828
OFFICE OF ME A7-rORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
Honorable W~lllam J. Lavaon Seoretary of State Austin, Texas Attentlonr Mr. Will Jbmn Rlaberdaoa' *.
Dear S1r1 opinion RO. o-3989 ROB Does a corporetion bavo a right to operate a cllty bus 1Ine under auMlvlaIon 66, Article 1302, Yernotlla Annotated civil Stat- utes, end related queatlona? Your letter of September 16, 1941, requeatIng the opin- ion of this depertmant on the questions stated herein, reads Ln part as r"ollovsz "The above named corporation vaa rented a char- ter using as Its purpose SubdIvIsIon 6% of ArtIale 1302 'to aatabllsh and maIntaln a line of stages.' Under this aubdIvIaIon the corporation her been op- erating buses In the City of Ulchlta. "In order to teke adventwe of the povera grant- ed br ArtIalo 6548 end Article 6548a.~the oorporatlon baa filed an application for en amendmentchenging its purpose alauae to Inolude thoa,e powers. It vi11 be noted twt those ArtIalea 8pp4 to ~orporatlona vhIch vere formed as street rellvey aorporatlona end vlah nov to operate buses in plaoe of street cars. The street railvay nubdIvIaIon Is Ho. 67 of Article 1302, end it Is the aontention of this Departmeqt that Artlalea 6548 &xl 654th apply only to corpora- tions formed under that subdIvIsIon. If auah Is tlae ?aae, the oorporatlon uould not aaacmpllah thla ahange by en ~endatent becauao of the prohIbItIona In the last lentenoe of Artlale 1314.
"The attorneys for the corpomtlon, hovever, contends that since they have been opereting a alty Bonorable Vllliem J. Lavaon, Page 2
bualineuaderSubdIvIsIon66, that theyareaot &eng- ing the purpose OS the corporation by adopting the en- larged povera granted under Artfolsa 6548 and 6548a.
"This Department has been of the opinion that SubdIvIsIon 66 vaa tha aorreot aubdlvltlon to be used by bus lines &wn.n¶.ngSrom one city to imther and that it did not authorize. the operation of a city bus line. It Is easy to see that a court could say that an lnter- city bus line vaa similar to, end authorlted by, the line OS stages au~vlsion, but the almIlarIty Is not so great betveen a 1Ine of stages end the operation of city buses. "We should like an opinion Srw your Department on the Sollowlng questions: Does a corporation have a right to operata 3 clt~ka line un&s? Subdivision 66 of Article 13025 "2. IS ~ubdlvlalon 66 la not tha proper subdlvl- sion, under vhat subdivision should a corporation vlahlng to operate a bus line in a city be formed? '3. IS SubdIvIaIon 66 Is the proper aubdIvIaIon, nay such a aorporatlon have the enlarged pavers grant- ed by Artlalea 6548 end ~6548s~.either by eraendmentor as en iouldental pover to their right to operate a city bus line?" The pertinent facts relatlvo to the WlchIta Traatlon Companyare set out In a letter firm HonoraBle Bennett L. Smith, Attorney at Lav, addressed to the Attorney General, bearing date September 19, 1941, are as Sollova~ ;.
"WlchIte Traotloa Company, a Texas aorporatlon, ovned end