Parker County Appraisal District v. James D. Francis
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 6690
Tex. App.2014Background
- James D. Francis owns three contiguous tracts totaling 13 acres: a 1-acre tract with his residence, a 3-acre tract, and a 9-acre tract. The residence sits on the 1-acre tract.
- The 3-acre tract had been granted open-space (agricultural) valuation by the appraisal district for 2010–2011.
- Francis timely applied in 2010 and 2011 to have the 3-acre tract also included in his residence homestead exemption; the chief appraiser and the appraisal review board denied those applications.
- The parties stipulated facts and values and tried the case to the bench on the stipulations; the trial court ruled the 3-acre tract qualified both for the homestead exemption and for open-space valuation, and reduced the appraised value accordingly.
- Parker County Appraisal District (PCAD) appealed; the Court of Appeals reviews de novo the legal issue presented by stipulated facts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Francis) | Defendant's Argument (PCAD) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a parcel can simultaneously receive a residence homestead exemption and open-space land valuation | The Tax Code allows both concurrently: residence homestead may include contiguous parcels up to 20 acres; open-space land can be principally agricultural and still be homestead; §23.55(i) prevents rollback solely for claiming homestead | Only one “use” should govern; residence use is incompatible with open-space agricultural use; §23.55(i) only bars rollback tax, not change-of-use determination | Court held the 3-acre tract qualified for both homestead exemption and open-space valuation under the stipulated facts; overruled PCAD’s arguments |
| Whether the trial court failed to strictly construe homestead entitlement | Francis showed the combined contiguous parcels are under 20 acres and used as his principal residence, so homestead should apply | PCAD argued homestead shouldn’t extend to land already appraised as open-space | Court held the homestead entitlement was properly applied to the 3-acre tract (homestead criteria satisfied) |
Key Cases Cited
- Panther Creek Ventures, Ltd. v. Collin Cent. Appraisal Dist., 234 S.W.3d 809 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007) (de novo review applies to trials on stipulated facts)
- Alma Grp., L.L.C. v. Palmer, 143 S.W.3d 840 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2004) (stipulations binding on court and parties)
- Highlands Ins. Co. v. Kelley-Coppedge, Inc., 950 S.W.2d 415 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1997) (limited to stipulated facts except necessarily implied facts)
- Orange Cnty. Appraisal Dist. v. Agape Neighborhood Improvement, Inc., 57 S.W.3d 597 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2001) (no sufficiency review in stipulated-facts cases)
- City of San Antonio v. City of Boerne, 111 S.W.3d 22 (Tex. 2003) (statutes must be read to give effect to every word)
- HL Farm Corp. v. Self, 877 S.W.2d 288 (Tex. 1994) (open-space valuation based on productive capacity)
- Resolution Trust Corp. v. Tarrant Cnty. Appraisal Dist., 926 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996) (rollback taxes triggered by cessation of agricultural use)