Aldrich v. Dallas County, 13362.

• Decision Date: 11 December 1942
• Docket Number: No. 13362.,13362.
• Citation: 167 S.W.2d 560
• Parties: ALDRICH v. DALLAS COUNTY.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

167 S.W.2d 560

ALDRICH v. DALLAS COUNTY.

No. 13362.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

December 11, 1942.

Appeal from District Court, Dallas County; John A. Rawlins, Judge.

Action by H. E. Aldrich, doing business as the Tax Record Company against Dallas County, to recover for services rendered. Judgment of dismissal, and plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

R. V. Nichols, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Dean Gauldin, Dist. Atty., and H. Pat Edwards and Warren S. Cook, Asst. Dist. Attys., all of Dallas, for appellee.

LOONEY, Justice.

H. E. Aldrich, doing business as The Tax Record Company, sued Dallas County to recover the reasonable value of services rendered at the request of defendant County, acting through its County Judge and Commissioners' Court, as hereinafter set out in detail. Plaintiff having declined to amend after the court sustained special exceptions to his petition, his suit was dismissed, from which this appeal was prosecuted.

In order to review the action of the court, it will be necessary to examine plaintiff's allegations in detail. There is attached to the petition Exhibit 1, being a book containing approximately 145 pages, sent up with the transcript by order of court, which is repeatedly referred to by plaintiff as to details, all of which reveals that, during the years 1938, '39 and '40, the Commissioners' Court of Dallas County had under consideration an undertaking to revalue the entire taxable property, both real and personal, of Dallas County, and to prepare a complete delinquent tax record to facilitate the rendition of property for taxation, and the collection of both current and delinquent taxes. It seems that the estimated cost of the project was $346,395, of which $267,569 was to be supplied by the U. S. Government through its Works Progress Administration, and $67,500 by Dallas County. The contract alleged by plaintiff, under which he seeks to recover, was not evidenced by an order of the Commissioners' Court, but, admittedly, was a verbal agreement between him, the County Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court, and there is no allegation that either the contract for services to be performed by plaintiff, or the W.P.A. project undertaken, was ever approved either by the Comptroller or the Attorney General, or that the Auditor of the County certified there existed ample budget provisions for the payment of said items, or that funds were at that time, or would be, on hand to pay the obligations when due.

Plaintiff alleged that he had evolved a tax record system, adapted for installation and use by taxing authorities of various political subdivisions, known as a Standardized Assessment and Delinquent Tax System of rural and urban real property and improvements thereon; that, as a result of the findings made by the Texas state-wide tax survey, completed in 1938, it was discovered that properties located in Dallas County, valued at approximately $50,000,000, were not listed on the tax rolls of the County, thus escaped taxation; that other properties were doubly assessed; many owners of properties were unknown; many properties listed failed to show the improvements thereon; that existing records were duplicated and not permanent, and that proper records were not being kept in regard to delinquent taxes.

He alleged further that the Federal agency known as the Works Progress Administration, created by Congress (referred to herein as W.P.A.), was authorized, upon proper application, to allocate funds to political subdivisions, to be used for making detailed tax surveys for the installation of Standardized Assessment and Delinquent Tax Record Systems; that plaintiff sought to and did interest defendant County, through its County Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court, in sponsoring a tax survey and the installation of plaintiff's Standardized Assessment and Delinquent Tax Record System, under the project proposal, and subject to the requirements and specifications of the W.P.A. He alleged that, as a prerequisite to such financial assistance by W.P.A., the defendant County, as sponsor, was required to submit an application for funds, to which must be attached a complete manual of procedure, reflecting the immediate objects to be served, scope of the project, source of data and results desired, and further the County must agree to provide a technical supervisor for the installation of such survey and tax system; that during the month of October, 1939, plaintiff orally proposed to the County, through its Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court, that he be engaged to cooperate with the County in obtaining financial assistance from W.P.A. and assist in the preparation of the necessary application therefor; that he also be employed by the County as its technical supervisor in the installation of said system, and furnish the necessary material; that the purpose of the County, in undertaking the enterprise of having said system installed, was to correct the insufficiency of the record system then in use by the tax officers of the County and establish a permanent record that would show the separate valuation of lands from the improvements thereon, the true record owner of the properties, proper description of same, and all holders of liens against the same, as well as an abstract of the delinquent taxes, to the end that the rendition of property and the collection of taxes would be facilitated, and to provide a complete scientific valuation, cost schedule for each type of building, scientific land valuation maps, scientific depreciation schedule, thus furnishing the tax assessor and collector of the County an accurate description of all properties, improvements and additions thereon, replacements and cost thereof, and allowances for depreciation and obsolescence; all of which was designed to save time and facilitate the assessment and collection of current and delinquent taxes.

Plaintiff alleged that, after his oral proposal to the defendant County in the month of October, 1939, he had a series of conferences with the County Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court of the County, ascertaining their objectives and, at the same time, attempted to correlate such objectives with the requirements of the W.P.A. for financial assistance; that such conferences continued until April 11, 1940, when he was expressly requested orally by the County Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court to proceed with such survey as was necessary to obtain data and information prerequisite to an application to W.P.A., for financial assistance; that in accordance with said oral request, plaintiff began immediately to obtain the necessary information, it being also understood that he would assist in preparing the application; and that, if funds were allocated by W.P.A. for such enterprise, plaintiff would be employed by the County as technical supervisor for such project. Plaintiff alleged that he immediately began the work, expended much time and several thousand dollars in ascertaining the necessary data, held a number of conferences in regard to the matter with the County Judge and members of the Commissioners' Court during May, June, September and October, 1940; by which time, he had completed enough of the work to give defendant County a fairly accurate estimate of the cost of making the survey and the installation of said record tax system; that upon submission of such facts to the defendant County, the Commissioners' Court, at a regular session held on December 11, 1940, unanimously adopted an order, directing the County Judge and County Auditor to have prepared a formal request to the Works Progress Administration, and execute their Project Proposal, Form 301, calling for a complete tax survey and installation of a Standardized Assessment and Delinquent Tax System of all rural and urban real property and improvements in Dallas County.

Pursuant to said order, Project Proposal, Form 301, directed to W.P.A., was duly executed by defendant County, through its County Judge, County Auditor and County Assessor and Collector of Taxes, on December 31, 1940, requesting the W.P.A. to grant $267,596 for such project, and agreeing, as sponsor, to defray the expenses of such project to the extent of...