OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

, 

opinion HO. 

rrer l3etluul 

rjOl3. :xaney Latham 

;;eoretary of State 

Auatln, Texas 

Dear 8lrr 

Your rsque8t So 

h&3 been I7MeiVOd #MM! OOQS 

quote fmm your letter of 

*For the tax 

or bras round no ia 

or State, however, reolamib pubA.io ut;lltlea and proo6eded 

86 franeailre taus u&or Sub- 
*In thr trlul OY the @me judgaeat was rodered 

in favor 0r the piaintiris and against thu State OS 

Texas. '3~ JuQper:t of the trl%l oourt was rubrequently 

aftlrmed by tho 3rd Court of Civil Appaels, 174 SW(2dJ 70. 

Thls daoision wen rendered Duly 28, 19L3, and DO writ of 

error W%B %pplhu? for. 

Y3e0tlon 2 of Art1010 7057b provides asong other 

fhfnge 66 follow8r *P%oridod, bowever, where a olae0 

ootlon 1s brought by any tax-parer all other tax-payers 

bolon~ir~ to tn. OlEOO 

9 

who hare pro9er 

ohm1 not be required to tile esperate wit8 but ahall be 

ontitled to at;Q ~or#raeQ by the Qaolol6a ru#QwoQ la l toh 

elauu eiotlan. A 018#S aotlon OhUl taoltrdo any l lt 

*It is to be noted tha8 the ault broPght by TexasXexlo%n R&iluayC~~panyan6 San Antonio ROuthwnRtilway 

0-y 0oaplIes nlth tiba dOfInlLl4sn 0s a olism mtloa 

a* oontaiaed in th rte6uto rlma +han uom a8 rweJT as 

two plalnWia Jo- ln t&o uutt but tin le~gu~go 

%uQ reproaeated ia suoh olaua Mt 1 oat appoad.n& ln MO 

statute preoo4lng the datlnltlm M l oh85 aotbm mom0 

pomfblg to lndioate thet ekl @eWe8 l xpeeoblng to alalm 

the benoilta Of the 01~0 aotioa should pa~sibl~ bs CWOU 

in ths petition ax~otherwl~ raprasekkte6 la the Ooit. 

lwna~ous rallr~Q8 ftilln& rLtbl.0 th0 naae olaes 

adt Terse-baloaa and son Antonio ;55outbera have naw aa0 

Qwands of thi6 offi ior a Tuftlnd Of e&k Of&It Of 

ircmohlei taxea haratoforo ptild under protest. Hone of 

these railr0aQs, emept Temm-i~exioori anQ %9an Antonio 

::outhern, wore 6QU#t?iWt11y naLaoQ a0 pulntrtrm tt the 

petition, and so fplr 88 thlr offlde llli abviswl, none 04 

the otfiers laterruM la auah suit but thay mm aantend 

thet they ar~ssntttlOa to the bene hte of the JuQg000t 

runtiered at .+.:7-.burt1 of the STEM ol.1~8 aa the naned 
373 

plalntiffe. :Wer &ate of Jamary 18, 1944 yo,ur 

departm~t in A latter .mdressed to Non. Tssee Jtmoe, 

?tata Treamrer, apeoif~oally authorlsed a refund to 

the plaiotlffr amed iti the ju@.unt. 

*In the lluht of the crbow t;rete, will you 

pleaee advlee tr.le Gepartrxbnt upon t&s foXlowln.g 

~QUiXi68: 

*A. Is it neoesMry thnt one olslmlng the 

bensilts 0E tho olaas eotlon prmlded r0r la SeOtlon 2 

or Artlals 705?(b) be speolfloally named as a plaintiff 

or lnti3rvercor in a suit to reoovor r2mnohi80 taxes.#ald 

under protest.ln or?fer to alsim the benefit8 of e judesmnt .ronbered in 8 alass aotlon7 

3pOulU this ~fi'ioa refund the frmohlse taxes 

pa%4 $r pretest to t&o88 railroad soapasiss is the 

aem alasr ss Terms Meerisss Railway Caay)aaJ and 3sn 

Antonio FWuthorn Railway Goap%rw? 

tjhojla this offlcre in We ll@ht oE the 

Court, ;?.UW Appeels Qeelsl&i rbtio roforrad'to, main 

ruolusiig mmh ~Ureodr and eampute Weir t&x08 hereafter unbar Bubaivislos (b) 01‘ Artlole 7084 Eather thsn 

as a publ1~ utflity Under %hQhl~lan (Ql an yea hsretefore done?" 

I. 

So6tion 2 or~Artlol@ 7057b, Vi A. 0. 9., proride8: 

?Yjmn the paysmit of aueh tarsa or f*eBt a~oeotnpnled 

by .auoh nrltten protest, tbs taxpsyqr shall have niasty 

(90) bay* fxasl amid dates witth+n rblah 00 file suit for 

the reootery thereof. . .I 
La sspeol6llw true in view al She qualiifeattonr the atetute 

psorltiea of these other tarpayem rho aim11 not bo repulsed 

to file separate sulta. 

myso (1) iuast be "of the same olamw$ 

Them other tax#ererel&; f,",,";g 

rated In auoh aotion" 

I 

ad (31 aust "hftt~ aOi)Orly proteuted 

88 hersln pmwldeu.w f Q tarpayer is of the 88~28 olass as 

tho8e Sillng the stilt, and has properly protest&d, he 1s 

thdn pZIBittd tie iat@WTetW ia tbt Wit itIStO@d Of b&ng 

re~ulred to tllr an lMepc+ndmt cult. This w60 prmldsd by 

w Lq&alature in ardor to avoid a multfplloity of ruftm. 

nota of 1939, 46th Le&lature 9. 8. Ro. 400, iseo. 4. 

A$eont mm& a rtatutfmy provis~oo, this taxpayer~a attempted 

&lpder ln the ame muit would be iPlpropb& and woald not be 

panltted, aa his oakme ef eotion is 8rpuata end Uietinot 

ftola that of the plaintiff who brought the auit, 

That affirmative aotion ir re uired 

wlthln the ninety URy period ia rmihw P 

oi the taxpiyor 

nuioatiea by them 

&&ultlolml proTis~onmr 

"It wit 18 not brought tidbhln the t&m aa4 within 

tit0 muaner Bezels b2m3wlddI. b . than aed in that went 

It elm11 be t&e duty of the State 'huasumr to tranrfar 

l uoh yamy Zxwn the ru8pmmo,aooount to the prox#r fund 

. . . 

Under thlo rZI,loR, (Ba ww inted out b Conferenae Oplaton Nai 301$ r- Opinion No. O-640 r3, ” 1S at the exptratlon 

ef ninety daye sio suit has !xwn film3 by %hsl protortlng taxpyer, for t&o rwemery af srloh taxer, the OOlL00tlog departimnt oamet 1eLegelly keep or oauw to be kept ia ru8pense euoh 

taw4. 

*The iaeuea to be Uetemalaed in euoh #tit 6hti.l 

(Emphasis ours) 
seotion 4 of krtlole 7057b protides: 

hereinabove 

by suoh pub110 offloial and that' 

taxmmr. theA and in that 

event it ahall-ibex the d&y o? &e~Stak Tma8urer to 

rotund auoh unount, together with the pro rata interset 

earned themon, to m&oh tax&nkyer.* (%&pha818 aura) 

Thle prorislon, as 1* pointed out is Oplaion No. 

048l9,~ meant8 the t r8fWl OM be anda only after W&utent 

fnrorable t0 taxpayer. 

Although Seetlon 2 rafus to ruoh aotion al) a 

*8Y"us ratfal, " tt Is submlttdl that it 18 not a ola88 aotlon 

fn the uauaI eenm, but Ls one in a very lidted, atabutory 

WE% B th8 01688iO ~18 Of the teX?R (Cma the dOefd1IU&8 Or 

the emmta.at equity sag be exmiaed to deter&&i8 whether 

*wati$& pro~lslocr are mpplloable to a gtven ma0 -&7 c. f. 

i+J, Sea. 831 Tobla t. PortluM Wll$ag Co., U Or. 269 62 P. 

7631 q elma aetlt+tir; e muft breu&ht by one or 110~8 $alntifio, 

for tbhmnl.+w sod ethem almUarly*it~ated whm'a a oor general iptuest la InvoWed or the p&e* ue ~0 numerous 

Chat it would be impraotQ%itble io bxf 

"B 

them all before the 

wart, and their oommm 8ftuatien snd ntmst -he it pmmlble, 

or their grad mmbu makes it neeesruy iar one or mare to 

mNPr(limlItal1. 

20 I?. C. L. 669, 

1 FX?eexmi On ~Ud&BE~S t&h Ed. 950 Se& 4351 

6ee. 9; 62 C. t. 1001: Sea. 12k &are there 

mum00 bo a maplate deterialnrt~ea ot the oontrwereg uithbut 

the prommoe of the pwmm la uJmi8 bakmlf l&e plelntlit 

lwlaga the sot&n, a mgreeecalrtite Ot *la86 aOtion 86nnot be 

aalntelaed. 47 3:. J. 43, Sea. 64, 8cd authorities oited. 

Where there eriete 45 mu8 0oraffuUtg of iatrreet 

in a gu~stion of a a olarra sot&en miuiat be maintained. 

%kus a bWrOw63 who &d beea ohsrged WUT~OW interest Ootia 

not me for hfa8elf tmd al8o ior the benefit of other8 wEe 

bed paid tha aa.m dstcmdaaut uoux-loua iatemlrt to ~eoo*ar such 

~~ssent6, althaugh the aetion was Sow&id upon t&e 8fme 8tatute. 

ThaPas ** Yecixa:sy Rust co., 156 IQ* 260, 160 a. -:. 1037: 

47 C. s. 47, see. 929 
A0 worn said in Trustemor Jaakeon T0wnmhip v. 

T&S#iA; 51 Ohlo St. 285, 37 N. E. 52). 526: 

'A suit to reewer ba& is qalte 4ilYexent in 

tne growla upon whioh a raowerg OM be ha4 frost R

suit ta enfoln 8 tax, IA the latter O(l8d, eaah fa 

not only interested in the question Involved, but e 

So here, the rarlous pxot~6tMtm aust be W&a 

the oowt (eaah wltain 90 days frwn the date of SiUng his 

proteat), eNher a0 putlw piamirr or lntww5erts, beaausor 

1. The tares are m not joid. 

2. B&ah proteat Is 8emrato and dit&laat and 

laPet 8tsnd 05 ltb Awn asl4C8. 0s netwwlty the oourt oannot 

drteraiae the ralialty of the ixrdirldsml proteats, rhlah 

aze 88xlatly aautrued uhwe mab or t&e& ia not preamited 

and at lame. 0bt10& the party dw lartitute4 the wrlli 

ir lntoreste4 only in protin& the validity of hla om protest 

aad right w refed, and ban io no scumer bs maid ce represent 

pXOt8StAAtll BOt ~0IWAt. 

3. ikioh payaient $6 a mparste tzWmablO5. Aa 

-ah taxpayeP6 aauso ot aatlon ir 8opanbe an4 diatinot, 

8h4ra la no atmao titlm 01: ,8uoh %deAt&ty or interest a* to 

bring dli *ithin the tie 8r vimal ~0p~~~krbit35. 

t-h.6 rights ati awaif or aaah alab far wund 

ww.bi not bo ae *4ju4la*ti~A ror another. 

5. S-emate doreases woi0.d be r~~ulrs4 ta raaah 

alalm. 

6. ::a,s?arste xeaovarisa wwl.4 haos to be rdJu4&e4 

to eaoh alelmant. 
Thcs purpose oi tho requlmme~t in Seatlon 2 of 

.rirtfcle 7057b, thst ttm proteetlag tnxpeyer mist rth suit 

~a his alai% within ninety 4eye is to quiet the title to 

the :~.tst.o*r ,mneye, and to enab i a Cm auspenae acaomt 

&tam to be plao8d in the funds to whiab they bslon&. Tf 

any otiier oo~struoti.on then the one we adopt be plaoed 

an the *claes slation’ pravlelau, 5any swpenso ltsm .ziay 

r*oaiA in CpiWtiOII lAd6iiAittiy. 

h SASWBP to YOU? riLr%t iAqUiPy We hotd that 

It 1s naaoeaary for om alaMt& tha berm& or the “alaas 

nation” provided ln Sootion 2 oi Arblale 7057b-to be speaiflany naree4 (LB pi615tirr 5r ln~ommer in auuh sul~t In order 

to moorer Sraaahlse texeo peld uadsr pmatesf. 

IL 

The judspunt in Capw Eo. 63,609 in the 96th i 

Plstrlat Court or Trawls County, 

Rallvray Co., st 61. -8. :z. 

style4 The Texea !.fexlaan 

0. FUmoxa, et al., entare 05 

NW. 23, 19.2, rezi40 In part 6th rolloval 

“It la therefore ordered, .dJu4@ en4 drone4 

br the ammt. . . theft 

“(3) The drremlant, issee Jamas, Raa~unr or tha 

State of Texae, mke proper refuad ae prorIde by 

Extlale 7057b, am amended, to saoh eorporatloa of the 

aleea r0r the benetlt 0r whlah thla 8ult he8 bean lnstltutea an4 whiah 7057 

68 6~93ma, 9 

o 2; “v; ygg&llcd with Artlole 

0 an 1% 0 it to a refund-la aaao 

ulth thla judgmsnt.W (:%lphe81* ours) 

i%r the rwmu18 set out ln anewer to yQur Pirat 

lw~~lry, the railroad aaapsnierr 8cw demndii%j refund hate 

not aoaplied trlth the pr~~l~ltmi of &Mole 7057b eo rre t0 

entItle them to A refund. There have b06~ no ilndlngs on 

the follmis&$, ell of which %r6 eaeentlal to reoaresyr the 

DLi:ze of tlia tnxpaye~~ mat t&I taxpayer p&I under PrQtUiit; 

thnt ~363 ta~~payQrf5 protest was valid end stated m.efi0i~~t 

~JUA~SJ tent ths crourt aati.05 ,am *a eeoh swh taxpsgsr, WA% 

1ttzt.i t,uted within tha ninety day parlad$ tk amount duo it 

aa R refund. 
Th~rd~r~, you should not, mfumi the franahisr 

wea apaf~? under proteat, to the railroad aofnpani~s %n 

quast t on. 

. III. 

The Court of Cfrll Appaalo, fn Fleers; et al. 

f~*IWms ~~xiaan Ry. Co,, et al., 174 3. 6'. (Zd) 70, held 

that rsilraaa oorporations, regludlsas of whether they 

r&ually yafd a tax upon fntan&ibla asIot6, were ontitled 

to the fom-JfZths trxenptlon on acrrporatioa frwohise taxea 

granted by Artfale 7084, Slotion b, V. A, C. S., to eorpomstions wow required by law to pay annually a tax upon 

igtaagible awets+. * At piwe 73 the oeurt eaiPr 

*Tke erl&mt purpose of 3ea. B w-as ta rrlleve 

those aorpore.tlona Re a oltwa that were 

potler for taxatfcsn &I1 of their pmprrrty %%%&ble 

htangtblr. ‘i?hhfs wea not aade dependent upon the 

%%mt of swh lntmqible8, relatiroly or otherwise. 

A railroad tight imn ~hysfual pnt~erty that maa aotually 

tared at ~61~s of 8im.y &llione and yet ita ~tar&&fbles 

(for a given year) mfght be amisenod at only (I few hundred, 

and the tax thereon be asgligible, or et least rolativmly 

S0. How~vor. euah raflrmd wQuld Sal& within SSO, B tho 

scme ao ane that gaid a rslativsly great fntangkble tax. 

The the&my of the 4/S axetnption 0lsarLy 16 ;i$;s~~poratloan whom iatan&blee are FeuuireU to be a 

under th aat 81% paying ptom ~6x1~ upon 4 full rendftlon basis than thallrs net wit&in the aoti and this wIrethor 

Tktw, fn wswer to your third inquiry, you should 

rwlaeritjv auah raU.roadrr and ooiupute their tares hereafter 

under :ieotioa b of Artfolo XV&, V. 3. (7, S. 
Trustlnr thrt tno foregoing rully ~11swer8 your 

inc,ui%so, b*) nrc? 

You!? vary truly 

Arthur I.. Yeller 

hssiatant