Hon. Amos Harper Opinion No. V-973. 

County Attorney 

Gaines county Re: Striking delinquent tax entries 

Seminole, Texas made prior to determination 

land in another county. 

Dear Sir: 

We quote the following excerpts from your letter of 

October 17, 1949: 

“I respectfully request your opinion concerning 

a problem of taxation that confronts the Tax Assessor 

and Collector of thie County and upon which I have been 

unable to locate any legal authority sufficient to enable 

me to advise that officer. 

“There is contained in the files of your office, 

Opinion No. O-1125, addressed to Alton T. Freeman, 

then County Attorney of Games County, which was approved by Gerald C. Mann, Attorney General, on August 31, 1939. 

“This opinion, and the opinion request from which 

it quotes, recites an involved fact situation which occurred several years ago and which had the effect of 

either relocating or moving the North line of Gaines 

County South from the point along which it originally 

was thought to run. As a result of those facts, certain 

sections along the North line of the County which apReared to be in Gaines County according to the official 

Gaines County map prepared by the General Land Office, dated March, 1922, which is that office’s latest 

map of this County, apparently ceased to be in Gaines 

county. 

“Under authority of what is now Article 7194, 

R.C.S., 1925, the General Land Office of Texas had previously furnished our Tax Assessor and Collector with 

abotracta of the surveys of land in thfs County and those 

abstracts showed these northern surveys to be in Gaines 

County. Accordingly, they were listed on the tax rolls 

and taxes were levied and assessed as to them by Gaines 
Hon. Amos Harper, Page 2 (v-973) 

“As a further y.esu(t 02 such moving of our North 

boundary line, our Northeast corner of the County ia 

further south than what is recognized, for tax purposes, 

to be the Northwest corner of Dawson County, whereas, according to the Act of the Legislature prescribing 

our boundaries, the two corners are supposed to be one 

and the same. (Act of August 21, 1876, page 234.) 

“Upon the strength of the above mentioned opinion of the then Attorney General, a suit was filed which 

involved, under the pleadings, a challenge to the validity of the action which moved, or attempted to move, 

the boundary south. This r,uit was never tried upon its 

merits, but a demurrer to such petition was sustained 

by the trial court,, such action being sustained by a subsequent action of the Supreme Court of Texas to be 

found in the case of YOAKUM COUNTY, ET AL, VS. 

GAINES COUNTY, 163 S.W. Znd, 393. The opinion of 

the Court of Civil Appeals in this, case gives more details of the matters of fact and law involved.’ 

“There are on the Delinquent Tax Roll of this 

County a number of entries showing delinquent taxes 

due to the State, County and other taxing units whose 

taxes were collected by that officer, upon these lands 

.for years prior to the moving of this line south, or its 

relocation, as you may please to call it. 

“In the light of the.se facts, will you please favor 

me with your opinion as to the answers to the following 

questions : 

‘FII(ST - By what procedure, if at all, may the 

Tax As’sessor of this County strike the above mentioned 

e&r&a of delinquent taxer from his delinquent tax roll? 

“SECOND -’ If he may not strike them from his 

delinquent tax roll, then what effect, if any, does the above mentioned relocation of the county line have upon 

the right of myself, or the delinquent tax attorney of 

this county, to prosecute an ordinary delinquent tax suit 

to foreclose the tax lien upon these lands for nonpayment of such taxes 7 * 
Hon. Amos Harp*, P4gm 3 (V-973) 

Tti apinion of the Supreme Court in the Yoakum Coant CM*, abovo-eited, 4ummarizes the allegations of tie petition 

&cari; G4ines County in the ~suit which was instituted against Yoakurn 8*r Terry,C&mtias to set aaide the boundary line surveyed by 

A. L. Harris in 1935 and agreed to by each of the counties acting 

thrw4gh its commissioners’ court and its county court. Plaintiff’s 

praymr was that the court adjudge the north line of Gaines County 

to b4 th4 lint as surveyed by Col. D. S. Woods in 1900 or in the alterntive that the north boundary be along certain survey lines enumerated in the petition or in the alternative that the court fix “the 

true boundary 11114 ,between the plaintiff and the defendant counties.” 

Th+ opinion points out that the field notes of the Woods 

11~. run in 1900. before any of the three cbunties were organiaed, 

w44 not mark4 on the ground as required by law and .that the calls 

in th4 field net44 l how wt there is room for doubt as to the location on tA4 grow4 of the Wooda line. Further, it was alleged that 

th4 south line of cert4in surveys were treated by the coanties as beial the boundary tiim and that as between Gaines County and Terry 

County a portion bf the boundary line was conaidcred, to be along 

the l outh line of Block D of another aurve$. But, said th court, if 

was not allcged that this line is oai the Woods line. 

Tha court firat upheld the power of the commissionarr’ 

courts and theceunty courtm to cntcr into a binding agreement as 

to tba beu&ry lint stating that since countias have tha power to 

litig&e boundary disputes they have the power to settle them out of 

court so long as thay do not violatc any provision of the Constitution. Gaines County contended that Article IX, Section 1; Subdivision 3 d th4 Texas Constitution had baaan violated. A portion of that 

subdivirisn~provideo +t no part of l y existing county shall be detach4d from ib and +tt&chad to anothet kxisting county’until th4 proposition for such chaqe shall have beei submitted to a‘vot6 of th4 

slectors of both counties and shall hava received a majority of those 

voting on the question in each county. The contantion was rejected, 

and tha court said l t:pge 397: 

“There is nothing in the raeord to show tha&t it 

~4s the‘ plrpesc of the three cax~&ics, in enterin the 

forog4ing ndar, to detach lad ~TQ#I one county whose 

l 44ad4r7 Uy@# ware already a4*yl+hed, and attach 

l utm t4 l YY other county. Oo* contrary, it cleably l p p a a rIlb*t a the sole purpeti was to definitely fix 

the undefined boundary line between the three counties. 

Y 

. . . 

‘The allegations contained in respondent’s patiti4n clearly show that the boundary line betwean Gaince 
mn, Amu mrper‘ hy 4 (V-973) 

Cm* and lt+kwn aI* Tekry copntk3 W&a indefidt*, 

l d t+t the Wea aouatie4 :de8ired to definitely *ettle 

f&d bopndar~ ibe between much counties. To t&t end 

the commiie$qrr’ courta of the three counties met 

tad provided r&au, ia,ectcer+ace with the law, to survey 9 deftmiyly fix t+S budary line between the three 

counttea. PHU to~the time in 1935 wben the three coantier provi&d,e metA* fat &~e emta&lis*eat of such 

betm+ry lip; there aLted in the dnindd of the three 

c~brieura’~cmts an iasu of fact, end they pmaed 

tke’fore@iaq uder, which ecttlod thet fact aa between 

“y+” ‘. 

Shoe m territory WEE detached frem Cieinee Couaty es 

a rosdt $ the l 

f 

zeerrert 4 Jío r + l tte eked in this suit, peceroerily tb,l+w rp nst.dieh yeut &linqup tuc rolir ahow delinquent 

w,ier wire”ner& withis tiinee County &nd should never hevc been 

o ii *b e? Co *a ty,CU *eil*, Tb id b einSg o , fhe l rperrment qf taqea 

aput thue kbde wad invalid, . 

Arfieler 7146 airl.7347, V.C& prescribe the procedure 
Hon. AMOS Harper, page 5 (v-973) 

.:i 

am3 Articles 7346 and 7347, V.C.S., are applicable. 

The Comptroller .provides Certificate of Cancellation 

forms. After said Certificates have been duly approved, the Tur Assessor and Collector may record the 

cancellations cm his rolls. The Comptroller will send 

list of l~nrls erroneously assessed to tax assessor of 

proper county, Art. 7353, V.C.S., and said lands may 

then be back assessed for taxes by the tax assessor 

of the proper county, Art. 7207, V.G.S. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORL’JEYGENERALOFTEXAS 

Mrs. Marietta McGreg 

Assistant 

FIRST ASSlSTANT 

ATTORNEY GENERAL