Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1969 )


Menu:
  • Hon. F. T. Graham             Opinion No. M-S24
    Criminal District Attorney
    Cameron County                 Re:   Construction of H.B. 87,
    Brownsville, Texas                   Acts 61st Leg., R.S. 1969,
    Ch. 455, p. 1512, concerning
    sale of real estate owned
    Dear Mr.   Graham:                   by political eubdivisiona.
    In your letter requesting an opinion from this office,
    you submit certain facts which we quote, in part, asp follows:
    "We desire your opinion as to what effect,
    if any, the above cited House Bill No. 07 will
    have upon Articles 1577 and 734513,Section 9,
    Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of the State
    of Texas.
    ". . .
    "It is noticed that the codifier has styled
    House Bill No. 01 as 'Public Lands Sale by
    Political Subdivisions-Publication of Notices'
    and has by foot note No. 53 indicated that
    House Bill No. 07 when ultimately codified
    will be an amendment to Article 5421c, Sec-
    tion 12 of Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of
    the State of Texas. However, nowhere in the
    caption of House Bill No. 07 and in the body of
    the House Bill is there any reference to public
    land, or lands, out of the public domain.
    *Article 1577, Vernon's Annotated Civil
    Statutes of the State of Texas, sets out the
    procedure by which the Commissioners' Court may
    appoint a commissioner to sell and dispose of
    any real estate of the county at public auction;
    and Article 7345b, Section 9, of said Vernon's
    Statutes provides the procedure for disposing
    of property purchased by the taxing unit as
    trustee.
    -2496-
    .
    Hon. F. T. Graham, page 2 (M-524)
    "Article 7345b, Section 9, provides, in part,
    that the taxing unit previously purchaser of
    property at a tax sale may dispose of said
    property at any time in any manner determined to
    be most advantageous to said taxing unit, or
    units, either at public or private sale.'
    With regard to these facts, you ask the following
    questions:
    "We should appreciate your opinion as to
    whether or not the above cited,House Bill No.
    87 is a general bill, and as such does it repeal
    Article 1577, and Section 9 of Article 734Sb,
    Vernon's Civil Statutes of the State of Texas?
    "We also are concerned as to how the codifier
    classified House Bill No. 01 as an amendment to,
    Article 5421c, Section 12 of Vernon's Annotated
    Civil Statutes of the State of Texas."
    House Bill 07, Acks 61st Legislature, Regular Session,
    chapter 455, page 1512, effective June 10, 1969, provides, in
    part. as follows:
    "Section 1. No land owned by a political
    subdivision of the State of Texas may be sold
    without first publishing in a newspaper of
    general circulation in the county where the
    land is located or in an adjoining county,
    if there is no such newspaper, a notice that
    the land is to be offered for sale to the
    general public, its description, its location
    and the procedures under which sealed bids
    to purchase the land may be submitted. Notice
    shall be so given at least on two Separati
    occasions and no sale shall be held less than
    14 days after the last notice.    DYE.
    "Sec. 2. Land owned by a political sub-
    division that wishes to contract with an in-
    dependent foundation for the development of
    that land need not be offered for sale on
    public bid nor sold to the highest bidder.
    "Sec. 3. Nothing ,in this Act shall require
    the governing body of any such political
    -2497-
    Hon. P. T. Graham, page 3 (M-524)
    subdivision to accept any bid or be required
    to consummate any sale.
    " . . .I
    Article 1577, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and Article
    734533,Section 9, Vernon's Civil Statutes, are each special
    laws which detail the procedure,fot the sale and disposal
    of land owned by political subdivisions of.the State named
    therein. House Bill 87 (Article 5421c-12) is a general law
    which pertains to the sale of land by all political sub-
    divisions of.the State. In answer to your. first question,
    you are advised that it is well settled that special legis-
    lation is not repealed by a later general act unless specifi-
    cally mentioned in the general law or such purpose was made
    manifest from the plain provisions of the general law. Paul
    v. State, 
    106 S.W. 440
    (Tex.Civ.App. 1907, error ref.), m
    734513,Sec. 13, V.C.S. It is noted in this respect that H.B.
    07 contains no repealing clause nor is such a purpose made
    manifest in the provisions of the bilf; Consequently, it is
    our opinion that H.B. 87 in no manner repeals Article 1577 or
    Article 7345b, Section 9, Vernon's Civil Statutes.
    This does not mean, however, that H.B. 07 has no
    effect. It is a well established rule that when a general
    intention is expressed and also a particular intention which
    is incompatible with the general one;.the particular in-
    tention which is incompatible with the general one shall
    be considered an exception to the general and in such cases,
    full effect may be given to the general rule beyond the scope
    of the local or special law and by allowing the latter to
    operate according to its special purposes and aims the two
    acts can stand together. Paul v. 
    State, supra
    .
    Moreover, in this regard, it was held in the case of
    Cabbert v. City of Brownwood, 
    176 S.W.2d 344
    (Tex.Civ.App. 1943,
    error ref.)   that when a statute makes a general provision for
    all cases s&h as for all highways in all counties and a special
    provision for a particular class such as highways in cities and
    towns, the latter prevails insofar as the particular class is
    concerned. This is so whether the general and special statutory
    provisions are contained in the same actor different acts.
    Trinity Universal Co. v. McLaughlin, 373 S.W.Zd 66 (Tex.Civ.App.
    1963, rehearing denied 374 S.W.Zd 350, no writ).
    Therefore, on the basis of the foregoing authorities,
    it is our opinion that H.B. 07 is operable outside the scope
    -2498-
    ‘.           .
    .   .
    .
    .
    Hon. F, T. Graham, page 4    (M-524)
    of Article 1577, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and Article 734533,
    Section 9, Vernon's Civil Statutes.    '
    :i
    The constitutionality of Section 2 of H.B. il is
    not before us. and therefore we do'not express any opinion
    on same.
    In answer to your second question, you are advised
    that H.B. 87 will be codified as a new Article 542lc-12,
    rather than an amendment to Article 5421~.
    S 0 MU A,R Y
    R.B. 87 is a general.law,but does not in
    any manner repeal Article 1577-or Article 7345b,
    Section.9,~Vernon's Civil,Statutes. H.B. 87 is
    operable outside.the scope of Article 1571, Vernon's
    Civil Statutes, and Article 7345b, Section 9,
    Vernon's Civil Statutes.
    H.B. 87 will be codified as a new Article
    5421c-12 rather than an amendment to Article
    5421c, Vernon's Civil Statutes. ,/
    General of Texas
    Prepared by Ivan R. Williams, Jr.
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    Kerns Taylor, Chairman
    George Kelton, Vice-Chairman
    John Banks
    Vince Taylor
    Sam Jones
    James Quick
    MEADE F. GRIFFIN
    Staff Legal Assistant
    NOLA WHITE
    First Assistant
    -2499-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: M-524

Judges: Crawford Martin

Filed Date: 7/2/1969

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017