Sands L. Stiefer, Chief Appraiser of the Harris County Appraisal District v. Edward Moers and Daniel Moers
469 S.W.3d 655
| Tex. App. | 2015Background
- Moerses sought open-space land appraisal for two non-contiguous tracts used for organic sheep-raising (2010–2012).
- HCAD denied open-space status; HCARB also denied the protests.
- Moerses alleged the Chief Appraiser lacked authority to adopt the degree-of-intensity Standards and challenged the Standards as invalid.
- Trial court dismissed ultra vires and injunctive-related claims against the Chief Appraiser and dismissed 2012 claims with prejudice; granted final summary judgment for HCAD.
- Court held the 2012 claims should have been dismissed without prejudice and affirmed as modified.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did summary judgment properly resolve open-space eligibility? | Moerses argued Standards invalid to preclude eligibility. | HCAD argued Moerses cannot meet degree of intensity. | Yes, HCAD's summary judgment affirmed. |
| Did Chief Appraiser act within statutory authority (ultra vires)? | Chief Appraiser exceeded authority by creating/ applying Standards. | Chief Appraiser acted within statutory authority per statute and Manual. | Ultra vires claims properly dismissed. |
| Were declaratory-judgment claims properly encompassed by the summary judgment? | Declaratory judgments improperly asserted against HCAD. | Only Chief Appraiser sets open-space standards; claims were inappropriate. | Claims dismissed; declaratory judgment claims resolved. |
| Was dismissal of 2012 claims with prejudice proper? | Exhaustion issues meant dismissal without prejudice. | Plea to jurisdiction supports dismissal with prejudice. | Dismissal for 2012 should be without prejudice. |
| Did trial court abuse discretion in awarding costs against Daniel? | Daniel prevailed on hearing entitlement; costs inappropriate. | Court may award costs; Daniel did not prevail on all claims. | Court did not abuse discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Parker Cnty. Appraisal Dist. v. Francis, 436 S.W.3d 845 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2014) (open-space standards and intensity framework context)
- MMP, Ltd. v. Jones, 710 S.W.2d 59 (Tex. 1986) (summary judgment burden on movant to prove no genuine issues)
- City of El Paso v. Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d 366 (Tex. 2009) (ultra vires claims require lack of authority)
- Tex. State Comptroller of Pub. Accounts, Qualification of Land Under Section 1-d-1, (unofficial citation in opinion) (1990s) (Manual governs degree of intensity standards for open-space)