Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1968
Status
Published
On the bench
Crawford Martin
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

TEEE ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF-XAS

AIWTIN, TEXAS V53711

December 5, 1968

Honorable Jerry Sadler

Commissioner

General Land Office

Austin, Texas 78781

Opinion Noi M-311

Re: Whether Commissioner of

General Land Office or

Veterans' Land Board may

reinstate forfeited pur-

chase contract.

Dear Mr. Sadler:

In your recent request for opinion, you present the

following fact situation and questions in regard to the

operation of the Veterans'Land Board and its affairs.

“It has been the general concensus of opinion

in the past years, and it is currently the

opinion of this office, that the administration

of the Veterans Land Program is primarily the

duty of the General Land Office and its employees.

. . . .

"The Board held a forfeited land sale on

November 19, 1968, at 11:OO A.M. here in the

General Land Office following the provisions of

Article 5421m. Just prior to the sale, but sub-

sequent to the time that the Board met and ordered

tracts to be advertised for resale, one of the

original veteran purchasers, whose tract was forfeited

in accordance with Article 542lm, and whose tract was

ordered advertised for resale in accordance with

Article 542lm, asked the Commissioner of the General

Land Office to accept payment in full of the original

contract and to furnish him with a paid-in-full deed.

-1515-

.

Hon. Jerry Sadler, page 2 (M-311 )

The Commissioner of the General Land Office

refused to accept payment in full; however, the

Veterans Land Board, having some question in their

mind, would like for your office to inform us of

the lecal riahts of the Commissioner to reinstate

the contract referred to above. If you conclude that

the contract of sale cannot be reinstated after it

has been forfeited and ordered advertised for resale,

can the original veteran tender the full payment

due under the contract and receive a paid-in-full

deed after he has lost all ri'ghts to reinstate his

contract?" (Emphasis supplied to question.)

Article III, Section 49b of the Texas Constitution provides in

part as follows:

"The Commissioner of the General Land Office

shall act as Chairman of the Board and shall

be the administrator of the Veterans' Land

Program under such terms and restrictions

._-. _ as .

are now or may hereafter be prOViaea by law."

Section 2 of Article 5421m, Vernon's Civil Statutes, provides

in part that:

"The Commissioner of the General Land Office

shall be Chairman of the Board and Administrator

of the Veterans' Land Program . . . and shall

Perform

.- ~~~ ~~~ all duties and functions of the Board

prescribed by law, except those prescribed in

section 2(A) hereof, which shall be performed

by the Veterans' Land Board as constituted.

(Emphasis supplied)

Said Section 2(A), above referred to provides in part that:

"The duties of the Veterans' Land Board ... shall

e... 0 provide for the forfeiture of contracts

of sale and purchase and the resale of forfeited

rand; and to formulate such policies, rules and

regulations as may be necessary, not in conflict

with the provisions of law, to insure the proper

administration of the law and to carry out the

intent and purposes thereof." (Emphasis supplied)

Section 19 of Article 542lm, provides in part that:

"In any case where the sale has been forfeited and

title to the land revested in the Veterans' Land

- 1516 -

Hon. Jerry Sadler, page 3 (M-311 )

Fund, the original purchaser or his vendee shall

have the right to reinstate the purchase contract

at any time prior to the date on which the Board

shall have met and ordered the said lands to be

advertised for resale, or for lease for mineral

development but not thereafter."

In answer to your question as presented, it is the opinion

of this office that the Commissioner of the General Land Office,

as Administrator of the Veterans' Land Program, is without

authority to reinstate a purchase contract after it has been

forfeited and ordered advertised for resale; and further, that

once the contract has been forfeited and the land ordered ad-

vertised for resale, the original veteran may not, in the

absence of further action on the part of the Veterans' Land

Board as hereinafter set out, tender the full payment due

under the contract and "receive a paid-in-full deed," for

to so allow would require a prior reinstating of the contract,

which is prohibited.

It must be pointed out, however, that the above answers are

directed, and limited, to the Commissioner of the General Land

Office as statutory administrator of the Veteran's Land

Program and are predicated upon the premise that the contract

has been forfeited with no subsequent action by the Veterans'

Land Board as hereinafter described. Forfeiture provisions in

statutes are strictly construed, not favored, and will be

interpreted where possible to prevent, rather to cause, a

forfeiture. 25 Tex. Jur.Zd 511, Forfeitures, Sec. 10; also

p. 502, Sec. 3, declaring forfeitures to be a harsh remedy

disfavored both at law and in equity.

There appears to be no reason why the forfeiture provisions

of a contract between the Veterans' Land Board and a veteran

purchaser would not be subject to the same rules in regard

to their enforcement, waiver and setting aside as would a like

contract between two individuals, as such rules are set out

in the case of Stevenson v. Lohman, 218 S.W.Zd 311, 314 (Tex.

Civ.App. 1949, error ref.) to wit:

We agree with appellant that the courts do

not favor forfeiture and when proper equities are

shown to exist equity will intervene and will deny

unjust enforcement of the naked legal right to a for-

feiture. On the other hand, when parties enter into a

contract providing that either should forfeit his

rights thereunder upon default in any of the material

provisions, thereof, it then becomes the burden of

the party resisting such forfeiture to plead and prove

-1517-

Hon. Jerry Sadler, page 4 (M-311 )

such facts as would justify a court of equity

in preventing his adversary from doing that which

otherwise, under the law, he has a right to do, but

in equity and good conscience he should not be

permitted to do."

Section 19 of Article 542l.mprovides certain prerequisites

to the declaring of a forfeiture by the Veterans' Land Board.

Automatic forfeiture is not specified, but forfeiture operates

at the discretion of the Board.

Section 21 of Article 542lm, provides in part that: "The

Board is hereby made the sole judge of forfeiture of aTcon-

tract under this Act, and anyone availing himself of the pro-

visions of this Act shall by so doing agree to abide by the

same ..." (Emphasis supplied) No specific time limit is

placed upon the Board within which it can make. such determin-

ation.

Section 17 of Article 5421m provides in part that 'I...in any

individual case, the Board may, for good cause, postpone from

time to time, upon such terms as the Board may deem proper, the

payment of the whole or any part of any installment of the

selling price or interest thereon." No specific time limitation

is placed upon the Board within which it can make such decision

to postpone such payment. When forfeitures are intended to

take place automatically, the time should be definitely fixed.

25 Tex.Jur.2d 517, Sec. 17, Forfeitures.

It would therefore appear that upon sufficient showing to the

Board that in equity and good conscience the contract should

not be finally forfeited, the Board, being the "sole judge of

forfeiture", and not having lost administrative jurisdiction

of the forfeiture action, may by majority vote determine that

there has in fact been no forfeiture and annul its purported

forfeiture, thus in effect reinstating the contract. It would

further appear that for "good cause" the Board by majority vote

may postpone the due date of the delinquent payments, thus

rescinding the purported forfeiture and reinstating the con-

tract. There being no specific limitation of time within which

the Board may take either such action, and any subsequent bidder

having agreed to "abide by the same", it is the opinion of

this office that even though the Board has theretofore met and

ordered said lands to be advertised for resale, either of such

actions may be taken by the Board and the contract reinstated

at any time, at least until the Board has accepted a subsequent

bid for resale and the rights of third parties have vested.

-1518-

.

Hon. Jerry Sadler, page 5 (M-311 )

SUMMARY

The Commissionerod the General Land

Office, as Administrator of the Veterans'

Land Program, is without authority to

accept delinquent payments and reinstate

a purchase contract after the same has been

forfeited and the Veterans Land Board shall

have met and ordered the lands to be ad-

vertised for resale: but the Veterans' Land

Board may do so at any time, at least until it

has acceoted the bid of a subsecuent DUrChaSer

and the kghts of third parties-have tested.

2-@ s very truly,

&&,&&. &pzdr..~,.,

RA ORDC.MARTIN

rney General of Texas

Prepared by Harold G. Kennedy u

Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:

OPINION COMMITTEE

Kerns Taylor, Chairman

Jerry Roberts

David Longoria

Fielding Early

Bob Flowers

A. J. CARUBBI, JR.

Executive Assistant

- 1519 -

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.