- -



### THEAVTORNEY GENERAL. OFTEXAS Grover Sellers A=rr‘,KN*:Y G*:NExcAlr

Hon. R. C. Neaves County Auditor Grayson County Sherman, Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion No. O-6324 Rer If real property conveyed to the City of Sherman at atax sale, is sold to a third party, would the State andCounty be entitled to collect all delinquent taxes prior and subsequent to the tax sale to the City? Andrelated questions.


### 1944, Weare in receipt of your recent letter of December 14, reques.ting our opinion relative to the above captioned matter. Your letter reads as follows:

“Please furnish meawritten opinion on the following proposition:

“OnJune 

### 17,1930 adelinquent tax judgment was rendered in cause No. 

### 40788 ‘See certified copy of judgment attached’ and on Decembei 27, 

### 1930,the Sheriff, acting on the above judgment and decree of sale, did convey by Sheriff Is deed, the premises described in said order of sale, to the City of Sherman aMunicipal Corporation, for the sumof Three Hundred Ninety Twoand 74/100 Dollars, it being the highest bidder therefor, and that being the highest secure sumbid for same. ‘See certified copy of Sheriff ’s deed attached.’

“The County andState were not aparty to the above suit, therefore, none of the State and County taxes were included in said judgment. (See copy of State andCounty delinquent taxes attached)

“For your information and consideration I submit the following:

“The City of Sherman, Plaintiff, bid the premises in at the amount of delinquent taxes due said City a,tthe Sher-. iff ’s sale onOctober 

### 7,1930, and said City of Sherman has held sameuntil nowwithout taking any further action. HOWever, the City of Sherman is now in process of taking posession of same, which is some 14years after such premises had been conveyed by the Sheriff.

“1 have been informed by the City Attorney that, it i.s the intention of the City of Sherman to take possession ofHonoR, C. Neaves, page 2 (O-6324)

said premises at private f in order that they in turn maysell same

sa e.

“There is nowdue the State andCounty for delinquent taxes, together with interest andpenalty in the aggregate sumof $247.60 for the years from 1928 to 1943, i%tlu:tf;::he:: ee State andCounty delinquent tax state-

“From the above information wewould appreoiate an answer on the following:

“1. If said premises are sold nowby the City of Sherman, would the State and County be entitled to collect all delinquent taxes from 1928 to 1943 inclusive, provided such property is sold for an equal amount, or more than the amount of all delinquent taxes due said taxing units?

“20 Would said premises be exempt from State and County advalorem taxes for all years subsequent to the date such premises were bid in by the City of Sherman in 19301

“3* Where such premises were conveyed to the City of Sherman b until 194t Sheriffus deed in 1930, and possession not taken

9would the City of Sherman have the authority to sell such premises at private sale?

“40 In the event the City of Sherman maysell such premises at aprivate sale, what would be the proper method for the City of Sherman to follow in order to convey such premises to the private purchaser?

“0 000’8 Weare enclosing herewith OUPOpinion MO.O-5710 which answers your first two questions.

Your other two questions request our opinion as to whether the City has the authority to sell such land at mate sQ& end if so9 the proper procedure to follow D

It is our opinion that the City of Sherman acting through i City Council, could sell said land as provided in ,A&.cle 7328 VernonOs Annotated Civil Statutes, 7343 and 106Oa, V.AX.S. byvirtue of the provisions of Ltlcles However, each of said ,Articles 7343 and 1060 by Its ownterms, is merely permissive, and is not exclusive.

Article 1062, V,A,COSO reads as followsrHon. R. C. Neaves, page 

### 3 (O-6324 )

“If, at any sale of real or personal property or estate for taxes, no bid shall be madefor any parcel of land, or any goods and chattels, the same shall be struck off to the city, and the city shall receive, in the corporate name, adeed for said property, and shall be vested with the sameright as other purchasers at such sale, and maysell and convey the sameo ” Article 1140, V.A.C.S., reads as follows: When the entry mentioned in the preceding article has been made, the town shall be invested with all the rights incident to such corporation under this chapter, and shall have power to sue and be sued, plead andbe impleaded, and to hold anddispose of real and personal property, provided such real property is situated within the limits of the corporation.” Article 

### 962,V.A.C.S., reads as follows:

“All the inhabitants of each city town or village so accepting the provisions, of this title shall continue to be a body corporate, with perpetual succession, by the nameand style bywhich such city, town or village was known before such acceptance, and as such they and their successors by that nameshall have, exercise and enjoy all the rights, immunities, powers, privileges and franchises possessed and enjoyed by the sameat the time of said acceptance and those hereinafter granted and conferred, and shail be subject to all the duties and obllgations pertaining to or incumbent on the sameas acorporation at the time of said acceptance, and mayordain and establish such acts, laws, regulations and ordinances, not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of this State, as shall be needful for the government, interest, welfare and good order of said body politic and under the samenameshall be known in law, andbe capable of contracting andbeing contracted with, suing and being sued, impleading and being impleaded, answering and being answered unto, In all courts and places, and In all matters whatever, maytake, hold and purchase, lease, grant and convey such real andpersonal or mixed property or estate as the purposes of the corporation mayrequire, within or without the limits thereof; andmaymake, have and use a corporate seal and change and renew the same at pleasure .I’ said It is, therefore, our opinion that the City of Sherman may sell/land to athird party at private sale, and that the City Council, as agoverning body of the City9 is the proper agency to exercise the authority to sell, and that the sale should be authorizedRon. R. C, Neaves, page 4 (0~6324)

by ordinance or ??esolhtfon. 160 S.W.z (2d) 519 (SupoCt.10 See Wilder v. Amerfcau Produce Co., However, ff the charter or an ordinance of the Cfty of Sherman provides howthe City mayalfenate its real property, such procedure should be followed.

Trustfng that the abo,ve and foregoing fully answers your inquiry, weare Yours very truly ATTORNEY

GENERAL

OFTEXAS By /s/ WeV, Geppert W.V0Geppart, Assistant APPROVED

JAN11, 1945 /s/ Carlos C. Ashley FIRST ASSISTANTATTORNEY GENERAL APPROVEDtOPINIONCOMMITTEE BY: BWB,CHAIRMAN WVG:forwb