration statuteproviding an exception from registrationfor the following: (1

. 9 ;provided,that where a ;Xblic highway separates lands under the dominion or control of the o-wner,the operation ef such a motor vehicle by such owner,hl.s agent or employees, across such '?i&hxy shall not constitute a use of ?‘~,c" mo7: :r ;;~;zl$ upon a public highway of ::hia

Art. 804 (P.C.)provides a fine fcr those operzzing an unregisteredmotor vehicle on a public 3.g'r~s.y. The owners of the vehicles under the f;izt?. ycu descri-53 fall within the exception quoted. The land ir: question .1s seprratedby a public highway and nothing else, and the land on either side is "underthe dominion and control' of the owner of the vehicles. In Brown v. Meadv 10 Me. 391, 25 Am. Dec. 248, the Court said 'across. . " shouldbe construed to mean the right of passing in the most convenientroute over the field to the grantors bulldings, tkLo7@ Ln sz doing it w?c necessary to pass over the lot tracsverslyand lengthwise." While the law generally construes an ex-epticn tc a revenue statute strictly against the person claiming sine, the cases construingArt. 6675a-2have given It ;,liberal construction. In Texas Highway Department, et al. v. Kimble Count.y, et al., 239 S W. 2d 831, Court of Civil Appeals,Writ refused~ N.R.E. the Court stated.,"sucharticle is, theref?rr: of a penal nrture send must be construedmost favorable to the owner of c:ne vehicle". Again in Allred, et al. v. J. C. Engleman 3s. Court of Civil Appeals, 54 S. W. 2d 152 Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 61 S. W. 2d 75, the Cour< s:id "the statutern>Jst be liberally construed to effectuate itspurposes and designs".Hon. Jack Fields Page 3 OpinionNo. WW 515

The statute In questionbeing of a penal nature requires "the act which is claimed to be a violation ofpenal lawmust be fairly within Its terms to sustain an action for thepenalt ' Thompson v. Missouri, K & T Ry. Co. of Tex., (Sup.Ct. of Tex. 126 s.x..257. It is our opinion thatunder the factspresented, the nature of the statute and the liberal constructionplaced thereon by the cases, that the egress from the land on one side of the highway need not be directly across the highway from the ingress to the land on the other side. It is to be understood that this opinion is limited solely to the fact situationpresentedherein and that any otheruse of said vehicle on a public highwaywould require registration. SUMMARY Where landunder the dominion and control of the owner of a motor vehicle is separated by a public highway, saidvehicle need not be registeredunder Art. 6675a-2 R.C.S. of Tex.,where said vehicle is crossing the highway from said land on one side to said

. land on the other side even though the egress from the land on one side is not directly across thehighway from the ingress to the land on the other side. Yoursvery truly, WILL WILSON

JCP:jc APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE L. P. Lollar, Chairman Leon Pesek Clyde Kennelly RFVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Morgan Nesbitt -"John C. Phillips Assistant