Preview
No. _______________________
KERRY G BONNER & DEBRA S BONNER IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff
FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS
FORT BEND CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Defendant
PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION
KERRY G BONNER & DEBRA S BONNER, Plaintiff or Plaintiffs, file(s) this appeal (see Texas Property Tax
Code generally (“the Code”), including, but not limited to Chapters 23, 25, 41 and 42), and would show the
Court the following:
I. Discovery Plan
Plaintiff intends to conduct Level 2 discovery pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.3.
II. Parties
Plaintiff(s) are the party entitled to bring this appeal. Defendant is the FORT BEND CENTRAL
APPRAISAL DISTRICT (“CAD”). Defendant may be served with process on the Chief Appraiser of the CAD, or
Jordan Wise, at 2801 B F Terry Blvd, Rosenberg, Tx, 77471 or any other employee or officer of the CAD
authorized by law to accept service.
III. Jurisdiction and Venue
Jurisdiction for this appeal is set forth in the Code, including Chapters 42, 25, 41 and 23. Venue is
proper as the property is in the county, or venue is otherwise provided by statute.
IV. Conditions Precedent
All conditions precedent to a trial de novo before this Court have been performed or have occurred.
All administrative remedies have been exhausted and the Board’s decision is final and appealable.
V. Appeal
The subject of this appeal is described as follows and in the appraisal review board order and the
following documents included and incorporated herein:
Property Description: 7218 Foster Island Dr
Account Number(s): R64812
YEAR: 2023
Section 23.01, et seq. of the Texas Property Tax Code requires that the CAD appraise all taxable
property as of January 1. The CAD appraised the property described above (the “Property”). Plaintiff(s)
timely filed an administrative protest or motion for correction of the appraisal. No agreement as to an
appraised value was reached between Plaintiff(s) and the Chief Appraiser or the CAD. The Appraisal Review
Board issued an order determining the protest or failed to issue and order as required. The Appraisal Review
Board’s order or notice regarding the protest or motion is incorporated herein.
Plaintiff(s) are entitled to judicial review of the CAD’s appraisal pursuant to the Code, including Section
42.23 of the Code.
Plaintiff(s) are entitled to relief as provided by Section 42.24 of the Code, provisions of the Code in
general, and seek that relief.
Plaintiff(s)’ property is excessively appraised, and Plaintiff(s) are entitled to the relief as provided by
Section 42.25 of the Code and seek that relief.
Plaintiff(s)’ property is unequally appraised, and Plaintiff(s) are entitled to the relief as provided by
Section 42.26 of the Code and seek that relief.
Plaintiff(s) intend to comply with the provisions of Section 42.08 by timely paying all taxes due, or the
taxes due on the undisputed portion of the value of the property or providing a payment plan for the taxes
due. If unable to timely pay the lesser of required amounts, Plaintiff(s) hereby request relief from the Court.
A dismissal of this case would deprive Plaintiff(s) of access to the Court and due process of law.
The levying of a tax on Plaintiff(s)’ property based upon a valuation which is excessive and/or unequal,
or without consideration of a lawful exemption, is an unlawful levy, creates an illegal lien on Plaintiff(s)’
property, and violates the Texas Constitution.
Plaintiff(s) are entitled to recover attorney’s fees as provided by law. Plaintiff(s) sue for those fees
through trial and for any appeals of the case.
In accordance with Rule 47 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff(s) seek monetary relief of
$100,000 or less and non- monetary relief.
Plaintiff(s) object to the entry by the Court of an Order of referral of this case to alternative dispute
resolution.
Plaintiff(s) request that the Court enter an Order setting this matter for trial pursuant to the Rules and
at the earliest reasonable time.
VI. REQUEST FOR INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE
Plaintiff formally requests that the Appraisal District engage in settlement discussions through an
informal settlement conference, as soon as practical, pursuant to § 42.227 of the Texas Property Tax Code.
VII. PLAINTIFF(S)’ RULE 194 DISCLOSURES AND EXPERT DESIGNATION
Pursuant to Rule 194.2 Plaintiff(s) make the following Response to the Request for Disclosure served by
Defendant:
A. Correct names of the Parties to the Lawsuit
1) Plaintiff(s): See named Plaintiff(s)
2) Defendant(s): See named Defendant(s)
B. Potential Parties
Plaintiff is unaware of any potential parties to this lawsuit that are not already named herein.
C. Legal Theories and Factual Basis of Claims
Pursuant to Chapters 23, 25, 41 and/or 42 of the Texas Property Tax Code (the” Code”), Plaintiff(s)
are entitled to appeal the determination of an appraised, market or assessed value of their property by the
Appraisal District or the Appraisal Review Board of the Appraisal District (the “Board”), or any determination
by the Board regarding substantial error or corrections, application or denial of exemptions, or notice and
hearing; or seek an order from the Court regarding the value or a hearing. Plaintiff(s) are entitled to relief as
the property is unequally appraised, excessively appraised, and/or the CAD denied an applicable exemption
or improperly appraised the property.
The CAD failed to carry its burden at the administrative level. The Appraisal Review Board did not
provide Plaintiff(s) with a proper hearing on its protests. Plaintiff(s) by law are entitled to relief and recovery
of attorney’s fees and costs, through trial and any necessary appeal.
D. Amount and Calculation of Economic Damages
Plaintiff(s)’ causes of action are statutory in nature. Damages relate to the appraised value of the
property and attorney’s fees. Plaintiff(s)’ attorney’s fees are calculated by multiplying the number of
attorney hours reasonably spent prosecuting Plaintiff(s)’ by a reasonable hourly rate of $150.00 per hour to
$250.00 per hour. Anticipated fees are between $5,000 and $20,000 through trial, and $5,000 per level of
appeal.
E. Persons with Knowledge of Relevant Facts
The following persons have knowledge of relevant facts and are connected with the case as follows:
1. The Chief Appraiser of Defendant, members of the appraisal review board, and any
employees of Defendant with knowledge of the subject property.
c/o Defendant’s attorney
Connection to case: These persons are employed by Defendant and the Board and have
knowledge concerning Plaintiff’s property.
2. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland
FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
2200 North Loop West, Suite 333
Houston, Texas 77018
(281) 819-2719
Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding necessary, reasonable, and
customary attorneys’ fees for representation of Plaintiff in this case.
3. Plaintiff’s Representative
FRAZIER AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC
2200 North Loop West, Suite 333
Houston, Texas 77018
(281) 819-2719
Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding the subject property and the
appraised value and the proper appraised value for the subject property.
4. Ryan Lin, Michael Miller, Gregory S. Zachary, H.E. “Skip” Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan
Schwarzlose
PROPERTY ANALYTIX LLC
2855 Mangum, Suite 210
Houston, Texas 77092
(346) 571-7075
Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding the subject property and the
appraised value and the proper appraised value for the subject property.
F. Testifying Experts, Expert Designation
The following persons may testify as experts in this case:
1. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland
FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
2200 North Loop West, Suite 333
Houston, Texas 77018
(281) 819-2719
Subject Matter: Reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees General Substance of Opinions and
Brief Summary of Basis: The fees incurred by Plaintiff for the prosecution of this case are
necessary, reasonable, and customary. The reasonable attorneys’ fee for services rendered in
this matter is at least $150.00 to $250.00 per hour based upon the pleading, discovery, and trial
time. The fee through trial of this cause would be approximately $5,000 to $15,000. Appellate
fees would be at least $5,000 per level of appeal.
2. Patrick O’Connor
O’CONNOR & ASSOCIATES
2200 North Loop West
Houston, Texas 77018
(713) 686-9955
Subject Matter: Mr. O’Connor may testify concerning the proper appraised value for Plaintiff’s
property.
Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal, excessive appraisal, and
the hearing process to be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony
pursuant to the rules or were submitted at the protest hearing. See also information and
biography on the internet at www.poconnor.com and www.cutmytaxes.com.
3. Ryan Lin, Michael Miller, Gregory S. Zachary, H.E. “Skip” Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan
Schwarzlose
PROPERTY ANALYTIX LLC
2855 Mangum, Suite 210
Houston, Texas 77092
(346) 571-7075
Subject Matter: The experts will testify concerning the appraised value of Plaintiff’s property.
Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal and excessive appraisal will
be produced in written reports or is available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules. As
reported, the expert is of the opinion that the property is unequally and excessively appraised.
See also reports and evidence produced by Plaintiff at the administrative hearing. The expert has
knowledge concerning the description, condition, and operation of the subject property, as well
as the appraisal of the property by Defendant. The expert has knowledge concerning sales of
properties and appraised values of properties. The expert has knowledge concerning the Board
and Appraisal District’s methodologies in appraising property. The expert will also rely on
principles found in, and information from, USPAP and the Appraisal of Real Estate, Defendant’s
Commercial Appraisal Manual, Mass Appraisal Report, and other publications, opinions by the
appellate courts of the state of Texas, and legal opinions. For expert testimony, the expert is
hired by Plaintiff’s agent on an hourly or flat fee basis. Plaintiff’s expert may review, re-adopt,
refine or otherwise confirm prior opinions and reports. See Exxon Corp. vs. West Texas Gathering
Co., 868 S.W.2d 299 (Tex. 1993) and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The Chief Appraiser of Defendant, members of the appraisal review board, and any employees
of Defendant with knowledge of the subject property.
Subject Matter: The appraisal of Plaintiff’s Property.
Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Plaintiff anticipates that this information will be included
in Defendant’s discovery responses and/or other testimony provided in connection with this
lawsuit.
5. Any agent or employee of Plaintiff’s agent that dealt with the Property as part of the
administrative process.
O’CONNOR & ASSOCIATES
2200 North Loop West, Suite 200
Houston, Texas 77018
(713) 686-9595
Subject Matter: The proper appraised value for Plaintiff’s Property.
Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal, excessive appraisal, and
the hearing process to be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony
pursuant to the rules or were submitted at the protest hearing. See also information and
biography on the internet at www.poconnor.com and www.cutmytaxes.com.
6. Plaintiff’s Representative
FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
2200 North Loop West, Suite 333
Houston, Texas 77018
(281) 819-2719
Subject Matter: Opinion of proper appraised value of the property.
Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal and excessive appraisal to
be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules. Unless
otherwise disclosed this person will adopt the opinions provided by the other experts or as
disclosed in supplemental responses to interrogatories, and includes the opinions and
information submitted at the administrative hearing all of which are in the possession of
Defendant or will be provided in supplemental responses to request for disclosure.
G. Plaintiff’s Available Documents
Plaintiff may use the following documents, if applicable, regarding the subject property to support its claims
and defenses:
1) Financial Records;
2) Photos of subject property or comparable properties;
3) Records regarding Deferred Maintenance or Repair Estimates;
4) Purchase or Sales Documents and/or;
5) Plaintiff’s Expert Report(s).
Further, Plaintiff(s) may use to support its claims any and all documents related to the claims made in the
petition that the Plaintiff's property was excessively appraised, unequally appraised, and/or that the
Plaintiff(s) was improperly denied a proper hearing pursuant to the Texas Property Tax Code. They include
all documents produced by either party at any Appraisal Review Board hearing during the administrative
process as well as documents any documents identified or produced by the Defendant in discovery
responses.
H. Indemnity and Insurance Agreements
I. Discoverable Settlement Agreements
J. Discoverable Witness Statements
K. Medical Records Available
L. Medical Records Obtained
M. Responsible Party(s)
None known of, or inapplicable, other than parties to this appeal {I}.
VIII. DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE AND PRODUCTION
Pursuant to the Rules, Defendant is advised that Plaintiff(s) intend to use any or all the documents
produced by Plaintiff(s) or Defendant in response to Request for Disclosure, response to Request for
Production, or any supplements thereto, as evidence at the time of trial. Plaintiff(s) will also use photographs
of the subject property, comparable properties, and other properties as evidence at the time of trial.
IX. TRIAL PREPARATION ORDER OR PRE-TRIAL ORDER INFORMATION
Plaintiff(s) submit the information as set forth below as Plaintiff(s)’ Trial Preparation Order or for the
Pre-Trial Order if required by the Court.
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
Plaintiff(s) submit this as its Trial Preparation Order.
Party/Attorney List:
Plaintiff: See Plaintiff named in Petition.
Plaintiff’s Attorneys: Frazier and Associates, PLLC, Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland, 2200 North Loop
West, Suite 333, Houston, Texas 77018, (281) 819-2719.
Witness List:
Plaintiff(s) intends to call the following witnesses:
1. Michael Miller, Ryan Lin, Gregory S. Zachary, H. E.” Skip ”Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan
Schwarzlose
2. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland
3. Plaintiff(s)’ representative or agent
4. Any fact or expert witness designated by Plaintiff(s) or Defendant.
Draft Findings and Conclusions:
Proposed Findings of Fact
1) The appraised value of the subject property exceeds the median of the appraised values of a
of a reasonable number of comparable properties appropriately adjusted. The proper
appraised value for the tax year based upon unequal appraisal is $_______.
2) The appraised value of the subject property is excessive. The proper appraised value for the tax
year based upon excessive value if $________.
3) Plaintiff(s) necessary and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred for representation in this matter
are the sum of $_________ and necessary and reasonable attorney’s fees for appeal are the sum
of $________ for each level of appeal.
Proposed Conclusions of Law
1) The appraised value of the property at issue on the appraisal roll of the County Appraisal
District should be changed to reflect the appraised values set forth below and as referenced in
the findings as the lower value.
2) Plaintiff(s) are entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees in the amount of $________
through trial and the amount of $_______ for each level of appeal.
Year(s) Account # Appraised Value
Plaintiff’s Exhibit List:
(1) Resume of Plaintiff(s)’ testifying expert
(2) Expert Report on Equity
(3) Expert Report on Appraised Value
(3) Resume of Plaintiff(s)’ attorney
(4) Photographs of Subject, comparables, and information sheets
(5) Defendant’s evidence submitted at administrative hearing, and reports by Defendant’s expert
Deposition Excerpts or Edited Videotapes: None anticipated.
Motions in Limine: None anticipated.
Trial Scheduling: Plaintiff(s) estimate that the trial of this cause will take one day.
X. PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff(s) request that Defendant be cited to appear and answer, and that on final trial,
the Court render judgment (according to the Code):
1. Setting the appraised value and/or market value and/or assessed value of Plaintiff(s)’
property as of January 1 of the year(s) set forth in the petition below the final value determined by the ARB
and the CAD;
2. Compelling imposition of the proper assessed/appraised value of Plaintiff(s)’ property
according to its value due to unequal, excessive and/or incorrect appraisal, proper property characterization,
exemption, description of the property or other remedy provided by the Code;
3. If appropriate, granting of an ARB hearing, allowance of an exemption, or other relief to which
Plaintiff(s) are entitled based upon the administrative protest;
4. Monetary relief of $100,000 or less and non-monetary relief as plead; and
5. Awarding Plaintiff(s) costs incurred, reasonable attorney's fees through trial, attorney’s fees
on appeal, and all other relief to which Plaintiff(s) may be entitled.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
By: /s/ Clemetric R. Frazier
Clemetric R. Frazier
State Bar No. 24051621
By: /s/ Craig J. McClelland
Craig J. McClelland
State Bar. No. 24039044
2200 North Loop West, Suite 333
Houston, Texas 77018
(281) 819-2719
eservice@frazierlawpllc.com
www.frazierlawpllc.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF(S)
Preview
No. _______________________ KERRY G BONNER & DEBRA S BONNER IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS FORT BEND CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT JUDICIAL DISTRICT Defendant PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL PETITION KERRY G BONNER & DEBRA S BONNER, Plaintiff or Plaintiffs, file(s) this appeal (see Texas Property Tax Code generally (“the Code”), including, but not limited to Chapters 23, 25, 41 and 42), and would show the Court the following: I. Discovery Plan Plaintiff intends to conduct Level 2 discovery pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 190.3. II. Parties Plaintiff(s) are the party entitled to bring this appeal. Defendant is the FORT BEND CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT (“CAD”). Defendant may be served with process on the Chief Appraiser of the CAD, or Jordan Wise, at 2801 B F Terry Blvd, Rosenberg, Tx, 77471 or any other employee or officer of the CAD authorized by law to accept service. III. Jurisdiction and Venue Jurisdiction for this appeal is set forth in the Code, including Chapters 42, 25, 41 and 23. Venue is proper as the property is in the county, or venue is otherwise provided by statute. IV. Conditions Precedent All conditions precedent to a trial de novo before this Court have been performed or have occurred. All administrative remedies have been exhausted and the Board’s decision is final and appealable. V. Appeal The subject of this appeal is described as follows and in the appraisal review board order and the following documents included and incorporated herein: Property Description: 7218 Foster Island Dr Account Number(s): R64812 YEAR: 2023 Section 23.01, et seq. of the Texas Property Tax Code requires that the CAD appraise all taxable property as of January 1. The CAD appraised the property described above (the “Property”). Plaintiff(s) timely filed an administrative protest or motion for correction of the appraisal. No agreement as to an appraised value was reached between Plaintiff(s) and the Chief Appraiser or the CAD. The Appraisal Review Board issued an order determining the protest or failed to issue and order as required. The Appraisal Review Board’s order or notice regarding the protest or motion is incorporated herein. Plaintiff(s) are entitled to judicial review of the CAD’s appraisal pursuant to the Code, including Section 42.23 of the Code. Plaintiff(s) are entitled to relief as provided by Section 42.24 of the Code, provisions of the Code in general, and seek that relief. Plaintiff(s)’ property is excessively appraised, and Plaintiff(s) are entitled to the relief as provided by Section 42.25 of the Code and seek that relief. Plaintiff(s)’ property is unequally appraised, and Plaintiff(s) are entitled to the relief as provided by Section 42.26 of the Code and seek that relief. Plaintiff(s) intend to comply with the provisions of Section 42.08 by timely paying all taxes due, or the taxes due on the undisputed portion of the value of the property or providing a payment plan for the taxes due. If unable to timely pay the lesser of required amounts, Plaintiff(s) hereby request relief from the Court. A dismissal of this case would deprive Plaintiff(s) of access to the Court and due process of law. The levying of a tax on Plaintiff(s)’ property based upon a valuation which is excessive and/or unequal, or without consideration of a lawful exemption, is an unlawful levy, creates an illegal lien on Plaintiff(s)’ property, and violates the Texas Constitution. Plaintiff(s) are entitled to recover attorney’s fees as provided by law. Plaintiff(s) sue for those fees through trial and for any appeals of the case. In accordance with Rule 47 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff(s) seek monetary relief of $100,000 or less and non- monetary relief. Plaintiff(s) object to the entry by the Court of an Order of referral of this case to alternative dispute resolution. Plaintiff(s) request that the Court enter an Order setting this matter for trial pursuant to the Rules and at the earliest reasonable time. VI. REQUEST FOR INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE Plaintiff formally requests that the Appraisal District engage in settlement discussions through an informal settlement conference, as soon as practical, pursuant to § 42.227 of the Texas Property Tax Code. VII. PLAINTIFF(S)’ RULE 194 DISCLOSURES AND EXPERT DESIGNATION Pursuant to Rule 194.2 Plaintiff(s) make the following Response to the Request for Disclosure served by Defendant: A. Correct names of the Parties to the Lawsuit 1) Plaintiff(s): See named Plaintiff(s) 2) Defendant(s): See named Defendant(s) B. Potential Parties Plaintiff is unaware of any potential parties to this lawsuit that are not already named herein. C. Legal Theories and Factual Basis of Claims Pursuant to Chapters 23, 25, 41 and/or 42 of the Texas Property Tax Code (the” Code”), Plaintiff(s) are entitled to appeal the determination of an appraised, market or assessed value of their property by the Appraisal District or the Appraisal Review Board of the Appraisal District (the “Board”), or any determination by the Board regarding substantial error or corrections, application or denial of exemptions, or notice and hearing; or seek an order from the Court regarding the value or a hearing. Plaintiff(s) are entitled to relief as the property is unequally appraised, excessively appraised, and/or the CAD denied an applicable exemption or improperly appraised the property. The CAD failed to carry its burden at the administrative level. The Appraisal Review Board did not provide Plaintiff(s) with a proper hearing on its protests. Plaintiff(s) by law are entitled to relief and recovery of attorney’s fees and costs, through trial and any necessary appeal. D. Amount and Calculation of Economic Damages Plaintiff(s)’ causes of action are statutory in nature. Damages relate to the appraised value of the property and attorney’s fees. Plaintiff(s)’ attorney’s fees are calculated by multiplying the number of attorney hours reasonably spent prosecuting Plaintiff(s)’ by a reasonable hourly rate of $150.00 per hour to $250.00 per hour. Anticipated fees are between $5,000 and $20,000 through trial, and $5,000 per level of appeal. E. Persons with Knowledge of Relevant Facts The following persons have knowledge of relevant facts and are connected with the case as follows: 1. The Chief Appraiser of Defendant, members of the appraisal review board, and any employees of Defendant with knowledge of the subject property. c/o Defendant’s attorney Connection to case: These persons are employed by Defendant and the Board and have knowledge concerning Plaintiff’s property. 2. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333 Houston, Texas 77018 (281) 819-2719 Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding necessary, reasonable, and customary attorneys’ fees for representation of Plaintiff in this case. 3. Plaintiff’s Representative FRAZIER AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333 Houston, Texas 77018 (281) 819-2719 Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding the subject property and the appraised value and the proper appraised value for the subject property. 4. Ryan Lin, Michael Miller, Gregory S. Zachary, H.E. “Skip” Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan Schwarzlose PROPERTY ANALYTIX LLC 2855 Mangum, Suite 210 Houston, Texas 77092 (346) 571-7075 Connection to case: These persons have knowledge regarding the subject property and the appraised value and the proper appraised value for the subject property. F. Testifying Experts, Expert Designation The following persons may testify as experts in this case: 1. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333 Houston, Texas 77018 (281) 819-2719 Subject Matter: Reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees General Substance of Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: The fees incurred by Plaintiff for the prosecution of this case are necessary, reasonable, and customary. The reasonable attorneys’ fee for services rendered in this matter is at least $150.00 to $250.00 per hour based upon the pleading, discovery, and trial time. The fee through trial of this cause would be approximately $5,000 to $15,000. Appellate fees would be at least $5,000 per level of appeal. 2. Patrick O’Connor O’CONNOR & ASSOCIATES 2200 North Loop West Houston, Texas 77018 (713) 686-9955 Subject Matter: Mr. O’Connor may testify concerning the proper appraised value for Plaintiff’s property. Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal, excessive appraisal, and the hearing process to be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules or were submitted at the protest hearing. See also information and biography on the internet at www.poconnor.com and www.cutmytaxes.com. 3. Ryan Lin, Michael Miller, Gregory S. Zachary, H.E. “Skip” Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan Schwarzlose PROPERTY ANALYTIX LLC 2855 Mangum, Suite 210 Houston, Texas 77092 (346) 571-7075 Subject Matter: The experts will testify concerning the appraised value of Plaintiff’s property. Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal and excessive appraisal will be produced in written reports or is available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules. As reported, the expert is of the opinion that the property is unequally and excessively appraised. See also reports and evidence produced by Plaintiff at the administrative hearing. The expert has knowledge concerning the description, condition, and operation of the subject property, as well as the appraisal of the property by Defendant. The expert has knowledge concerning sales of properties and appraised values of properties. The expert has knowledge concerning the Board and Appraisal District’s methodologies in appraising property. The expert will also rely on principles found in, and information from, USPAP and the Appraisal of Real Estate, Defendant’s Commercial Appraisal Manual, Mass Appraisal Report, and other publications, opinions by the appellate courts of the state of Texas, and legal opinions. For expert testimony, the expert is hired by Plaintiff’s agent on an hourly or flat fee basis. Plaintiff’s expert may review, re-adopt, refine or otherwise confirm prior opinions and reports. See Exxon Corp. vs. West Texas Gathering Co., 868 S.W.2d 299 (Tex. 1993) and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. 4. The Chief Appraiser of Defendant, members of the appraisal review board, and any employees of Defendant with knowledge of the subject property. Subject Matter: The appraisal of Plaintiff’s Property. Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Plaintiff anticipates that this information will be included in Defendant’s discovery responses and/or other testimony provided in connection with this lawsuit. 5. Any agent or employee of Plaintiff’s agent that dealt with the Property as part of the administrative process. O’CONNOR & ASSOCIATES 2200 North Loop West, Suite 200 Houston, Texas 77018 (713) 686-9595 Subject Matter: The proper appraised value for Plaintiff’s Property. Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal, excessive appraisal, and the hearing process to be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules or were submitted at the protest hearing. See also information and biography on the internet at www.poconnor.com and www.cutmytaxes.com. 6. Plaintiff’s Representative FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333 Houston, Texas 77018 (281) 819-2719 Subject Matter: Opinion of proper appraised value of the property. Opinions and Brief Summary of Basis: Opinions on unequal appraisal and excessive appraisal to be produced in written reports or available by deposition testimony pursuant to the rules. Unless otherwise disclosed this person will adopt the opinions provided by the other experts or as disclosed in supplemental responses to interrogatories, and includes the opinions and information submitted at the administrative hearing all of which are in the possession of Defendant or will be provided in supplemental responses to request for disclosure. G. Plaintiff’s Available Documents Plaintiff may use the following documents, if applicable, regarding the subject property to support its claims and defenses: 1) Financial Records; 2) Photos of subject property or comparable properties; 3) Records regarding Deferred Maintenance or Repair Estimates; 4) Purchase or Sales Documents and/or; 5) Plaintiff’s Expert Report(s). Further, Plaintiff(s) may use to support its claims any and all documents related to the claims made in the petition that the Plaintiff's property was excessively appraised, unequally appraised, and/or that the Plaintiff(s) was improperly denied a proper hearing pursuant to the Texas Property Tax Code. They include all documents produced by either party at any Appraisal Review Board hearing during the administrative process as well as documents any documents identified or produced by the Defendant in discovery responses. H. Indemnity and Insurance Agreements I. Discoverable Settlement Agreements J. Discoverable Witness Statements K. Medical Records Available L. Medical Records Obtained M. Responsible Party(s) None known of, or inapplicable, other than parties to this appeal {I}. VIII. DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE AND PRODUCTION Pursuant to the Rules, Defendant is advised that Plaintiff(s) intend to use any or all the documents produced by Plaintiff(s) or Defendant in response to Request for Disclosure, response to Request for Production, or any supplements thereto, as evidence at the time of trial. Plaintiff(s) will also use photographs of the subject property, comparable properties, and other properties as evidence at the time of trial. IX. TRIAL PREPARATION ORDER OR PRE-TRIAL ORDER INFORMATION Plaintiff(s) submit the information as set forth below as Plaintiff(s)’ Trial Preparation Order or for the Pre-Trial Order if required by the Court. TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Plaintiff(s) submit this as its Trial Preparation Order. Party/Attorney List: Plaintiff: See Plaintiff named in Petition. Plaintiff’s Attorneys: Frazier and Associates, PLLC, Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland, 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333, Houston, Texas 77018, (281) 819-2719. Witness List: Plaintiff(s) intends to call the following witnesses: 1. Michael Miller, Ryan Lin, Gregory S. Zachary, H. E.” Skip ”Preble, Bagus Priambodo, Reagan Schwarzlose 2. Clemetric R. Frazier & Craig J. McClelland 3. Plaintiff(s)’ representative or agent 4. Any fact or expert witness designated by Plaintiff(s) or Defendant. Draft Findings and Conclusions: Proposed Findings of Fact 1) The appraised value of the subject property exceeds the median of the appraised values of a of a reasonable number of comparable properties appropriately adjusted. The proper appraised value for the tax year based upon unequal appraisal is $_______. 2) The appraised value of the subject property is excessive. The proper appraised value for the tax year based upon excessive value if $________. 3) Plaintiff(s) necessary and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred for representation in this matter are the sum of $_________ and necessary and reasonable attorney’s fees for appeal are the sum of $________ for each level of appeal. Proposed Conclusions of Law 1) The appraised value of the property at issue on the appraisal roll of the County Appraisal District should be changed to reflect the appraised values set forth below and as referenced in the findings as the lower value. 2) Plaintiff(s) are entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees in the amount of $________ through trial and the amount of $_______ for each level of appeal. Year(s) Account # Appraised Value Plaintiff’s Exhibit List: (1) Resume of Plaintiff(s)’ testifying expert (2) Expert Report on Equity (3) Expert Report on Appraised Value (3) Resume of Plaintiff(s)’ attorney (4) Photographs of Subject, comparables, and information sheets (5) Defendant’s evidence submitted at administrative hearing, and reports by Defendant’s expert Deposition Excerpts or Edited Videotapes: None anticipated. Motions in Limine: None anticipated. Trial Scheduling: Plaintiff(s) estimate that the trial of this cause will take one day. X. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff(s) request that Defendant be cited to appear and answer, and that on final trial, the Court render judgment (according to the Code): 1. Setting the appraised value and/or market value and/or assessed value of Plaintiff(s)’ property as of January 1 of the year(s) set forth in the petition below the final value determined by the ARB and the CAD; 2. Compelling imposition of the proper assessed/appraised value of Plaintiff(s)’ property according to its value due to unequal, excessive and/or incorrect appraisal, proper property characterization, exemption, description of the property or other remedy provided by the Code; 3. If appropriate, granting of an ARB hearing, allowance of an exemption, or other relief to which Plaintiff(s) are entitled based upon the administrative protest; 4. Monetary relief of $100,000 or less and non-monetary relief as plead; and 5. Awarding Plaintiff(s) costs incurred, reasonable attorney's fees through trial, attorney’s fees on appeal, and all other relief to which Plaintiff(s) may be entitled. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, FRAZIER & ASSOCIATES, PLLC By: /s/ Clemetric R. Frazier Clemetric R. Frazier State Bar No. 24051621 By: /s/ Craig J. McClelland Craig J. McClelland State Bar. No. 24039044 2200 North Loop West, Suite 333 Houston, Texas 77018 (281) 819-2719 eservice@frazierlawpllc.com www.frazierlawpllc.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF(S)