Court Opinion

ID: 9684111
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:46:54.343657+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:52.853951
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
In its motion for rehearing appellant argues that we failed to consider all of the controlling issues raised in its brief. The basis for that argument is the contention that appellees failed to produce evidence that they tendered the correct amount of tax. This point was not raised by any point of error. The only point relating to taxes paid was Point of Error No. 4 which stated:
The trial court erred in overruling Defendant’s Plea to the Jurisdiction and Motion for Judgment Non Obstante Ve-redicto and in entering judgment for Plaintiffs for the reason that Plaintiff failed to pay any taxes before the delinquency date and have therefore forfeited the right to a final determination. (Emphasis added.)
The thrust of that point was that appellees failed to pay any taxes because the tender was not to the taxing entities.
Tex.Tax Code Ann. § 42.08 (Vernon Supp.1986) requires the taxpayer to pay the tax due on the amount of value not in dispute, or the amount of tax paid on the property the preceding year, whichever is greater. The tax roles had not been prepared or the tax rates set at the time this suit was filed. The tax tendered by appel-lees was an estimated amount based on the previous year’s rate as applied to appellees’ properties as they had been redescribed on the appraisal notices. Thus, even though the point was not raised, we find there was some evidence to support the jury finding *476that the proper amount of tax had been tendered.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.