Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-101

Opinion No. 101 Counties-Ta.'"ation-InsUl-ance, Right of County to Proceeds whel'e Count.y Holds Tax Cel-tificate, H]i}LD: A county has no interest in the insurance contract between the owner of the property and tbe insur- ance company, even tbough the prop- erty was sold for taxes and the county expected to take a tax deed thereto. March 6, 1933. You ha \-e requested my opinion on the following: "l\Hldred Frances Ammer was the title owner and had $1,000 insurance 011 the ·buildings located 011 land that has been sold by the county for taxes alJ(1 to which you expected to take tax deed on March 3, 1933. The own- er dul'ing .the 13 years had tbe place rented and received the rents. Does the county of Golden Valley and State of Montana ha\'e any chance to n.~ co\-et' this insurance by action, or oth- er\vise:" In such a case botb tbe county and ~Irs. Ammer bad an insurable interest in the huildings and improvements and the contract of insurance witb either the county or Mrs. Ammer would have been a personal contract between tbe insurance company and the insured with which no one else not a party to such conti'act would bave anytbing to do directly. The funds for insurance after they came into the bands of Mrs. Ammer migbt be levied upon under garnisbment or execution in any action in which sbe was found to be liable. The following decisions are in point in your ease. "An interest, to be insur- able, does not depend necessarily upon the ownership of tbe property. It may be a sIlCCial or limited interest, discon- nected from any title, lien, or posses- sion." German Ins. Co. v. Hyman, 52 ::\. W. 401. "In sucb cases tbe contract is personal, and does not run with the title to tbe property." Carpenter v. In- surance Co., 16 Pet. 495, 10 L. Ed. 10+l: Chrysler Sales Corp. v. Spencer, 9 Fed. (2) 679. These two cases are rather outstand- ing on the point and follow the general rule, and in barmony therewitb this of- fice is of the opinion that the countv has no interest wbateyer in the insu;- ance contract in the case whicb you ba \'e submitted. As stated before, howC\'er, if 1\Irs. Ammer has any other property s1Ibject to execution she would be liable for the taxes the same as any othcr delinquent taxpayer, and furthermore tbe insur- ance money migbt be where it could be got at by garnishment. Opinion No, 102 Joint School Boards - Fonnation - Powers-Contracts - Count,y Superin- tendent-Voting, HELD: Where a superintendent is Iii red in joint session between a dis- trict board and high school hoard, eith- er hoard can decide not to re-hire bim without the agreement of the otber, A joint board cannot be formed where a majority of one board opposes it. Although a supelintendent bas held his position for five years, tbe board lllllY discharge him without !,'ixing reasons for its action. A county superintendent has no right to yote at a meeting of the county higb ~('hool board excepting in cases where there is a tie wbicb continues for three successive ballots. Marcb 7, 1933. I ba \'e your letter asking a number of questions concerning the formation and operation of the joint board pro- yided for hy Sections 58, 59, 60 and 61 of Chapter 148 Session Laws of 1931. '.rhis board is purely statutory, As stated in Section 58, "they may form