Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1946 )

‘i .:*
I 274
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
r : AUSTIN
i
Ron. T. Il. 'Primbl.
pirot As8iatant
State 3uperlnteQdent of
Publlo Inatruotion
Austla, Texan
Opinion Ro. O-7494
Rer When delinquent school
c0neb3a by the
oollect9r in 0011
you ewrlose a
letter frosibir.
of Raat&and co 3x%~.t
.~m 0pm0n 0r qw8tioM tberein,
ohloh ve shall lng aa rollova I
lots entitled to the
on eom8um 6ohool
8r Art1eI.e 279!5,R.C.3.#ae
ong with the aceate and
ths pmalty irid interoat 08 lah &lln-
dlrtrlet taxes havs beoa ellooatad to
the wspeetive OOFZJWOsohool distriotr
vere ooXk@$t%a, vhat 8tatute8 or llmlta-
y to the right8 of suah oomuwn aohool dls-
suoh clellnquent penalty awl intereat?
Third, is the county Board of Education aotlng vithin
its legal rights In demanding the allmetion and apgwpriatlon
of penalties and interest on delinquent taxes due eosmon school
districts to the respctive districts to which the t&x is aapm-
plated and allocated under the law?
xon. T. 1. Trmbl., P’@ 2
VQ rhrll 6ri6xmrth666 qu66tlon6ln th6 61cgbonl6r
la rhlrh 118 'be- Bbbd tbm. W@ tim h#mtOfo`` pu@ed
upca tb6 question of vbet&er 02 not penaltlrr and iatere6t
on d0llnqwrat tfU66 vb6n oolleoted follov WA6 6W fund a6
thu tax upon vhioh tit@ penaltier and lnt8rertlzav6 66arued.
`````` 1l0. 0-2566 16 in WOOM ~itih CUP YIOWS, end tn quo-
fr0lr it 68 r0ii0wrt
"Fbe general rule vlth referen to tb aispcritlon
of yadltleesand lntareatin at&ted l.naOolsy oa Taxetiua,
4th a. vol. 4, P. 3573, 3430.1621, w r0li0v6:
'lPsnalti%a for dulinquent taxes generally follcv
the tax and go tc the dlstpi6t entitled tc tb8 tax,
ti666 It 16 otherviae pmvided by etetuk. On the
other hand, if tha pmaltler SW iaposedbr th6 U@.tsla-
ture, their dirpoaltioa m6t6 In It6 416o~tlon. Ibney
derived fpom p6m.ltle6Spa fopirIture6 whelre tax-a8 a~
deliaquent are not a part of @a6 tsx, and v&em Isposed
by the Leglalature It h66 a right to dispose of 6uoh
ftis 88 it likes, xwgaMle66 of the puPpo6e of tb6 tax,
a6 qalnot the ob eotlon that publl.6 raollby raised for
one purpow eamo3 b0 uwd for a&otwD. . .’
"me germcilru16 i6 6X60 rts&ed ia 61~orpus axes,
p. 1528, S66. ngo, a6 follolf6r
"Wil.e66othcmrlse dimeted, lat&mrt, pervalties,
and oosts eolleated on dellnqueat tams follov tke tax,
and go to the rtate, oounty, or oity, awOrdl.ng aB thu
ow or the 0-r ULlptla4d to tb tAxltaa.f,8na, in
ewes. where tvo orbire of these are laterest%d In the
tex, suoh latez+st 6ad.psm.ltler6houldb6 8pprtlorted
tbMtl iA t&l ratio Of theiF I'66~Ot%V3 6h6P.6 Of
?iitxx fib h I r a g Ola
b hc g
( lOSB tiW ~P~Yided tOr by
rtawo: buttbu L6gl6l6tur6aayQh6~ thl6ml6 6ad
dispose otherviw OS latereat or penaltIer. A statute
prcoidLng for the dI6trlbutfon of intereat end p6nalties
collected in a dtiferent zswner fpom th8 dlrposltlon of
the taxes on vhloh the Interest and penaltier are based
dcess not Wsxnt to the appllOatlon of tax66 to objeuts
other than for vhioh they vere impowd. . .' *
XOR. T. I. srht’t, 94- 3
“title10 7336, Retlrad oirll statuter,1933, u
mm&d, vhleh provider for pnaltter and fnbmst ea
tU’66,
dellnqrrsnt Wad6 in pt U folhr61
*'All p666ltlbs 6nd intellest
providedfar in this
Act rhell, vhoa crolboted, be paid to the Stot6, ooun-
tie*, S.RdbiStP18t6,ii -7, IS @'QpoFtiOJi t0 a t&US
upoawhlehths pmltyazid inknrtuuoollaotud. All
discountaprovided for la t&la Pat rh6U, l&en alloved,
be ahtuwd to th #tits, UOUnti66, %nd dlstriok, ii 6z%y,
la pFopo&ion to I&% tax66 uma vhioh ruah dlwounk ~6
allotrsd.1
"You @tat+ that you have been unable to find any
atatuts in Texas provldlng,,fos the dlBposltloa of penal-
ties and intarest aad tfe haw beon umble t0 fipd say
axoept th6t quoted 6bov% whloh applibs 66 between the
0ar10us texl.llg 6uthorities&id lmt 6S3N661~ to the
VQFlQtaa
tuuu or the oountr.
*In th6 cm68 of Joasa ~6, willDm6, l21 Tex. $4,
45 33. (26) 130, our S~prez6 Cowt held that penalti%S
and lnterwtam no part& the *and the Lqiolattm
thUPefol'6 hW authallity to ~a di6poSition fhslWof OZ’
‘to n&W4 6U6h pbLWlti66 aad int%Z'eSt. It i6 8u&3%6t%d
that t&IS how &fiords th@ bar16 ior StZ’OZh$UeupsIAt
Y that t2ls%axlRgauthoritiesdo wt aWe.aaril~ kavo ti
~b?kO4 tin tllt%XWSt 6d P%n6lti%S iZl ths p62'tiOUbP fURd
for vhiah the delinpwnt tax?36 vere leoled and asresaed.
We de not think,hurewr, that this 16 the nStul-31
OF
pWpl' Such hOsdiS& 6m
l'.Stdt of it i8 WJ a``lit36tion
ot t&e gewral rule that th% L6gislatur6 6my PaLb etbr
ppOViPiOU6 iOr th6 dl6~6ltion of p6lItitl%S. The qW6tiOn
here p2666di6d tavolvas the pmper oredftiag Of pbnrrltiee
W betVWR YU’ioW hUd6 VhaR th@ fd~iS&hP6 h66 AOt
giwn &ny dFPeat%on
6pealfl.a ~lth ~efmaumo thereto.
“Xt vould se%m to fo Vi b& agnlo y to the general
rules kiexwinabove stated, %a 8 wnee 0P atetu-
tory pro~islons to th% ombmy, ponaltles aollected
for tax dellnqwnay should follov the prluulpal and b%
prUZEba awOW3#IfI VEUiOUSfUad6 iOr Which the teJce6
wm u~lleotml. If thin we-t’ not true there vould be DO
provielon for the de;m,sit wd accounting Sor pnaltles
end Intslm9t.’
Hon. T, N. Tr2mble, page 4
Thllr is also tM holding in the oase of Amsrican
Surety Oolapany of Hev York et al. Y. Board of Trustees of
Independent Sohool Distr:ot of Fort Worth (Court of Civil
Appeals, Fort Worth, vrlt of error deniedj 224 8. W. 292.
TM Court adopted the findings of la&t. and oonoluaLona of
lav of the trial oourt as the oplnioa of ths Oourt, and
from the eoMlurloa8 of lsv ve quote M ro1lovsr
%ie CQUrt oortaludee that both under the general
primiplos bf the lav and under the charter pwvisicna
refamed to in the abvre f Indings of fao t all perLalty
rmneyv colleotsd on aohool tsxes Ln the olty of Ft.
k’orth became when oollected a part of the school fuud,
and bolang to the board of’ tmsteos of the inde~mdont
sohool distriot of Pt. Worth.
“The oourt oonoludes that in this oaaa the plaintiff,
the said board of trustees, is not estopped to 8ue fop
and maover such penalty moneys. ’
Upon the authority of this uase ve thereforehold
that tbs panalty and lntersst on dellnquernt taxes, ,vhethar
it be for 0omid.m sohool dlstriot taxer alp independenteohool
distrlot taxea, follov ths tax and should be allocated to the
respaotlre dfatF:ot8 to vhioh the tax ls under ths lav allo-
cated.
We nov paas to the question of 1l.vJtatl.m. If ve
interpret y0ur opinion request oormotly, you vish to know
vhat lava of liwitatlon, if any, vould apply vhere peenalties
and interest on delinquent taxer have been errowourly vlth-
held by the tax oolleotfng offioLals and allooated erroneously
to ether purp~aes than to the. school distriot entitled to the
SW.
karioan Surety Cmwauy of Rev York et al. v. 57ard
of h‘ustses of Inde~udent Sahool Diatriots of Fort Worth,
sugra, also deals vbth the question of UiiLZtstion a* betveen
the sohool districta and som 0th~ taxiag authority or unit
errsasouely reoeivinij the saae. In the ab0ve case betveen
the City ol Fort Worth and the Board of Trustees of the Fort
Warth Inde``sdttot School Dlatriot, supi?a, the Court vald:
Boa, t. II. bIBhI.., wm 5
“l%a oourt
oooahde8 that Uk8 rtatute of liml-
tation of Ia0 brB plspded by tM oity 18 not
ap911aabl# to tic plaintiif ululer the rlswmstswer
0r this we, rab that PO part 0r the plaintiir'r
8&t@e or mtioa 18 b-d by raid Ot8tUtiJ that tb8
independent 8ehool dirtriot sf Pt. North ia L rub-
diWioR ti iMPt~t8ift~ of t&B 8t&O Or %w.BJ
- that ik tmrtee8 am so\iaty0rriwri that oald
dirtrlatsnd ita tm8teer, in the diwhW%e of tblr
dutier for the pEJbOtiOB ad reoowry 0r tha 8ohool
funds, are aiating in the inkr6st or the piblla arbd
of the state, and es+4exerolrlng a portion 0r the
rovereign pmera of tha atate of ‘pew, and that
under suah olm~tatmer limitation cannot be 8uooma-
fully pleaded egal.nat t&m any INS% than it can
agaiart the stata %trslf."
We thl& the fundr when eolleatsd by the County
%iX Qolbdol’, lb0 i8 tit80 th0 OOl``lootOP Qf BOE3rm)A
8&001
dialMats, t8 l.iaprM8ed with a trat mid 1opld ror the btmsfit
of th8 respeotfob district to vhleh t&y &wld be allocat%d.
fi tom v. city 0r Balla (swxwm 630~t) 40 3. x,
gap 7iet 0r thb“‘&$gt`` 0r tb, mtb*ttt aab the
6t6tU& sad OOMtitUti6asl prO+iBiOM BSferPedt0
above, ft Is plain, we t&Ink, thst t&e prowrty and
iundt 0r * publie s0h0018 8se had in tr82.t by th0
aft , dio@let, OoMty, OF QtheZ' 8tat~toPy wemy,
too UOd '?Or 3210bOrPrflt Of %hOMhool ehildm Of
'Lh$ eomnunit nor dlstrlot in vhiah the properties exist,
or to vhioh LJ 8eb001 iuad8 have bee13 allocated. We
thwk th8se properties 6~4 fwid8 * 80 plainly and
ommy~r8edtitha lmmtin rator. th010eal
pub116 8&0018 Or tb6 @itJ OT dl8tmt ti$&Bitthy PFI
vlthin the proteotiw alaM 0r both th43 state and
federal Constitutions, and that the Iagislatum is
vlthout paver to devoote them to any oth%r purpse or
to the un8 of miy other benefloisry or bensflaiarlerr.”
It tlwefore rollov8 from vhat w have said abow
that ve am of the opinion that limiitation oannot be mccess-
fully malntal.rmd a&ainst a right of action of oo~&n~ntwhml
dletrletr to have pnaltlss and interest oolleoted on delln-
qusnt taxm illocated to the mspsotfw distriots to vhiah
xvn. T. n. %‘rmae, psee 6
tb sta x i, llloeated,aadsolongu 8OsY maa':
fund emneously mceivlag such d*linqueat penaYf%ib
iote?est, tb eotlntf offiolals abrrgedu&es the 8~ with
the edoini8tmtloa of sshcol lavs ard ths eolleatioa of
the taxes ha# t&e r ig htotadjustths fun&s a nd reimbuzwe
tba dl@trl.ets which have been lrrcmeousl~ dep r ived of the
ssm, whether br w2wmow allooatlon or emmeous rith-
holUng by ?& 6ollectLw oifloials.
1i ve have tpfsconstrued yo-'ur question an to
llaftation, vhioh VI have UwePed u&or lo. 2 above, and
instead yvu vlsh to knov whether or not the 88`` rule of
UMtatfon vould apply te ciomwn school bistrict tame
In the oatter of collection by the State es would apply
t.9 State and County taxes, then 0" ~RSVW to the second
question 18 herelmfte~ stntedx
The mleeue or extinguisbmeat o? deliriqumt tmmr
which have beea due for a pariod of at least ten yeqw, polfor
to the tIrf3erdwat of Art&ale III, Beotion 55 of the i?onstitu-
tioa, Xov. 8, 193, vcll not authorfsed. Artiule 729, V. R.
0. fIba vhloh sought to provide b period vi linitatioa agalinmt
the ooU.eatfca of delinquent tams of school diatrlats and
road dlstr'iots tea ye-8 or mm past due, vld laut amnded
.+ia rgW but thin 4nandmnt, if *alid, lpp2l.m ody to seh00l
;l&:lots and road dl8trlct8, ard not to State aad County
.
In the recent case ef sasi Bsseett Lumber Co. v.
City of Xoustvn, 19 8. U. (26) l%, (Court vi Civil Ap air,
Oalvcston) th+ Court held that that portion of Art. 72 r$
pe2wltting a plea ot llwitation against the collection of
School dlstrlet SM road dletrlet taxes vas uncortstitutliznal
th a t tb a r did
e not b tthat tlma lslst th
t. 3, 8ee. 55, of the Constitution, which
Legislatum to ZrdlSeae or extinguish delin-
qthnt taxes for t&e ten year8 past due, the axiiendf;ent to
the Constltutlon being mm than a SF BUbS!Zquf#nt ti the
aroemtmnt to the statute, arid that G e oubseqwnt aimxlmnt
to the Comtitution 0oulQ not be invvkad J.ri aid of such pior
ensatmnt of the Legislatwe. Thfr 0880 Lo nov pmdiag on
appllcetion Par writ of error t.?~ the Supreme Court, vhlch hhs
bsen grantid, and the awe har been Equml and submitted.
.
.
.
Hon. t. Y. hlmble, Pqp 7
Tki&.pst~ Till Ilo 6oubt shortly w (sol&d by ths
.k#elmnQvstai%l8thenl8rw,
psantl dotwnimd valid statub $bat aathvrlsesa
plea of Lm it6tiOD -f&St dOl:qWDt ldXWl srd POti
distrlet tads. Ia view OS ths prseentstatus of this
gas0befor. t&a supm ovurt, w VVUMnot dviw tl38
appliaativaof Art. 7298, v. R. 0, b., and matters
depsnd3.~#uj1~a
lt should bo held in alwyanssuntil the
Bupre~eOourt has passed upon Um 3am Bassett Lumber
coq3aag0988, The Court 8aFd in this oass:
“It is ap~llaeVs aonte9otion that t&s Legiala-
two 981 vithout sbuthorlty la enact rwh bmnduant in
1931, and that it vea not until ]Povwzbar 8, 1932, t&t
BeoCicn 55 of APti, 3 of the Tex’kaConstitution Ii68 80
aim&d au TV prmlt tb Legirlatuzs k authorlso swh
plsa of Ilnritatloa. Ti the cvustitutioa torbsde tbs
Legirlatws to autbmlss & pl.ra vi llmitatioato a tar
suit b a BohvolBiahriot rt the tlmasstd aimtint
vas mdi6 in 1931, it rsqulres no oitstion of authority
to support the pmposition that no subesquent grant to
t&3 Isgislatnrs af pwer, to allov a plea of lfolitat3.m
to a tax Suit, vould make valti ma 8Ot passed By tha
Lsgfslatws prior kr suah gmut.”
w thiak as oounty 8ehool Bow ir vithia Its
gal rlghts in tnslstlRg UpvR th# proper alleo8t10n of
”ii@
ellziqusnt ~naltles and taternst on somma sohool dlatriot
taxes, oonslstent vith ths views vs have exjfreased above.
Assistant