-c- 

-- 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable E. P. Cunningham 

County Auditor 

latarro County , 

Corslcana, Texae 

Dear Sir: 

the delinquent 

delinquent tame, 

rest and tax colSt.8 only; and related 

lark of &ad aaunt7 deUnquent tax rtitr 

nt taxpayem~ that 1s. each yew *a 

ellnguent, the then dlstrlct 6morney6, 

mentioacd, after notice, rim tax 

the tax lien on lands of 811 of those 

“The petitiona were filed with the dietrlet clerk, 

docketed, and citations were only lamed in a few ae6el 

thereon. Many of them, however, of whtoh no eemloe was 

av+c;obtrined, and many of vhioh wore never mduoed to 

final Judgment. The fese earned bi the then d1sttrtot 

attorney, dbtriali clerk and sheriff, if he served prccess 

thereon, fro~s~~yem? 1919 thyugh the year 1989, were not 

:~ ‘:Tj:;’ 

625 
%onorable E. Y. Cunninghan, page 2 

fees of offloe. The fees earned by the then offloials 

after the year 19~3 through the year 1Q58 were fee8 of 

orrico. 

*mat, at the present tlae, there 1s approximately 

30,000 delinquent tax suits egelnst delinquent taxpayers 

ZQoestlon lo. 1: Can the oomml~sionere irout of 

Iiaramo Uounty enter its order instruoting the t&x oolleotor to irsue proper redemption receipt8 for delinqwl 

taxer due Xa+arro Uounty, upon parmeat by the dellapue~1 

texpbyer o? the delinquent taxes, penalties, .lntereet am 

tax oolleotor~e oortr only. In other wotio our the 00, 

olsrlonera court remit feer In delinquent tax suits duy: t 

former county ofrloials, whether they be fees o? o??io\,),

or fees that are required to be aooounted for. I 

%ueetlon 110. e: Xn the event thaP the oom~loslo 

oourt enters an order romittlng all oo8te in $ 

y

delU4quen 

tar suite earned by former offbiala from the year lQl.Qi 

through the year 1835, would the county or the tax sol-; 

leotor be llable to the former ogunty o??icials for tb 

cost illeged to be earned by them ?roa the year 1BlQ 

through the year 10s. 

f'Qmestion no. 5: Would the oommi8t3ianers aatirti hi 

the power free o? llnbillty, for payment of abet, to di 

lta eppolnted delinquent tax attorney to dlemlrr dellaq 

tax wits mhioh hare .hersto?ore been filed against deU 

qu&t taxpayers upon the payment tb the tax OOlfeOtar 0. 

l#wamo iJaunty of The proper amount for delinquent taxes, 

penalties, intereet and tax oolleotor’s cost, au0 Lgalaat 

said property in the rbeance of the payment of QOete ddte 

former ooanty officials. 

I I . . . . 

Artiole 7334, Vmnon’s Annotated CiriL Statuter, 

p+o+Ide6 in part : 

Whenever any pereon or persons, firm or oorporatlon 

ahali pny to the Tax Coliocrtor allthe taxee, intereat, 

penalties and oortr ehawn by the delinquest ,tax reoordr 

of the County to be due w-id unpaid against m f&rot, &et 
Honorable E. Y. GunnIngham, gage S 

or peroel of land for al&the yeare for mhloh taxes may 

be shown to be Uue end -paid, prior to the lnrtltutlon 

of cult for the oolleotlon thereof, the Tax Colleotor 

the11 lrrue to ruoh pereon or per8on8, firm or oorporation, a reaeipt covering ruoh payment ae ie now required 

by law.' 

Article ISSE, Vernon’8 Annotated Cfrll Btatuter, 

prforidee In pert a8 r0ii0w8: 

'The Oounty or DI8trlot Attorney 8ql represent 

the gtate and bounty In allrults against hellnquent 

taxpayer8 and all sums oolleoted #hall be paid over 

imnedlately to the County Colleotor.* 

Then Tollour rpeolfio prorlrlonr enumerating ‘the 

fee8 of the County or Dlstrlot Attornay, Werl?? or Oonetable, 

f;;:Ui;t Clerk or County Clerk. The artlole then provider a8 

: 

a 

. . . 

'In aase the delinquent taxpayer8 ahall pa7 to the 

oollector the amunt of delInqu8nt taxes for whloh he 

Is liable, together with aaorued lnterert, a?ter the 

filing of ruit before Juwent 18 taken agdn8t him in 

the oaoe, then only One-half of the Seer taxable in rush 

a aese as provided for herein ahall be ohsrged egain8t 

hIr.* 

It ~111 be noted that Artiole 73Q4, l upra, cequlrer 

the Tax Colleator to Irsue e redemption OertlfiOat8 or reoelpt 

upon the payment of all taxes, eto., *rhown by the delinquent 

tu redktDd8 . . . prior to the Instltutlan of 8nIt for the 

oolleotlon th*reo?.a Artlole 733g, oupra, provldee that where 

payment la made to the oolleotor “after the fillng of rult 

before Judgment is t&en* In the aaee, only half fees rhall 

be oherged, a~ OOlt6 in the ce6e. 

'Artlole 7333, Vernon'8 Annotated Civil gtatute8, 

expressly provides that in eeoh aase such feea, Pe8nlng the 

fees provided for Ln Artlole 7332, supra, rhall be taxed ~8 

oorts against the lands, etc., but “in no case ohall the etate 

or oounty be liable therefor.’ See WAIT vs. ELLJS, SO 8.w. 

(2d) 1093. 
Bonorabli E. Y. CUnnIn&am, page d 

as fOllOWB,: 

IJO quote from the sase of Grant vs. ELlIe, mupra, 

‘The reoord before US shows that on, before, and 

after October 4, 1966, the oounty attorney of Burleron 

County, Texas, meting on Iostruotlons from the county, 

filed 1044 salts for delinquent taxes agalnrt ntuerous 

parties. EllIr, @o was dl8tTiot olerk of the oounty, 

dlsoharged the duties reqUt?oa of him by law in filing 

su4h 8ulto and lrrulng prowls thereon. He vould hats 

earned oertaln fees had the suits resulted In Judgments 

for the rtate. hfter the l b~ro suits uere fll~d, the 

oounty made a 6ontnot vith sortala parties to oolloot 

Lts 64lInqUOnt taXOB,md In snoh oontraot agreed 30 dir818s the Instant suits. 

'In'krnfo?#Ity vlth the above eantraot, the oouaty 

ordered the 00&u&y attorney to dISmlr8 the rultn. AstIng 

08 ruoh order, the eouoty a tto r l nppoared ey In thr alat*ot oourt and 8ored the oourt tb dlsmI88 all of the 

abore mont%oned tax suits. Aotlng on the motion of the 

ootmty attornoy, the dlrtiriot aourt et&tore& Itla order 

and dmree ia oaoh aad all of the abeTo oultr di8~1881ng 

the sue, md in spah or&err adJ~dg4d all aortr a5d fo48 

9axed as aorta, InTelTed thareI5 against Burlwon aoUnty, 

and further ordered that the offleers eatltled thereto 

should make alit their rsepootlve aooounts ag&lnst the 

oounty and file the 8~4, togsther with a OertifIed ospf 

of the Judgments with ths 4omal8sloners~ oourt. . . .s 

In the l boTe montloned base tt we8 held that Jwdgment adJu&glng aostcl against the aounty and dlsmIss&mg the 

orlglnti tax suits was ~016 end prohltlbed by rtatultes *pd 

formed no basis for a ra3Id olaln for toes by the clerk Of 

the dietriot aourt against the aounty. 

It is apparent that under tha abort mentioned case 

of errnt Ts. SD118 the fess prorlded for oftto8rr enum8eated 

In &Wale 7W2, supra, ars not saraed bl srroh'offlesro u&t&l 

the suite resulf la )udgm%nt for the O&ate,, .Werr the dOlla+ 

quest ta;rpa)rers ti3.l.m to the aol3eetor the amerult of d4linqaont taxem for uhloh he 'is &leble, together with th4 atWU4d 

interest, Jter the filing of rult befera Judgment Is take5 

waIn8t him in the ewe, then ~17 one-half the too8 tulrble 

In such a aase a@ protided for shall be charged against him. 
.4 

N 

629 

6cnoreble E. Y. Cunningham, page 6 

Article V, Seotlon 18, of th8 Oonetltutlon provldem 

twt the county coaai88loners~oourt .8hhall axeraise SUCh pouers 

ana Juriaaictlon ofor all county busIne8s, am 18 oonferred by 

thlr Constitution and the 18w8 of the state, or em may be herelnJter presarlb4d.* &l&Or ti+S 88~t~Oll Of th8 COilStitUtiOEl it 

h88 been held and firsly establlahed that oom8Is8Ionerr~ oourta 

can oxerclae only ruoh powers as tine ConmtltutIon itself or 

th4 legt8latur4 ham conferred upon them 8peclfIc8lly or by 

n4oe8aary ImplI0atlO5. BLAND vs. ORR, 39 8. W. 658; SIAUGHTEU 

TE. ZIARTMMO ConPAur, lsu 9. u. 662; Ex Put0 TIfolUs;e 8. u. (2a) 

e70; LMDlWl TO. BTkTTE, 97 3. W. (2d) 264. 

In tho Bland ~'1. Orr case, aupre, it was~held that 

a oomml88Ion4r8~ court h8a no power to comproaire a debt of,8 

d$faUlting oowrty tnaSPr4r by accepting a deed t,6 ma fro8 

a surety on hlo bond. 

Ia Ex Part0 Thon~am, aupra, it was held that a oommI8rIoner8' court 00ula not remit 8 fin4 iniiiCtS& for aggravated 

8BSWlt. 

In Tiew o? the foregoing facts *nd the l uthorit~48 

mentionad &bOTS, in reply to your rirct question ~QU are r48peot 

fully advised that it i8 the opinion of thlr department that the 

00mmI88Ion4r8~ aourt of 1pavarro County eallnot legally l ntmr its 

order In8tructIng the tax oolleoto6 to Issue proper reaemptlon 

r4ceIpt8 for delinquent taxes au4 Rararro County upon p8ymnt 

by ths delinquent taxiaysr .Z Ecllnqoent taxes, peniltle8, 

lntereet and tax colleotor'a costs only, In ml1 those 0amem 

r48ultIng In final Judgacnt in favor of the State nor In oa8em 

8tIll pending in court. 

Considering the mannor in whloh we hare 4XiSWer4d 

your first que8tIon, It neoe88arlly follow8 that your second 

question beoomoa moot and require@ no enwer. 

With reference to your third question you 8ro adTired 

that the aommI88Ioner8 oourt doemnot hare the power or legal 

authority. to alraot its appointed delinquent tax attorney to 

dlemlm~ dellnqwhbt tax mlt8 which hare heretofore been fllsd 

against dellnquent tarpayors upon the payIoent to the tax cob 

lector or tiaT&rm Comity pi tk proper amount for dellnqUent 

t(lfO8, penaltiee, interest end tix oolleotor~8 008t8, due 

agalnet said property in the nbsenoe of the p~ayment of ObStcl 
Uonorebla E. I. Mi@m~, page 0 

d& former aounty OifiOiilO in any oar@ that ha8 been reduaed 

to rim1 Judgment, nor to dlrmlrs my case still pondlng in 

the court. Rowover, the pnrent dlrtrlot or oounty attorney, 

.aotlng either lndopendbrtly or with the dellnqueat tbx attorney 

a&l the oomaireioner8’ oaurt, cay dlraira or takr non-suit in 

any ease now pending. Y&err raid dellnquant tax mlts have born 

di8micsed or non-mit taken, a8 rbo+b &ate&, tkb tu oolloo8oor 

of tiatamo (lounty monld ba authorized upon the pqaent of thb 

proper amount for dblinqubnt taxee, pearltier, bitered ad tu 

oollrotor’r coats due rgalnrt raid property to imt%e proper 

reoeiptr thereror. 

Trusting that the foregoing fully *IImfer8 your tnqu*, 

we are 

Yours very tmly 

hTTORWEi QR!4ERAL OP TEXM 

AU t AMM