delinquent tax suit | taxing units entities | upaid taxes penalties and interest | Texas Property Tax Code | evidence in property tax suit |
certified copy of tax records | delinquency notice | Ad valorem tax protest | property tax assessment | appraisal appeal | dispute |  
excessive valuation | unequal appraisal | appeals process | administrative remedies |
exhaustion doctrine | deadlines | notice | property
owner standing to bring judicial review suit under Texas Property Tax Code | rule 28 substitution of true name |

Chapter 41 of the Tax Code provides that property owners are entitled to protest the determination of
the appraised value of the property and the unequal appraisal of the property before the county’s
appraisal review board.
 TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 41.41(a)(1)–(2) (Vernon 2008); Nevada Gold & Silver, Inc. v.
Andrews Indep. Sch. Dist., 225 S.W.3d 68, 75 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005, no pet.).  If the property owner meets certain
procedural requirements, the owner is entitled to a hearing on its protest before the appraisal review board.  TEX. TAX
CODE ANN. § 41.44(a) (Vernon 2008); Appraisal Review Bd. of Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist. v. Spencer Square Ltd.,
252 S.W.3d 842, 845 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.).  At the hearing, the appraisal district has the
burden of establishing the value of the property by a preponderance of the evidence, and, if it does not, the board must
determine the protest in favor of the owner.  TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 41.43(a) (Vernon 2008).  The purpose of the
hearing is to give both the appraisal district and the property owner an opportunity to appear before the board and to
present evidence and arguments regarding the parties’ relative opinions on the property’s value.  See id.; see also id.
§ 41.45(b) (Vernon Supp. 2010) (“The property owner initiating the protest is entitled to an opportunity to appear to offer
evidence or argument.”); id. § 41.66(b) (Vernon 2008) (“Each party to a hearing is entitled to offer evidence . . . .”); id. §
41.67 (Vernon 2008) (discussing types of evidence that may be presented at hearing).
       Generally, property owners have a statutory right to file a suit for judicial review of an appraisal review board’s
order determining the property owner’s protest.  TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 42.01(a)(1)(A) (Vernon 2008) (“A property
owner is entitled to appeal an order of the appraisal review board determining a protest by the property owner . . . .”).

Tax Code section 1.111(e), however, provides that:
(e)      An agreement between a property owner or the owner’s agent and the chief appraiser is final if the agreement
relates to a matter:
(1)     which may be protested to the appraisal review board or on which a protest has been filed but not determined by
the board[.]
Id. § 1.111(e)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2010).  Section 1.111(e) agreements are “final and not subject to protest by the
property owner or subject to a property owner’s statutory suit for judicial review under chapter 42.”  MHCB (USA)
Leasing & Fin. Corp. v. Galveston Cent. Appraisal Dist., 249 S.W.3d 68, 84 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, pet.
denied).  These agreements are final even without approval or adoption by the appraisal review board.  Id. at 83; see
also TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 41.01(b) (Vernon 2008) (“The [appraisal review] board may not review or reject an
agreement between a property owner or the owner’s agent and the chief appraiser under section 1.111(e).”); Sondock
v. Harris Cnty. Appraisal Dist., 231 S.W.3d 65, 69 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, no pet.) (“Because the
agreement related to [a matter in which a protest had been filed but not determined by the Board], at the moment it
was reached, it became final.”).

As a general rule, only a property owner may protest tax liability before an appraisal-review board and seek judicial
review in court.  Tourneau Houston, Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal Dist., 24 S.W.3d 907, 909 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] 2000, no pet.)  Section 42.21(a) of the Property Tax Code requires a party who appeals as provided by Chapter
42 of the Property Tax Code to timely file a petition for review with the district court.  Failure to timely file a petition bars
any appeal under the chapter.  Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 42.21(a) (Vernon Supp. 2009).  Section 42.01 of the Tax Code
specifies that a property owner is entitled to appeal an order of the appraisal review board determining a protest by the
property owner as provided by sections 41.41 et seq. of the Property Tax Code.  Id. § 42.01(1)(A).  Alternatively, a
property owner may designate a lessee or an agent to act on the property owner’s behalf for any purpose under the
Property Tax Code, including filing a tax protest.  Id. §§ 1.111 (Vernon 2008) (authorizing a designated lessee or agent
to act for a property owner), 41.413(b) (Vernon 2008) (authorizing a lessee to protest for the property owner in certain
circumstances).

Section 42.21(e) specifies that only petitions that are “timely filed under Subsection (a) or amended under Subsection
(c)” may later be amended to correct or change a party’s name.[3]  See Tex. Tax Code Ann.  42.21(e)(1).  To seek
judicial review under Subsection (a), the plaintiff must be a “party who appeals as provided by [Chapter 42],” meaning
the plaintiff must be the property owner, a properly designated agent, or a lessee.  Id. § 42.21(a).  

Appeals from Tax Delinquency Suits and Ad Valorem Property Tax
Litigation - Houston Appellate Decisions
|
Also see ---> HCAD Property Tax Valuation / Appraisal Appeals

Lambertz v. Robinson (HCAD) (Tex.App.- Houston [14th.] Mar. 25, 2010)(per curiam)
(
tax protest appeal and due process, administrative remedies exclusive remedy)
AFFIRMED: Per Curiam      
Before Justices Brock Yates, Seymore and Brown   
14-09-00650-CV Robert W. Lambertz v. Jim Robinson and Oliver Esch    
Appeal from 333rd District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Joseph ("Tad") Halbach   

RRB Land Investmenst Ltd v. HCAD (Tex.App. - Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 4, 2010)(per curiam)
(
only owner has standing to challenge property tax appraisal, application of Texas Rule of Civil
Procedure 28 re substitution of true name for common name, dba)   
Cypresswood attempted to substitute its “true name” RRB by filing an amended original petition and arguing Rule 28
permitted the substitution.  For a party to take advantage of Rule 28 and sue in its common name, there must be a
showing that the named entity is in fact doing business under that common name.  Seidler v. Morgan, 277 S.W.3d
549, 553 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2009, pet. denied).  Whether an entity does business under an assumed or common
name is a question of fact for the trial court.  Sixth RMA Partners, L.P. a/k/a RMA Partners, L.P. v. Sibley, 111 S.W.3d 46,
52 (Tex. 2003).  
 
AFFIRMED: Per Curiam   
Before Justices Brock Yates, Seymore and Brown    
14-09-00317-CV  RRB Land Investments Ltd., aka Cypresswood Venture I Ltd and Cypresswood
Venture I Ltd, as the Property Owners v.
Harris County Appraisal District    
Appeal from 269th District Court of Harris County  

Seiflein v. City of Houston (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 4, 2010)(Higley)
(
ad valorem tax delinquency suit judgment affirmed)(evidence to prove delinquent taxes owed by
property owner in tax suit, burden-shifting, requirement to rebut prima facie case)
Once the taxing authorities met their burden to show that taxes were due and delinquent, the burden shifted to the tax
payer to introduce competent evidence to invalidate the assessments. Defendant property owner did not present any
evidence and thus failed to rebut the evidentiary presumption.
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Higley     
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Alcala and Higley
01-09-00361-CV  Phil Seiflein v. City of Houston    
Appeal from 164th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:  
Hon Alexandra Smoots-Hogan

SWP Remic Properties II LP  v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 7, 2010) (Sullivan)(trial
court’s order granting
Harris County Appraisal District’s (“HCAD”) plea to the jurisdiction affirmed; ad
valorem tax protest appeal judicial review suit not brought by owner of property. Rule 28 inapplicable)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by
Justice Sullivan         
14-08-00425-CV  SWP Remic Properties II LP as the Property Owners and the Property Owners v.
Harris County Appraisal District    
Appeal from 55th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Jeff Shadwick   

Gillum v. Harris County (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 22, 2009)(Higley)
(
ad valorem property tax case, tax suit, appeal from tax master to referring court, de novo trial)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Higley    
Before Justices Jennings, Higley and Sharp)
01-08-00551-CV   Jennifer Gillum v. Harris County   
Appeal from 157th District Court of Harris County  
Trial Court Judge:
Hon. Randy Wilson

Plaza At 610 Commons Inc v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 1, 2009)(Higley)
(
ad valorem property tax appeal, plea to the jurisdiction, no substitution of different owner under Rule
28 governing dba-s, suit in common names) (property tax protest, appeal administrative remedies and
judicial review suit, plea to the jurisdiction, no substitution of different entity as owner under Rule 28
governing dbas, common names, actual property owner did not bring protest and suit within the filing
deadline, attempted amendment to add owner untimely)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Higley   
Before Justices Jennings, Higley and Sharp   
01-08-00690-CV  Plaza At 610 Commons Inc. v. Harris County Appraisal District   
Appeal from 334th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Hon Sharon McCally

HCAD v. Nunu (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 27, 2009)(Seymore)(HCAD appeal,
homestead exemption reduced pro rata for business use of home as law office)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by
Justice Seymore   
Before Justices Seymore, Brown and Sullivan  
14-08-00528-CV   Harris County Appraisal District and Harris County Appraisal Review Board
v. Paul E. Nunu  Appeal from 151st District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Caroline Elizabeth Baker

Goffney v. HISD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 30, 2009)(Hanks)
(
delinquent property tax suit, standing to appeal, preservation of error re: constitutional challenge,
due process challenge, inadequate briefing results in waiver of argument on appeal)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Hanks  
Before Justices Keyes, Hanks and Bland  
01-08-00063-CV Willie H. Goffney and Gladys R. Goffney v. Houston Independent School District   
Appeal from 165th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Hon. Elizabeth Ray

Expo Motorcars, LLC v. HCAD (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 23, 2009)(Jennings)
(tax protests suit,
constitutionality, due process, motor vehicle inventory value)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Jennings   
Before Justices Jennings, Keyes and Higley  
01-08-00473-CV  Expo Motorcars, LLC. v. Harris County Appraisal District, Harris County Appraisal
Review Board   Appeal from
270th District Court of Harris County

Loposer v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 21, 2009)(Yates) (tax appraisal appeal,
agreement on appraisal value of home precludes subsequent appeal)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by
Justice Brock Yates     
Before Justices Brock Yates, Guzman and Sullivan   
14-07-00956-CV Timothy C. & Leeann Loposer v. Harris County Appraisal District and The Appraisal
Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District   
Appeal from 80th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Lynn M Bradshaw-Hull  

BACM 2002 PBs Westpart Dr LP v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 21, 2009)(Frost)
(prior owner
did not have standing to bring ad valorem tax protests appeal, judicial review suit,
assumed name theory as basis for substitution of correct party rejected, no standing - no subject
matter jurisdiction).  
AFFIRMED: Opinion by
Justice Frost     
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Frost   
14-08-00493-CV BACM 2002 PB2 Westpark Dr LP, Houston Parkwest Place Ltd, as the Property
Owners and the Property Owners v.
Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal Review Board
of Harris County Appraisal District   Appeal from 11th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court
Judge: Mark Davidson  

Amidei v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 16, 2009)(Higley)
(
HCAD property tax appeals, property tax appraisal protests, excessive tax appraisal claim rejected,
admissibility of evidence)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Higley    
Before Justices Jennings, Alcala and Higley  
01-08-00833-CV  Maurice Amidei and Sara Amidei v. Harris County Appraisal District, Appraisal
Review Board of Harris County  
Appeal from 125th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:  
Hon. John Coselli

Briggs Equipment Trust v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jun. 4, 2009)(Radack)
(
property tax litigation, valuation of equipment for property tax purposes, subsequent sales)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Chief Justice Radack  
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Alcala and Higley
01-08-00190-CV Briggs Equipment Trust v. Harris County Appraisal District
Appeal from
280th District Court of Harris County

Hays v. Butler (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] May 21, 2009)(Alcala)
(
property tax litigation, validity of tax judgment void judgment, foreclosure, real estate litigation, title
dispute)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Alcala  
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Alcala and Hanks
01-08-00197-CV Lloyd Hays and Shelia Manus v. J. Dude Butler and Karen B. Butler
Appeal from 405th District Court of Galveston County
Trial Court Judge: Hon Wayne Mallia  

Starflight 50, LLC v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Mar. 26, 2009)(Bland)
(
ad valorem tax protest, interstate allocation, temporary relocation)
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Bland   
Before Justices Jennings, Hanks and Bland
01-08-00234-CV Starflight 50, LLC v. Harris County Appraisal District and Harris County Appraisal
Review Board   
Appeal from 125th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Hon. John Coselli  

Dissenting Opinion by Justice Jennings   
Royal I.S.D. v. Ragsdale, Jr. (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Nov. 25, 2008)(Hedges)
(
tax suit, excess proceeds form foreclosure sale, limitations, appellate jurisdiction, interlocutory, final
orders) Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brown and Boyce
14-07-00181-CV  Royal Independent School District v. John W. Ragsdale, Jr., as Trustee for the
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Estate of Mortgage Funding Network, Inc.
Appeal from 9th District Court of Waller County

The Appraisal Review Board of HCAD v. O'Connor & Associates (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Aug.
19, 2008)(Yates) (
property tax appeal, failure to exhaust their administrative remedies before filing
suit requires jurisdictional dismissal)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by
Justice Leslie Brock Yates  
Before Justices Brock Yates, Anderson and Brown
14-07-00354-CV The Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District, and Robert
Cunningham, former Chairman v. O'Connor & Associates, Wolverine Crosby LP, E Pointe Properties I
Ltd, Baker-Orr Joint Venture, and J. Frederick Welling
Appeal from 127th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court
Judge: Sharolyn P. Wood

Public, Inc. v. County of Galveston 264 S.W.3d 338 (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] July 10, 2008)
(Anderson) (taxing of non-profits)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Anderson  
Before Justices Brock Yates, Anderson and Brown
14-07-00458-CV   Public, Inc. v. County of Galveston and City of Galveston
Appeal from 212th District Court of Galveston County
Trial court judge:
Judge Susan Criss

Verm v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st. Dist.] July 1, 2008)(Yates)
(
property tax appeal, no violation of due process)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by Justice Brock Yates  
Before Justices Brock Yates, Guzman and Brown
14-06-01046-CV Ray A Verm & Jane Verm, as the Property Owners and the Property Owners v.
Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District
Appeal from 190th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court
Judge: Jennifer Elrod Walker  
We cannot imagine how the [property owners] were deprived of due process when they were given the opportunity to
present their arguments to a legal panel and they reached an agreement fully satisfying their stated contentions.  
Sondock, 231 S.W.3d at 70.  The Verms presented their protest to the panel, were provided a hearing before the panel
on the matter, and raised no further complaints after the HCAD representative concurred with their proposed property
valuation.  Accordingly, we find the Verms were afforded due process.  See id.; see also Hartman, 251 S.W.3d at 601
(holding property owners who had opportunity to be heard before appraisal review board were provided due process);
BPAC Tex., LP, 2004 WL 2422033, at *3 (holding that when property owner chose to reach agreement with HCAD, it
was not deprived of its statutory due process right to appeal appraisal board's order because agreement, not order,
determined outcome). We affirm the trial court's judgment.

HCAD v. Spencer Square Ltd, 252 S.W.3d 842(Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 29, 2008)
(Seymore) (property tax appeal, procedural issues, second hearing sought by mandamus, no
jurisdiction)
REVERSED AND RENDERED: Opinion by Justice Seymore  
Before Justices Fowler, Frost and Seymore
14-07-00567-CV The Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District v. Spencer Square
Ltd as the Property Owners and the Property Owners
Appeal from 334th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Sharon McCally  

Mann v. HCAD (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 17, 2008)(Radack)
(tax appeal, unequally and excessively appraised,
SJ for taxing authorities affirmed, no due process
violation)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Chief Justice Radack  
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Jennings and Bland
01-07-00436-CV Paul M. Mann and Carolyn S. Mann v. Harris County Appraisal District and the
Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District
Appeal from 280th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Hon. Tony Lindsay

HCAD v. Sigmor Corp. (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 3, 2008)(Higley)
(property tax litigation, taxing gas stations)
REVERSE TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT AND RENDER JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Higley
Before Justices Nuchia, Hanks and Higley
01-06-00740-CV Harris County Appraisal District v. Sigmor Corporation, et al
Appeal from 11th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge:
Hon. Mark Davidson   

Previous owner of property lacked standing to challenge HCAD's appraisal and to file suit
for judicial review of board's decision in property tax protest; new owner's suit barred for
failure to comply with exhaustion-of-remedies requirement, which is jurisdictional under
Texas Supreme Court precedent

Koll Bren Fund VI LP v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 28, 2008) (Radack)
(property tax protest, tax appeal,
suit for judicial review, standing, exhaustion of administrative
remedies under the Property Tax Code)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Chief Justice Radack
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Jennings and Bland
01-07-00321-CV Koll Bren Fund VI LP and Hartman 3100 Weslayan Acquisitions, LP v. Harris County
Appraisal District and The Appraisal Review Board of Harris County Appraisal District
Appeal from 113th District Court of Harris County (
Judge Hon. Patricia Hancock)

2007 Texas Property Tax Cases

HCAD v. CCH Parkhearterwood LTD (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 25, 2007)(per curiam)(tax appraisal contest
appeal, voluntary dismissal)
DISMISSED: Per Curiam
Before Justices Frost, Seymore and Guzman
14-05-01266-CV Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal review Board of Harris County Appraisal District v.
CCH Parkhearterwood Ltd., as The Property Owners and the Property Owners
Appeal from 55th District Court of Harris County (
Hon. Jeff Brown)

Ex Parte Waller ISD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist] Dec. 21, 2007)(Keyes)
(bond validation suit, challenge to school bonds by taxpayer)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Keyes
01-07-00900-CV Ex Parte Waller Independent School District
Appeal from 155th District Court of Austin County (Hon. Dan R. Beck)
In this accelerated bond validation suit,  appellant, DeWayne Charleston, appeals the judgment of the trial court that
granted a final judgment in favor of appellee, Waller Independent School District (“WISD”) and the orders of the trial
court requiring him to post security and dismissing him from the proceedings. In five issues on appeal, Charleston
argues that (1) the bond election and sale of the bonds should be voided; (2) the trial court lacked authority to enjoin
proceedings in federal court; (3) the trial court erred by ordering the Attorney General to approve the bonds; (4) the trial
court erred in declaring that WISD was entitled to state debt-relief funds; and (5) the trial court should not have
required Charleston to post bond. We affirm the trial court’s October 2, 2007 order which required Charleston to post a
security bond of $715,000 to continue as a participant in this lawsuit. We likewise affirm the trial court’s October 13,
2007 order which dismissed Charleston from the lawsuit. We dismiss the portion of the appeal that relates to
Charleston’s remaining claims for want of jurisdiction.

HCAD v. CCH Parkhearterwood LTD (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 25, 2007)(per curiam)
tax appraisal contest appeal, voluntary dismissal)

Justices disagree on delinquent tax penalties and interest in tax suit
HISD v. Old Farms Owners Ass'n (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 26, 2007)(Higley)(tax suit, assessment of
penalties and interest where tax statement was not mailed to property owner or agent at correct address)(construction
of legislative amendments, savings clause)
REVERSE TRIAL CURT JUDGMENT AND REMAND CASE TO TC FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS:
Opinion by
Justice Higley
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Keyes and Higley
01-04-00538-CV Houston Independent School District, et al., v. Old Farms Owners Association, Inc., et al.,
Appeal from 270th District Court of Harris County (
Hon. Brent Gamble)
Dissenting Opinion by Justice Keyes in HISD v. Old Farms Owners Association (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Jul. 26,
2007)

County held immune to award of attorney's fees in tax dispute
Waller County, Texas v. Simmons (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 18, 2007)(Taft)
(
government entity law, tax suit, attorney's fees, sovereign immunity, interlocutory appeals)
REVERSE TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT AND REMAND CASE TO TC FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: Opinion by
Justice Taft
Before Justices Taft, Hanks and Higley
01-07-00180-CV Waller County, Texas v. Oscar Simmons a/k/a Oscar C. Simmons
Appeal from 9th District Court of Waller County (Hon. Frederick Edwards)

MHCB v. Galveston Dentral Appraisal District (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Sep. 20, 2007)(Taft)
(property tax appraisal, refinery, plea juris, declaratory judgment)
REVERSE TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT AND REMAND CASE TO TC FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS:
Opinion by Justice Taft
Before Justices Taft, Keyes and Hanks
01-06-00529-CV MHCB (USA) Leasing and Finance Corporation and Valero Refining-Texas, L.P. v. Galveston Central
Appraisal District; Galveston Central Appraisal Review Board
Appeal from 405th District Court of Galveston County  (Hon. Wayne J. Mallia)
In these interlocutory appeals, MHCB (USA) Leasing and Finance Corp. ("MHCB") and Valero Refining-Texas, L.P.
("Valero Refining") (together, "the protesting parties"), who were plaintiffs below, and Galveston Central Appraisal
District ("the District") and Galveston Central Appraisal District Review Board ("the Board"), who were defendants
below, each appeal from the trial court's order granting in part and denying in part the District's and Board's joint plea
to the jurisdiction. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(a)(8) (Vernon Supp. 2006). We determine (1)
whether either or both of the protesting parties lacked standing to protest, and to seek judicial review of, the District's
and Board's complained-of actions and (2) whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the protesting parties'
requests for declaratory and injunctive relief when, at their core, those claims sought a determination of whether the
District had the statutory authority unilaterally to rescind an appraisal agreement between itself and the protesting
parties. We reverse the order and remand the cause for the trial court to render an order dismissing certain claims
asserted by MHCB and to deny the District's and Board's jurisdictional plea against certain of the claims of Valero
Refining.

Court Issues New Opinion on Rehearing in Excel v. Alief I.S.D.
Excel Auto and Truck Leasing LLP v. Alief ISD (Tex. Aug. 31, 2007)(op. on rehr'g by Hanks)(tax appeal)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by
Justice Hanks
Before Justices Taft, Keyes and Hanks
01-04-01185-CV Excel Auto and Truck Leasing, L.L.P. v. Alief Independent School District et al.
Appeal from 11th District Court of Harris County (The
Honorable Mark Davidson)
In this suit for delinquent ad valorem taxes, Excel Auto & Truck Leasing, L.L.P., appellant/taxpayer, complains of the
trial court's granting summary judgment in favor of the various taxing units, appellees. In three issues, Excel argues
that the trial court erred in (1) finding that it was the owner of the vehicles and liable for ad valorem taxes; (2) finding
that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact as to ownership of the vehicles; and (3) granting summary
judgment to Pasadena Independent School District ("ISD"), which filed no Motion for Summary Judgment, rendering
the judgment interlocutory. We affirm.
Prior opinion: Excel Auto v. Alief ISD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 19, 2007)(superseded opinion by Hanks)
(property tax suit)

Court Rejects Argument that Defendant in Delinquent Personal Property Tax Suit Did Not Own the Leased Vehicles
- Leases clearly stated that they may be terminated; contrary summary judgment evidence excluded
Excel Auto v. Alief ISD (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Apr. 19, 2007)(superseded opinion by Hanks)
(property tax appeal; judicial review, affirmative defense of nonownership of leased vehicles rejected)
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Hanks
Before Justices Taft, Keyes and Hanks
01-04-01185-CV Excel Auto and Truck Leasing, L.L.P. v. Alief Independent School District et al.
Appeal from 11th District Court of Harris County  (Judge Mark Davidson)
AFFIRM TC JUDGMENT: Opinion by Justice Hanks
Before Justices Taft, Keyes and Hanks
01-04-01185-CV Excel Auto and Truck Leasing, L.L.P. v. Alief Independent School District et al.
Appeal from 11th District Court of Harris County  (Judge Mark Davidson)

Hartman v. Harris County Appr. Dist., 251 S.W.3d 595 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, pet. denied)

Property Tax Appeal Fails
Sondock v. Harris County Appraisal Dist., 231 S.W.3d 65 (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, no
pet.)
Sondock v. HCAD (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] May 31, 2007)(Hedges)
(property tax, HCAD appeal, unequal assessment)
AFFIRMED: Opinion by
Chief Justice Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Hudson and Guzman
14-06-00676-CV Deborah S. Sondock, as the Property Owners and the Property Owners v. Harris
County Appraisal District
Appeal from 125th District Court of Harris County (Hon. John A. Coselli)

In this case, the Sondocks filed a protest and were given an opportunity to present their contentions before the Board.  
During that protest hearing, HCAD stated that it agreed with the Sondocks' opinion regarding the value of the property
and the Sondocks offered no further complaints following HCAD's stated accord.  We cannot imagine how the
Sondocks were deprived of due process when they were given the opportunity to present their arguments to a legal
panel and they reached an agreement fully satisfying their stated contentions.  As a result, we find that the Sondocks'
agreement with HCAD did not violate their due process rights by precluding them from appealing the appraisal issue.  
We hold that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of HCAD.

We note the close similarity between our facts and those that came before our sister court in BPAC Texas, LP as the
Property Owners and the Property Owners v. Harris County Appraisal District and the Harris County Appraisal Review
Board,  No. 01-03-01238-CV, 2004 WL 2422033 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] October 28, 2004, no pet.) (mem. op.).  
In BPAC, the appellants (BPAC), owners of the property at issue in that case, filed a protest from the valuation of their
property after the property was appraised by HCAD (same entity involved in this case) for purposes of assessing
property taxes.  Id. at *1.  At the protest hearing, which was also before the Harris County Appraisal Review Board,
HCAD's representative stated that HCAD had lowered its appraised value of the property.  BPAC's representative was
then asked if the revised value was "agreeable" to BPAC, to which he replied it was.  The hearing then ended, and the
Board issued an order that appears to contain the exact same boilerplate language as the order issued in this case
regarding the property owner=s right to appeal the Board=s decision to a district court.  BPAC subsequently filed suit
against HCAD and the Board in district court regarding the matter, but the trial court granted the taxing authorities=
motion for summary judgment.  Id.  After analyzing BPAC=s complaints regarding the district court=s granting of
summary judgment, the First Court of Appeals held, pursuant to Section 1.111(e), that the parties reached an
agreement during the protest hearing, and because the protest had not yet been determined by the Board, the
agreement was final, thereby precluding BPAC's right to appeal.  Id. at *2-3.  The Court held that any subsequent
actions by the Board had no effect on the finality of that agreement.  Id. at *3.  The Court also found that BPAC's due
process rights were not violated by this preclusion, as BPAC Awas given an opportunity to present and argue the
grounds of its protest" and that "instead of pursuing its protest, BPAC chose to reach an agreement."  Id. at *3.  As a
result, the court found that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the taxing authorities.  Id.
at *4.  We find the court's analysis in deciding that case thoroughly instructive to the remarkably similar facts at hand.  
We overrule the Sondocks' sole issue.  We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Sheriff Sale of House Not Undone
Mark McCoy v. Rogers (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] May 31, 2007)(Radack)
[suit to set aside constable sale deed, notice issue]
AFFIRM TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT: Opinion by Chief Justice Radack
Before Chief Justice Radack, Justices Keyes and Higley
01-06-00240-CV Mark McCoy v. Renee Rogers and Timothy Rogers
Appeal from 165th District Court of Harris County (Hon. Elizabeth Ray)
Appellant, Mark McCoy, filed this action to set aside a deed conveyed pursuant to an execution sale of real property that
he previously owned. McCoy brings this appeal to challenge the summary judgment rendered in favor of appellees,
Renee Rogers and Timothy Rogers, who purchased the property at the sale. McCoy presents a broad issue
contending that the trial court erred by rendering summary judgment. (1) In two additional issues, McCoy contends that
the sheriff's execution sale should be set aside (1) because of lack of compliance with the notice provisions of rules
637 and 647 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, (2) because he was not notified of the sale at his home address, and (3)
because the Rogerses purchased the property at half its fair market value. We affirm.

Tax Protester must exhaust available administrative remedy before filing suit for judicial review
HCAD v. Blue Flash Express, LLC (Tex.App.- Houston [ 1st Dist.] May 10, 2007)(Taft)
[tax appeal,
suit for judicial review, exhaustion of administrative remedies, due process, notice]
REVERSE TC JUDGMENT AND REMAND CASE TO TC FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: Opinion by Justice Taft
Before Justices Taft, Alcala and Hanks
01-06-00783-CV The Harris County Appraisal District and the Harris County Appraisal Review Board v. Blue Flash
Express, LLC, City of La Porte and La Porte Independent School District, and San Jacinto Community College District
Appeal from 234th District Court of Harris County  (
Judge Reece Rondon)

HCAD v. CCH Parkhearterwood LTD (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 25, 2007)(per curiam)
(tax appraisal contest appeal, voluntary dismissal)
DISMISSED: Per Curiam
Before Justices Frost, Seymore and Guzman
14-05-01266-CV Harris County Appraisal District and the Appraisal review Board of Harris County Appraisal District v.
CCH Parkhearterwood Ltd., as The Property Owners and the Property Owners
Appeal from 55th District Court of Harris County (
Judge Jeff Brown)


.
Property Tax Suits, Appraisal Appeals, and Related Case Law
from the Houston Courts of Appeals
Houston Opinions
TEXAS SUPREME COURT
DECISIONS ON
PROPERTY TAX ISSUES

Nueces County v. San Patricio
County, No. 07-0166 (Tex. Jan. 25,
2008)(per curiam) (governmental
immunity, county vs county dispute
over wrongfully collected property
taxes)

Cameron Appraisal District v. Rourk,
No. 04-0359 (Tex. Jun 2, 2006)(per
curiam opinion)(tax on travel trailers)
Old Harris County Civil Courthouse
Houston Opinions
Caselaw Web Pages by
Topic and Practice Area

FEEDBACK
Email Webmaster
Comment on this Pae

AVAILABLE SERVICES
(FOR ATTORNEYS)
(click links for email)
SEO AND SEARCH ENGINE MARKETING FOR
LAWYERS
LAW LINK LEVERAGE
CIVIL LITIGATION SUPPORT
RESEARCH AND PARALEGAL E-SERVICES

PRACTICE AREA AND
LEGAL TOPICS PAGES
ADR in Family Courts
Amicus Attorney & Ad Litem
Attorney's Fees Awards
Animal Law Cases
Arbitration Case Law
Arbitration Confirmation Suits
Attorney Fee Litigation
Attorney Malpractice
Auto & Truck Accident Cases
Bill of Review Cases
Car Wreck Litigation
Child Support Cases
City of Houston Lawsuits
Commercial Lease Disputes
Commercial Real Estate Litigation
Consumer Law DTPA Litigation
Condemnation Suits
Constitutional Challenges
Construction Law Disputes
Contractors & Subcontractors
Contempt of Court
Contempt of Court (family law)
CPS DFPS Termination Suits
Credit Card Debt Suits
Default Judgments
Default Judgment in Family Court
Discovery Disputes
Divorce & Child Custody Suits
Division of Marital Property
Election Law Litigation
Eminent Domain Cases
Employment Litigation
Ethics and Recusal
Expunction Cases
Family Law Cases
Family Mediation ADR
Firefighter Litigation
Foreclosure
Foreign Judgments
Forum and Venue
Fraudulent Transfers (UFTA)
Government Entities
Grandparent Rights
Harris County Litigation
HCAD Appraisal Appeals
Health Care Coverage
Healthcare Liability Lawsuits
Homeowners in Court
Insurance Litigation
International Family Law
Juvenile Court Cases
Labor and Employment
Legal Malpractice
Breach of Lease Cases
Landlord-Tenant Disputes
Medical Coverage Lit
Medical Malpractice Suits
Modification SAPCR Suits
Official Immunity Cases
Paternity Parentage Actions
Post-Divorce Actions
Premises Liability Suits
Premises Liability-Crimes
Probate Court Cases
Product Liability Lawsuits
Property Tax Appraisal Appeals
and Tax Suits
Public Employment
Real Estate Litigation
Restaurant Litigation
Restricted Appeals
Sanctions Caselaw
SAPCR Modification
School Law Cases
School Districts in Court
Slip and Fall PI Lawsuits
Sovereign Immunity
Temporary Injunctions
Texas Tort Claims Act
Worker's Comp Appeals
Workplace Safety Injury
Venue Challenges
TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION BLOG
HOUSTON CASE LAW BLOG
AUSTIN CASE LAW BLOG
1/18/10