Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1939 )

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AUSTIN Juuuy 11, 1939 808. J.X. Robinron Com$y Attommy? Kant County J8yton. nns Dnar Ih. RobInnon: danucld .to the . 'Attorney Ooaeral writer ror reply. ia04 OIIth r0ii0w- ’ Ing qwstIoM: 81~00 l tom or rlllngn oumt M k n l &my thu a w oeat of the dollnquant County Attoruy when notltlnd to tile . manot do it ?or the pny nllond by la w, th e i what la th e a b u t m y ut wh a t th e y h nr o l La r g e . -t 0f a0iinqumi -08 dry -4 0npd19 4 . lxroply to your tlmt quntlon, you are ro- 8poottully mlrlud that tha kgI8l8tm hn8 tha mob powu to provida foroollmotloa of dolinquont tax.8 ana to rlr oonpan- rtion ror aolleotlon, and tlm Comulr8Ioaerr~codrt8 enrite * ;. 1* I! .& -- . Hon. J. E. Roblason, January 11, 1939, page 2. their rower to contract for the collection sxoluslvely from the Litatuter. See rihlte'I,MoOill, 114 S. :1.(26)060 and haste - wood v. Henderson County, 62 9. W. '(26)65. AlonE with other duties the County Attorney la &ven the duty of collecting delinquent taxes. Article 7332 Revised Clrll 3tetutes states that the County Attorney's compensation shall be $2.00 for the first tract and $1.00 for eaoh additional 1 traot up to four, but said fee In no oaee to exoeee $5.00 Artlole 7335-A further provldoa: *No oontraot shall be made or entered into by the CommIr~loners* Oourt in oonnodtlon with the oolleotlon of delinquent taxes where the compenaatlon under auoh ,contraot la more than fifteen per oent of the amount collected. Said contract must be approved by both the Comptroller enb the Attorney General of the 3tate of Texas, both a8 to substance and Therefore, It Is our opinion that the County Attorney can receive only the feea provided for in Article 7332, aa aet out above. In reply to your second question, you are adrleed that f.rtlole7335 pro+ldea that after the ConslIs8100ere1Court ha8 #-jvento the County Attorney thirty (30) dapn written notloe to f!le suit for delinq,ueottaxer and he ha8 retuaed to do 60, a contraot oao be made with another ettorney for that purpose. In view of this provision it would follow these requisite8 must appear before the Commlsalooera~ Court 1s authorized t0 employ another attorney. Cameron et al v. Earnest et al, 34 S. W.(2d) 685. However, the County Attorney may 41s``~ the matter with the Commlaaloners* Court and by worda and act3, he may wnive the necessity of the stntutory 30 days notiOe in -riting. It 1s a well settled rule of law in this State that 8s R General thing, a party may waive any formal preroquislte of en agreement not forbidden by incl4ent to the consulritnatlon lnw. It is YeId in Corpua Juris, Vol. 67 p. 292, *Walvel,-theact of walvlng or not insisting upon some right, claim or privileue." It was said in Sovereign Camp .~.C..I. V. Nigh Ron J. E. Roblnaoo, January 11, 1939, pege 3. 223 8. H. 291, *a mlver 18 the r6lIaquIsh- ment of some right by word or contract.* See SlImp v. Wise County, 98 8. W. (w) SST. Our opinion Is that the Count7 .Attorasymey by worQs, or.aote ualre the SO day8 written notlos snd ths Oomissionsrs* court w than ~-ploy mother attorney undsr tha provIsIons ot Art1010 0~A RevIss# Oltil 88autes. .EDwsw., it -a bs s auoh lter poliay ts herp.s written stat-t m the Oounty Attsrti d80linirrgths'rsqusstOf the ~SSLSSWS' Court to file drl4nqusM ,$ax stilt8 for rum0n.a thusla 8ssM an4 mI~Iry.;hIsright to the 50 6y prIa4 and ooaertdng to the ~ulonsr8’ Oourt entering lato CLoontraot with othus tor . the oollsotlonSt delinquent t8xss wlthoutwmitlrythe SO day period ud bars a rooord thereat medo In the Ylsutr ot the Commls~lonera * Court. 1 QI reply to your third question. Artlols 7343 does not plsoe any duty upon the County Attorney to fIS8 delinquent tsx suits ror oItlss, towns or rIllngss. Us would suggsit that saoh town employ a 'olty8t- torney and pay h$m a sslary and as luoh attorney, he could bring tu suits. .'J Tours rery truly COB&