Pine Village North Open House Welcome

What happens when an investor who owns 200 out of 500 units in a north Houston condo complex defaults on his loan, leaving many of his properties vacant? Reporter Allison Triarsi visits Pine Village North, just south of Hamill Rd., west east of the Eastex Fwy.:

“It’s just an open house for gang members to come. Anybody can come,” said homeowner Ann Loyd.

Walk inside any one of the open units and you could find anything from gang graffiti and dead roaches, to the bones of animals.

“I don’t know if what I’m standing in [is] some kind of mice droppings or rat droppings,” said Loyd, while escorting 11 News through a vacant unit.

In addition to debris, there were pink pills on a counter, and clothing and blankets on the floor where people have either left them behind or kept them there in case they needed a free place to sleep.

***

Afraid of the vandals, Loyd tried to sell her unit for $59,000. The offer she got for it last week was $7,000.

Photos of Pine Village North and 12427 W. Village Dr. Unit C: HAR

36 Comment

  • We bought our townhome after living in Pine Village North for several years from Ruben Diaz, son of Georg Diaz. I thought I was doing the right thing by providing a home for me and my family. Now I’m not so sure. Although we’re blessed to have good neighbors, it is a struggle to realize the future in Pinve Village. I feel I’ve been lied to and duped. I hope George and Ruben Diaz feel the heat of their dealings with hardowrking people just trying to have a roof over their head. It’s truly ridiculous.

  • Does anyone have any information about the situation in Pine Village North? I understand that many of the townhomes have been purchased and are being remodeled. Any information would be most appreciated.

  • i’ve lived here since 1975. i’ve got plenty of info for you.

  • Marina, we are an investor and considering buying several units. What’s your take on the community right now?

  • the HOA has financial and legal problems. it’s operating month-2-month; no reserves. even though our assessments are supposed to cover exterior repairs of our units, you may never get your units repaired, unless you do it yourself. many of the units have serious plumbing problems. if the HOA is dissolved, PV may become a free-for-all; it’s almost that now. if you’re willing to risk all of that, then go ahead and buy, otherwise, don’t.

  • According to my maps this place is located EAST of the Eastex Freeway, not WEST.

  • @Superdave, Thanks for the late catch!

  • Thank you Marina for your reply to my post. My family was one of the first in Pine Village North in the early 70’s and my father still owns a townhouse there. He said there was a lot of activity going on and it appeared many of the homes were being worked on. Can you clarify what’s going on? Thank you for taking the time to respond.

  • annual meeting coming up 11/17. the 1st one (Oct 27) cancelled cause not properly noticed. notice and proxy for this 2nd mtg has already been sent. most repairs are along the main roads. looks better until you drive into the alleys/drive-ways. we still live in ours and own several more. very difficult to rent to anyone that doesn’t already live here. outsiders are appalled at the appearance of the exteriors, graffiti that’s been here since Katrina, and the seemingly lack of crime control. i keep saying i’m too old to set myself up with another mortgage, that’s why i keep fighting, but keeping up the fight has taken its toll on me, too. the investors are planning to remove my husband from the board at the annual meeting. they’ve said they will not back me if i run for a board position. they don’t have to worry abt that! been there, done that. my objective is to make the other owners aware of how their money is being spent or mis-spent. i “decipher” the HOA’s financial reports (not like any you’ve ever seen!) and share the info with whomever really seems to care about what’s going on. hope to see you at the annual meeting. regular HOA board mtgs have been changed to 2nd Tues of the month. BTW: i use to be Castillo; son, David (40yrs); daughter Denise (39).

  • Thank you for your reply Marina…I really appreciate it. Do you know why after 15 years with the same attorney the association switched to someone else?

  • There were several reasons, but the main one was money. The attorney was getting paid thousands to collect past-due assessments. Unfortunately, most of the legal fees paid to the attorney, although charged back to the owners by the HOA, will never be collected from the owners. Looks like there may be another board takeover on the 17th. The new board will have very little, if anything, to operate on. A lot of the problem is lack of board experience and lack of knowledge of our own governing documents. And, we need an attorney who’s knowledgable in townhome HOAs and all the laws that apply to them. We’re in a mess. It’s never been this bad. No one knows whom to believe or trust. As for me, I trust God. I’m asking him for guidance.

  • Please keep me posted on the results of the board meeting. I appreciate the information. I live in California and am not the homeowner, my father is. I will let him know what’s going on. All the best to you Marina! Keep the faith!

  • Hi Marina,
    My father is going to try to make it to the meeting tomorrow night. His name is Don DeLoach, he’s in his 70’s, he wears glasses and he bought his unit in the mid 1970’s. I told him I’d been chatting with you so if you see him please say hi.
    Warmest Regards,
    Robert

  • i’ll look for him. tell him i’m hispanic, short, with dark hair, and my husband is anglo, tall, with light hair and red beard. as a couple, we stand out like a sore thumb. i’m sure the meeting’s not going to be pretty. too many unhappy residents, and once again, the investors are going to out-vote us. not sure who they’re putting on the board, and they’ve proposed some bylaw changes we’re against. will let you know how it goes.

  • I think your dad and i need to talk. we may have special leverage against the HOA as “first mortgagee” members of the HOA. please contact me at marinasugg@swbell.net

  • Are there any new news on this subject? I’m thinking about buying one and wanted more information.

  • all of the previous still the same. we’ve got about 100 resident owners and 400 rental properties. we are down on our vacancies, but it’s the quality of people that are moving in that’s got the resident owners worried. people from Haverstock Hill moving in. groups of men standing around all day, while the rest of us go to work. the board is operating without a quorum because many of the directors have resigned. also, now that more people are moving in, our sewer lines are backing up. you’ll need to have someone run a camera and/or a 150-ft roto rooter to find the problem. and then you’ve got to get it fixed. if you decide to buy, be sure to ask the title company AND the HOA for the HOA’s
    “certificate of management” and a copy of the HOA’s tax-exemption. the HOA is req’d to have both in order to be a valid HOA and to collect money from us legally. to the best of our knowledge, they have neither, but we don’t have the money to fight them in court.

  • Hi Marina,
    It was so nice meeting you when I was in Houston. I hope you and Kenneth are doing well. I look forward to seeing you again when I get back to visit Dad.
    Warmest Regards,
    Robert DeLoach

  • Marina,

    My wife and I have recently relocated form the chicagoland area and have purchased a unit here in Pine Village, I was elected to the board and have had the pleasure of meeting with your husband Ken. After further investigation of your aforementioned, I have concluded for myself that your statements are very true and i have been faced with a battle within the board. The HOA Board IS a facade as ALL decisions are made, approved and carried-out by the Board President without voting on the various issues. At the last unofficial board meeting 8-21-12 (this was not the appointed day per the HOA by-laws, but was the date most convenient for the board president), I actually distributed proof to the residents of my findings at which time our illustrious board president attempted to shut me up by having OUR HOA paid security force (six officers) remove me from the meeting, even though I AM a board member as well. All I asked was that if the residents really wanted to know what was really happening here, just to please go home and read the information they had received in writing and return on the second Tuesday of next month at the regularly appointed meeting and make their own educated decisions about our HOA Board and our community. Our HOA funds are being utilized for vendor contracts and services that we as a complete Board HAVE NOT agreed and voted on. We have asked for proof of validation of several board members that sit on our board including the President of our board and all have gone unanswered. Following an attempt to shut me up by our Board President the residents took a stand and walked out of the meeting as it was very evident that more security officers were at the meeting at the President’s request than that of the (1) officer per shift that patrol the property. It was very clear to the residents and they were aware at that point that evidently I had something to share that our Board President would go to great lengths to keep me from divulging. We have since gone door-to door speaking with residents and educating them about how our HOA Board is operating as a dictatorship. We will continue until we have exposed EVERYTHING and start fresh with a board of directors that truly care about this community. A community watchdog website is being built as of this writing and will be fully functional within the next 72 hours…I can be reached along with several other dedicated individuals at the following:

    pinevillage2012@gmail.com

    We have made several contacts within the AG’s office and within Harris County as well. We are prepared to fight for our community as “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH” !

    We need ALL that are reading this to lend their support as we fight for the rights of our community. You DO have a say! Every vote counts. Our annual meeting is rapidly nearing and we NEED EVERYONE to take a stand !

    Contact us at: pinevillage2012@gmail.com

  • Hurray Pine Village Residents are having their say in court! Thanks to the residents
    of PINE VILLAGE NORTH coming together to take a stand against corruption and finally saying enough is enough ! We are finally getting our day in court!

    Trial is set for November 8, 2012 9:00 am
    Civil Courthouse
    201 Caroline
    11th District
    Houston Texas 77002

    Case # 2012-59689

    All Pine Village Residents are greatly urged to appear and support this fight
    to reclaim our community!

    Show that you care about your community
    as you did during the Resident Townhall
    Meeting on October 21, 2012

    We had over 150 residents in attendance!

    Please continue to support your community!

    Together we will reclaim our board, thus our community!

    Take a look at the Channel 13 news link:
    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/video?id=8848247

    Google: “Channel 13 News Pine Village North HOA”

    Thank You Marina and Ken and all that have assisted and supported this fight!

  • Several fights/assaults, discharging of firearms, burglaries and various other crimes have been committed here in Pine Village Within the past (60) days. The majority of these crimes have been committed by a group of teenagers from this community.
    Our Pine Village Watchdog Group is currently working in conjunction with authorities to combat the aforementioned issues.

    We also NEED & MUST HAVE your help to bring closure to these matters. We need EVERYONE to take part in making this a safe environment for everyone. Take pride in your community, call 911 when you witness a crime or even when you see shady characters lurking in the community. You can help by making an anonymous call to the Harris County Sheriff’s Department to report a crime that has happened or is in commission. In order for us to obtain the authoritative support we are seeking, we must have the calls and police reports to support our claims of increased Sheriff Patrols.

    An investigation has concluded that many of the criminals that are committing crimes here in Pine Village are rental tenants of a few investors here at Pine Village. Things are underway to hold the Landlords accountable for their tenants’ actions.

    PLEASE GO TO THE PINEVILLAGE WATCHDOG GROUP email below and submit your contact information, so that you will receive automatic community updates.

    Google: “Channel 13 news pine village north HOA”
    Contact: Pine Village Watchdog Group Pinevillage2012@gmail.com

  • Hello, Everyone,

    The attorney for the HOA has passed on the hearing for Friday May 3, 2013. In other words, they do not want to go before the judge on Friday, so DO NOT go to the 152nd on Friday. The hearing will NOT take place. They were so quick to sue us, but now they do not want to come to court to face the community or the LAW.

    The fight’s not over; it’s just begun, but we’re not backing down.

    PLEASE READ THIS CASE (THIS IS YOUR HOA ATTORNEY) :
    Harris County District Clerk seal 201252012 – INDEPENDENT MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT LLC vs. BUTLER HAILEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW (Court 127) Chronological History Print All Print All
    (non-financial)
    Summary
    Appeals
    Cost Statements
    Transfers
    Post Trial Writs
    Abstracts
    Parties
    Court Costs
    Judgments/Events
    Settings
    Services/Notices
    Court Registry
    Child Support
    Images

    Print Summary
    Print Summary
    Case (Cause) Summary
    File Date 9/7/2012
    Case (Cause) Location Civil Intake 1st Floor
    Case (Cause) Status Ready Docket
    Case (Cause) Type DTPA-DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICE
    Next/Last Setting Date 10/21/2013
    Jury Fee Paid Date N/A

    Court Details
    Current Court 127th
    Filing Court 127th
    Address 201 CAROLINE (Floor: 10)
    HOUSTON, TX 77002
    Phone:7133686161
    JudgeName R K Sandill
    Court Type Civil

    We are still asking how can our HOA attorney sue half of the board on behalf of the other half of the board members….read the attachments and find out…isn’t that a conflict of interest & discrimination ?
    What do you think the reasoning is for them not wanting to appear in court to present their case in a court of law ??? We will have our day in court and will rectify this matter in its entirety. Please read all of the attachments to this email.

    They constantly tear all of these types of posting off of our community bulletin board, but it is now posted on the internet…go to “swamplot.com” where it will be posted forever for the world to witness these acts. We have sent a legal notice to our HOA board and HOA attorney for validation of election of our HOA president James Nichols and Charles Lucenay, demanding proof of their valid election to our HOA board, but our LEGAL NOTICE & DEMAND per Texas State Statute has been ignored…we wonder why they have refused to validate their position on our board.
    It has been said that you cannot hide the truth forever…the time has come for accountability. Please continue to support the Coalition, thus the Pine Village Community.

    Thanks, again, for your encouragement and continued support.

    Pine Village Homeowners Coalition
    832.303.2886
    pinevillage2012@gmail.com

  • This is very interesting to read. We had a similar situation at Le Promenade in Southwest Houston. Best of luck with it all. I will note that there are high level discussions in Harris County and the City of Houston on this issue, and I know it has been raised with the state legislators, too. Hopefully we’ll get some protection from what I call the “condo complex loophole,” so that condo owners like yourself, and neighbors to condo complexes can rest easy.

  • PINE VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS COMMUNITY COALITION
    Pinevillage2012@gmail.com (832) 303-2886

    Attn: Pine Village Residents
    Re: Court Hearing Friday May 24, 2013

    This community needs your support !!!
    Pine Village has court this Friday, May 24, 2013 @ 1:30p.m.
    The 152nd District Court is in the new Harris County District Courts Bldg. See below for address.
    FRIDAY, MAY 24, 2013 @ 1:30 p.m.

    201 CAROLINE (Floor: 11)
    HOUSTON, TX 77002
    Phone: 713.368.6040
    We need everyone to attend and show that this community cares and is finally fed up and will no longer tolerate these mis-dealings anymore.
    They have been served…Deb Jacobsen, Charles Lucenay, the HOA Attorneys (Butler-Hailey), there are still more being served everyday !

    It is written…you CANNOT hide the truth forever !!!

    The time has come and the truth is coming out !
    We need you in court !!!! We need your support !

    PINE VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS COMMUNITY COALITION Pinevillage2012@gmail.com (832) 303-2886

  • CAUSE No. 2013-23075

    PINE VILLAGE NORTH ASSOCIATION, } In THE DISTRICT COURT OF
    Plaintiff, }
    VS. } HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
    CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, CRAIG MITCHELL, }
    KENNETH SUGGS, MARINA SUGGS, TONY HUGHES, }
    MARTHA MARIE PRESTON, TARA LONG AND THE LONG } 152ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    LAW FIRM PLLC, } SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT
    Defendants, } OF DEFENDANT’S ORIGINAL ANSWER

    DEFENDANT’S ORIGINAL ANSWER

    COMES NOW, Defendant, CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, a resident of Texas, Pro-Se and respectfully submits to this Honorable Court this brief in support of his Original Answer to Plaintiff Pine Village North Association, and would respectfully show unto this Honorable Court as follows:
    GENERAL DENIAL

    1. Defendant generally denies the allegations in Plaintiff’s Application For Temporary Restraining Order, Application for Temporary Injunction and Original Petition for Declaratory Relief and Requests for Disclosures authorized by Tex. R.

    Civ. P. 92 Defendant respectfully request that Plaintiff provide strict proof of his charges and allegations by a preponderance of evidence.

    2. Defendant reserves the right to amend this answer in accordance with the Texas Rules Of Civil Procedure.

    INTRODUCTION

    Presently pending before this Honorable Court is a matter of controversy in which the previous Home Owners Association Board of Directors at Pine Village North Townhome Community was
    removed by an official and legal election process of the members of Pine Village and a new HOA
    Board of Directors was legally and duly elected. The previous Board of Directors filed suit against the new Board of Directors alleging the election processes utilized did not conform to Texas Property Codes or that of the Association’s By-Laws. The new duly elected Board of Directors have raised several concerns of blatant discrimination against the Pine Village Community.

    SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT

    November 8, 2011 , without a quorum James Nichols (a.k.a. Jim Nichols) and Attorney Roy Hailey knowingly and intentionally conspire to illegally takeover the Pine Village HOA Board by illegally utilizing a mock election practice by casting votes via email in violation of Texas Property Code 209.0051 (h) , due to the vote not being unanimous. Roy Hailey clearly states that this mock election process is illegal per the new HOA laws, but still contends that the election was legal, (see exhibits A-1, A-2, A-3 & A-4). TPC 209.0051 – “A board may meet by any method of communication, including electronic and telephonic, without prior notice to owners under Subsection (e), if each director may hear and be heard by every other director, or the board may take action by unanimous written consent to consider routine and administrative matters or a reasonably unforeseen emergency or urgent necessity that requires immediate board action. Any action taken without notice to owners under Subsection (e) must be summarized orally, including an explanation of any known actual or estimated expenditures approved at the meeting, and documented in the minutes of the next regular or special board meeting.”

    On or about April 17, 2012, Plaintiffs Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols), Deborah Jacobsen and Charles Lucenay perpetuated fraud upon the Pine Village Community by illegally and fraudulently attempting to validate a board seat for Charles Lucenay and approve the February 15, 2012 meeting minutes,(see exhibits B-5 paragragh 7-8, B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, B-5, B-6, B-7 & B-8)

    Also, no African-American voting decisions were allowed starting February of 2012… African-
    American employees were terminated illegally without a Pine Village HOA Board vote (see exhibits B-1 paragraph 10, B-2 paragraphs 1,2 & 6-8).

    Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) knowingly and intentionally sought to fraudulently add Charles
    Lucenay to the Pine Village Board of Directors without official nomination or vote of the Pine Village members (see exhibit B-6 paragraph 5), which is illegal per Pine Village By-Laws (see Article V of “Nomination and Election Of Directors”, (see exhibit C-1 paragraph 3, 4 & 5).

    On or about August 20, 2012 a Certified “Notice & Demand” was sent to the Pine Village Board of Directors and the Pine Village HOA attorney Roy Hailey, (certified # 7011-0470-0001-2777-3757) demanding proof of legal standing of Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) as acting President and of Charles Lucenay as Board Director and Treasurer, (see exhibit D-1, D-2 & D-3). Roy Hailey furthered the aforementioned conspiracy by providing erroneous statements and answers in an attempt to validate Jim Nichol’s (a.k.a James Nichols) and Charles Lucenay’s illegal positions on the board as is evidenced in exhibits D-4 & D-5, which is a blatant violation of Pine Village By-Laws Article V, “Nomination and Election Of Directors”, (see exhibit C-1).

    On August 20, 2012 Pine Village HOA Board Vice-President, Craig Mitchell directed Pine Village Office Manager Daneaa Thompson to contact the Pine Village HOA attorney Roy Hailey to ascertain why the African-American Board Directors were being precluded from partaking in the decision making processes of the Pine Village Board/Community, (see exhibit E-1).

    On September 21, 2012, Pine Village HOA Board Vice-President, Craig Mitchell entered the Pine Village HOA office to discover an unofficial and/or non-approved copy of a Pine Village Board agenda for the upcoming October 9, 2012 Annual Meeting. Notice was forwarded to the Pine Village HOA attorney Roy Hailey asking how was it possible for this act to occur when he was present during the previous open session and no one had voted on this issue.
    Furthermore, all African-American board members were excluded from the email circulation of the aforementioned (see exhibit F-1).

    On October 5, 2012 correspondence was forwarded to the Pine Village HOA attorney Roy Hailey pertaining to the illegal removal of Pine Village Board Director Martha Marie Preston only when she spoke in disagreement to the illegally appointed Pine Village President Jim Nichols (a.k.a James Nichols) (see exhibits G-1 & G-2) Roy Hailey’s response is documented in exhibits G-3, G-4, G-5, G-6 & G-7, in which Roy Hailey clearly demonstrates in his official capacity via email that Ms. Preston must be automatically and immediately removed from the Pine Village HOA Board of Directors. Roy Hailey states that a criminal background investigation was conducted on Pine Village Board members Henry Parker and Ms Preston. Ms. Preston’s background investigation was conducted without her consent and in violation of law. (see Texas Government Code 411.084), which states in relevant part “those who obtain access to a person’s criminal history record may only use that information for the original intended purposes and may not share that information with anyone else.” Section 411.085 also states in relevant part, “anyone who illegally discloses information regarding a person’s criminal history record, or obtains that information without consent, will be charged with a class B misdemeanor.”

    On October 9, 2012 the Pine Village HOA Annual meeting was held at the VFW Hall on Aldine Mail Route Road, Houston,Texas, which is approximately (7-8 miles) from the Pine Village property. Typically the Pine Village Annual meeting has been held at the Elementary School, which is located within (1) mile of the Pine Village property/community.
    During the aforementioned Annual Meeting, defendants acquired a professional commercial videographer to video-tape the Pine Village Annual Meeting in its entirety. On several occasions Katie Godinez, daughter of board member Deborah Jacobsen and grand-daughter of board member Nordean Yates, tabulated the ballots for voting purposes of the Pine Village Annual meeting, in violation of Texas Property Code 209.00594 , which states in relevant part “not withstanding any other provision of this chapter or any other law, a person who is a candidate in a property owners’ association election or who is otherwise the subject of an association vote, or a person related to that person within the third degree by consanguinity or affinity, as determined under chapter 573, Government Code, MAY NOT –
    tabulate or otherwise be given access to the ballots or cast in that election.

    On several occasions Katie Godinez can be seen handling and tabulating the election ballots, (see the following points in time of the recorded video from the Pine Village HOA Annual Meeting on October 9, 2012 :

    18 mintues- 56 seconds on video disc
    21 minutes- 29 seconds on video disc
    23 minutes- 20 seconds on video disc
    24 minutes- 05 seconds on video disc
    26 minutes- 10 seconds on video disc
    41 minutes- 41 seconds on video disc
    42 minutes- 36 seconds on video disc
    47 minutes- 28 seconds on video disc

    On several occasions Roy Hailey can be seen personally directing Jim Nichols (a.k.a James Nichols) instead of assisting the community/members of Pine Village (see the following points in time of the recorded video) :

    9 minutes- 14 seconds on video disc
    12 minutes- 52 seconds on video disc
    22 minutes- 31 seconds on video disc
    32 minutes- 05 seconds on video disc
    42 minutes- 05 seconds on video disc
    43 minutes- 20 seconds on video disc
    53 minutes- 25 seconds on video disc

    On October 19, 2012 the Pine Village HOA attorney, Roy Hailey submitted an invoice for services rendered to the Pine Village HOA, which includes research of Texas Laws pertaining to performing a criminal background check without an individuals consent, which is in violation of Texas Government Code 411.085. The aforementioned invoice evidences that these illegal acts took place on September 12, 2013 and September 13, 2013 (see exhibit H-1), which is contradictory to what Attorney Roy Hailey stated in exhibits G-3, G-4, G-5, G-6 & G-7 .

    On November 5, 2012 the parties attended mediation that was ordered by (11th Judicial District Court Judge Miller) and was supervised by Gerald M. Birnberg of Williams, Birnberg & Anderson LLP. As a result of the mediation the Plaintiffs, currently Defendants (Mitchell Et Al) of this current action were seeking a forensic audit, which is what the Pine Village Community (members) have sought throughout the duration of the aforementioned litigation. The opposing parties offered an agreement that was truly
    One-sided by stating that they would agree to said forensic audit only if the Mitchell Et Al party would agree not to sue or seek prosecution for findings therein. (see exhibits I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-5 & I-6).

    On March 29, 2013 notice of a special meeting for the removal of directors and election of new board members was sent to the Pine Village HOA Board of Directors via certified mail, return receipt # 7012-0470-0001-4047-8744 (see exhibits J-1, J-2, J-3, J-4 & J-5) which exhibit the official “Notice Of Special Meeting Of Members Of Pine Village North Association” for April 13, 2013. This notice clearly states the
    date, place, time and purpose for meeting, copy of agenda, copy of ballot and a copy of the proxy. The aforementioned notice of special meeting for April 13, 2013 was duly served in accordance with Pine Village By-Laws Article III, Sec. 3 and Texas Property Code 209.0056 . (see exhibit J-6 paragraph 5).
    The aforementioned was posted on the community bulletin board centrally located at the mailbox station on the Pine Village property as well as being sent to all members first class postage prepaid, which is in accordance with current Pine Village By-Laws (see aforementioned exhibit J-6 paragraph 5),
    states in relevant part, “not later than the 10th day or earlier than the 60th day before the date of an election or vote, a property owner’s association shall give written notice of the election or vote.

    On April 5, 2013 a subsequent “ACTUAL and CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE” was sent to the Pine Village HOA BOARD attorney Roy Hailey, Certified Article # 7012-0470-0001-4047-8768 demanding legal proof of validation of Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) as the Pine Village HOA President and of Charles Lucenay as a Pine Village Board Director and Treasurer in accordance with Texas Property Code 209.005. This
    Notice & Demand was disregarded in violation of Texas Law. (see exhibits K-1, K-2, K-3, K-4 & K-5).

    On April 12, 2013 a Pine village check # 000290 in the amount of $ 1,195.65 was made payable to Texas Capital Holdings, a Texas Corporation controlled by Plaintiffs, Charles Lucenay (Illegal Pine Village Treasurer) and Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) (Illegal Pine Village President) (see exhibits L-1& L-2).
    Said check was drawn from an active Pine Village HOA checking account explicitly controlled by Plaintiffs.

    On April 13, 2013 @ 7 p.m. the aforementioned Special Meeting took place outside of the clubhouse in the parking lot, due to illegal board director/self-appointed treasurer, Charles Lucenay personally informed Bishop Henry Parker that he, Charles Lucenay and other Pine Village Board Members would not be in attendance of said meeting. Bishop Henry Parker was present at said Special Meeting in his official capacity as a Pine Village Board Director and did cast a vote to remove Plaintiffs Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols), Deborah Jacobsen and Charles Lucenay from the Pine Village HOA Board and did participate in electing new board members all in accordance with Pine Village By-Laws. Plaintiffs were removed by a unanimous vote of the members by in-person votes and proxy votes per Pine Village By-Laws Article IV. Section 3. (see exhibit M-1) and Texas Property Code 209.0056 .

    On April 15, 2013 the Texas State Registry was updated with the Secretary of State to reflect the newly elected legal Pine Village Board Of Directors as is evidenced by exhibits N-1, N-2 & N-3 . On April 15, 2013 upon the close of business the new Pine Village Board utilized their keys to open the HOA office and changed the door lock to prevent unauthorized access and theft of Pine Village files and evidence.
    Plaintiffs, Deborah Jacobsen, Charles Lucenay, Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) and Diane Gonzalez were officially notified of their removal from the Pine Village HOA Board of Directors (see exhibits N-4, N-5, N-6 & N-7). The new board members received phone calls of threats of bodily harm against them as well as threats to destroy Pine Village HOA files/evidence. The aforementioned threats prompted the new board directors to contact the Harris County Fire Department and Harris County Sheriff’s Department to report said threats (see exhibit N-8). The Harris County stated that some form of “No Trespassing” signs should be posted until the situation could be formally resolved (see exhibit N-9). A meeting was set for April 17, 2013 at 8 a.m. with the Pine Village employees as they were contacted by the previous board members and told “NOT” to come to work .

    On April 16, 2013 previous board member Deborah Jacobsen arrived at the Pine Village HOA office and phoned the Harris County Sheriff’s Department in an attempt to have the newly elected HOA Board President, Christopher Mitchell arrested. Two (2) Harris County Sheriff’s Deputies responded and Christopher Mitchell demonstrated the proper state filings and spoke with the deputies to further explain the situation. Upon a brief investigation, the sheriff’s deputies informed Deborah Jacobsen that there was nothing they could do. Deborah Jacobsen then phoned and informed Charles Lucenay, who then prompted a series of emails (see exhibits O-1 & O-2). The aforementioned exhibit demonstrates that Charles Lucenay erroneously prompted a lawsuit against the defendants based on erroneous, third-party information, thus perpetuating harassment, defamation and discrimination of the individuals he, (Charles Lucenay) has chosen to maliciously prosecute (see Browning-Ferris Industries v. Lieck, 37 Tex Sup. Ct. J. 851, 881, S.W. 2d 288, 290-291 (Tex 1994) and King v. Graham , 47 Tex Sup. Ct. J. 85, 126 S.W. 3d 75, 78-79 (Tex 2003). Charles Lucenay knowingly and intentionally filed a notarized/sworn affidavit that he knew to be fictitious on its face, due to the fact that he was not an actual witness to said allegations and also that he had received all findings via an unreliable third party (see exhibits O-3 & O-4). Diane Gonzalez acted in the initiation of the harassment, defamation and malicious prosecution of a just HOA Board. Charles Lucenay failed to simply contact the Secretary of State to verify who the new Pine Village HOA Board consisted of as is evidenced in exhibit N-3 . Furthermore, attorneys Roy Hailey and Cliff Davis furthered these malicious acts of defamation, harassment, discrimination and abuse of process by directing Charles Lucenay in civilly prosecuting the African-American board members on behalf of the Caucasian board members (see exhibits O-1 & O-2). Plaintiff, Charles
    Lucenay provided this Honorable Court with an erroneous sworn-notarized affidavit stating the Long Law Firm contacted Pine Village employees pertaining to their employment status when in fact, Christopher Mitchell phoned the Pine Village employees on April 16, 2013 between 8:12 p.m. & 8:17 p.m. to advise and confirm their attendance at the employee meeting scheduled for –
    April 17, 2013 at 8 a.m. as is evidenced by Christopher Mitchell’s phone records
    (see exhibits P-1 & P-2). Plaintiff’s erroneous and defaming statements against Tara Long
    and Long Law Firm were prompted in an effort to preclude and bar Tara Long of Long Law Firm from any assistance to the Pine Village Community in the present and future of these proceedings as the defendants acted alone and as an HOA Board in compliance with Pine Village By-Laws and Texas Property Code throughout this process. Charles Lucenay erroneously states that defendants formed a human blockade, which is untrue and he, (Charles Lucenay) fails to mention that purported board member of the previous board, Diane Gonzalez was sitting in (1) of (2) vacant folding chairs as defendants were merely on alert, due to arson threats against the Pine Village HOA building. Also, defendants and Pine Village residents feared that the Butler-Hailey Law Firm or an associate thereof would retaliate and/or break-in and remove HOA files as they have in the pending case against them per Cause # 2012-52012 , in which it is alleged as follows: “that on September 9, 2010 Butler-Hailey, through its associate Rick Miller, waited for the Leawood Home Owners Association office to close, then broke into the office to collect and remove all HOA documents and records from the office. The padlock to the front gate, the main office door lock, and the lock to the inside office were cut or broken and the security alarm was triggered. Police arrived and Plaintiff’s representatives returned to find former counsel loading HOA boxes into his car (see exhibits P-3, P-4, P-5, P-6, P-7, P-8, P-9, P-10, P-11 & P-12) . This clearly demonstrates a need for defendants heightened awareness to prevent trespass, theft and destruction of evidence as the Pine Village Community has requested and literally demanded a forensic audit of its HOA files on numerous occasions, (see exhibits D-1, D-2, D-3, I-1, I-2, I-3, K-1, K-2 & K-3).

    On May 1, 2013 attorney Clint Brown knowingly and intentionally filed an affidavit with this Honorable Court, that he knew contained False and Deceptive information to persuade this Honorable Court to grant a Temporary Restraining Order against defendants in an effort to further liquidate the Pine Village accounts for monetary gains. (see exhibit Q-1), in which attorney Clint Brown purports, “Plaintiff has been unable to serve the defendants in this lawsuit. It appears that defendants are avoiding service.”
    This allegation is false as attorney Clint Brown’s actions have blatantly demonstrated abuse of process as “He” has passed this matter on April 26, 2013 , May 3, 2013 and May 24, 2013, (see exhibit Q-2).
    The truth of the matter is that Clint Brown has purposely avoided serving defendants and defendants were forced to file for an emergency hearing in Honorable Judge Bennett’s courtroom on May 24, 2013.
    Furthermore, Clint Brown stated in open court on May 24, 2013 that while attempting service, “Three big black guys surrounded his process server and threatened to rob him”. No evidence has been found to support this ludicrous statement…no affidavit or police report, etc. . Upon speaking with District 3 Constable Office, it was discovered that no attempts were ever made until May 25, 2013 when defendants were served for the court appearance on May 24, 2013 (see exhibit Q-3) . Take special notice of Constable Cox’s signature and date of service, of whom will gladly testify that he received the citation on May 25, 2013 and no prior service attempts were made. It is very evident that Attorney Roy Hailey, Clint Brown and Cliff Davis have directed and assisted plaintiffs to discriminate and act against the African-American Board Directors and Pine Village Members/Community throughout this entire period.

    Throughout this litigation process previous illegal board member Diane Gonzales has acted in the capacity of Pine Village HOA President, thus vitiating controversy, due to her illegal election to the Pine Village HOA Board being NULL & VOID per Texas Property Code 209.00594 as is evidenced on the video of the Pine Village HOA Annual Meeting that took place on October 9, 2012 when Katie Godinez, daughter of board member Deborah Jacobsen and grand-daughter of board member Nordeen Yates. Texas Property Code 209.00594 states in relevant part, “not withstanding any other provision of this chapter or any other law, a person who is a candidate in a property owners’ association election or who is otherwise the subject of an association vote, or a person related to that person within a third degree by consanguinity of affinity, as determined under chapter 573, Government Code, may not tabulate or otherwise be given access to the ballots cast in that election or vote.”

    On April 26, 2013 plaintiffs without any official meeting or votes of the members knowingly and intentionally changed the Texas State Registry and removed ALL African-American board members from the Texas State Registry while illegally adding Diane Gonzalez as a board director. This is discriminatory and illegal per Texas Property Code and the Pine Village HOA By-Laws (see exhibits R-1 & R-2). Furthermore, on March 4, 2013 Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) personally signed and filed the Texas State Franchise Tax Report for Pine Village HOA for the period of January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013 with a filing due date of May 15, 2013, in which he, Jim Nichols purports that Martha Preston is an active board director and Craig Mitchell is listed as the Vice-President, but Martha Preston was purportedly removed from the Pine Village HOA board on September 11, 2012. This is a blatant fraudulent act that is racially motivated as ALL African-American board directors have been illegally removed without election or votes of the members. If Martha Preston and Craig Mitchell were purportedly removed from the board in 2012, then why have tax documents been tendered under the penalties of perjury and penalties for providing the state with falsified documents purporting their seats on the board to still be valid, but they argue in court that they are not valid board directors.

    In summarization, Defendants pray this Honorable Court will review and apply all of the aforementioned and grant Defendants’ Injunctive and Declaratory Relief. Defendants pray this Supplemental Brief adequately demonstrates to this Honorable Court that the Defendants and the Pine Village Community/Members have suffered as follows:

    1.) racial discrimination as this is a predominantly African-American and Hispanic community
    2.) harassment
    3.) defamation
    4.) slander
    5.) libel
    6.) coerced to sustain sub-standard living conditions
    7.) intimidation of the community
    8.) Fraud, theft and misappropriation of funds

    Hoa attorney, Clint Brown, Roy Hailey, Cliff Davis and Butler-Hailey Law Firm blatantly
    utilized Deceptive Trade Practices while maliciously prosecuting Defendants with total disregard for the Pine Village Community/Members, as the Community Members’ monies are utilized to pay their invoices. This is the greatest example of “Abuse Of Process” as Defendants pray this brief demonstrates Attorney Clint Brown and Charles Lucenay knowingly and intentionally providing this Honorable Court with false affidavits in an attempt to further their cause against Defendants and the Pine Village Community/Members. Defendants and the Pine Village Community/Members pray that this brief supports findings that Roy Hailey, Clint Brown and Cliff Davis breached their contract with Pine Village when they failed to represent the Pine Village Community/Members and Board as a whole.

    Based upon all of the aforementioned, defendants move this Honorable Court to render a decision in favor of the Defendants and the Pine Village Community that will grant injunctive
    and declaratory relief by granting the Pine Village Community’s choice of removing the old Board and enacting the newly elected HOA BOARD and any other relief this court deems necessary.

    Respectfully Submitted,

    View Annual Meeting Video to see the corruption: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7efInVs9wU

    Google: You tube pine village houston

    (There are (3) parts 2 the video)

  • CAUSE No. 2013-23075

    PINE VILLAGE NORTH ASSOCIATION, } In THE DISTRICT COURT OF
    Plaintiff, }
    VS. } HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
    CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, CRAIG MITCHELL, }
    KENNETH SUGGS, MARINA SUGGS, TONY HUGHES, }
    MARTHA MARIE PRESTON, TARA LONG AND THE LONG } 152ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    LAW FIRM PLLC, } Defendant’s Motion For Reconsideration
    Defendants, }

    DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

    COMES NOW, Defendant, CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, a resident of Texas, Pro-Se and respectfully submits to this Honorable Court this Motion For Reconsideration of June 14, 2013 hearing, due to violations of the court order and newly discovered evidence, and would respectfully show unto this Honorable Court as follows:
    1.) Plaintiffs have blatantly and intentionally disregarded the Judge’s Order and Interim-Agreement
    2.) Illegal election practices have been utilized in attempt to preclude a fair election
    3.) Illegal amendments were made to the Pine Village By-Laws without proper notice, a meeting or authorization of members
    4.) On April 13,2013 the election of the new board WAS legal and in accordance with state statute
    5.) Plaintiffs made statements to the court that they knew to be false, while under oath at the hearing on 6-14-13 before this Honorable Court
    6.) The election proxies that were mailed DO NOT include an Agenda, Ballot or nomination list as prescribed by law and Pine Village North Association By-Laws.

    On 6-14-2013 during a hearing before this Honorable Court an interim-agreement was reached to hold an HOA Special Meeting for an election to fill (3) vacant board seats based on a (7) member board. The aforementioned election was to be held at least (30) days from 6-14-13, parties were to agree on the actual date. The Long Law Firm and Butler-Hailey Firm proposed a tentative date of 7-22-13 due to attorneys’ availability. The NOTICE that was sent out for said meeting, states that the meeting will be held on July 9, 2013 (See Exhibit 1 & Exhibit 2).

    On 6-25-13 certain residents of the Pine Village community received new voting proxies for the election. These new proxies were printed on “pink paper”, the wording/content and overall format has been amended and/or changed to reflect erroneous and illegal information as follows:

    1.) The new proxies have been amended and state in relevant part, “the undersigned, acting in accordance with the wishes of all of the owners of said property do hereby revoke any prior proxies given for any meetings of the members of Pine Village North Association”, (See Exhibit 3). The proxies that have been utilized for several years by the Pine Village North Association state in relevant part, “This proxy shall be valid for a period of eleven (11) months from the date of signature of owner. (See Exhibit 4) This change is contrary to Texas
    Civil Statutes, (Vernon’s Texas Civil Statute, Chapter 9, Article 1396-2.13) which states in relevant part, “ A member may vote in person or, unless the articles of incorporation or the by-laws otherwise provide, may vote by proxy executed in writing by the member or by his duly authorized attorney-in-fact. Proxies shall be valid for eleven (11) months from the date of its execution, unless otherwise provided in the proxy. Each proxy shall be revocable unless expressly provided therein to be irrevocable, and in no event shall it remain irrevocable for more than eleven (11) months. Where directors or officers are to be elected by members, the by-laws may provide that such elections may be conducted by mail, by facsimile transmission, or by any combination of the two”. The proxies commonly utilized in Pine Village North Association elections have always clearly stated that said proxy is valid for a period of (11) months, ( See Exhibit 4).

    The erroneously amended proxy states in relevant part, “if no individual is designated, then the Secretary of the association as my/our proxy, with full power to vote on my behalf as if I/we were present”, (See Exhibit 3), this statement has NEVER been listed on the commonly used proxy of a Pine Village North Association election. Furthermore, this is a blatant attempt to steer votes for the Plaintiffs. All of these changes were made without NOTICE to the association, defendants, and/or residents/members and without a vote, meeting or legal quorum. All of the aforementioned is clearly in violation of Article IV., Sec. 3 of the Pine Village North Association’s By-Laws and Vernon’s Texas Civil Statute, Chapter 9, Article 1396-2.09 (B)(1),(2)&(3) , which states in relevant part, “ A corporation’s board of directors may not amend or repeal the corporation’s by-laws, or adopt new by-laws, unless:
    (1) the articles of incorporation or this Act reserves the power exclusively to the members in whole or in part;
    (2) the management of the corporation is vested in its members; or
    (3) the members in amending, repealing, or adopting a particular by-law expressly provide that the board of directors may not amend or repeal that by-law. “
    The Pine Village By-Laws can ONLY be amended by a vote of the MEMBERS per the By-Laws.
    The election proxies that were mailed DO NOT include an Agenda, Ballot or nomination list as prescribed by law and Pine Village North Association By-Laws.

    NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE

    During the June 14, 2013 court hearing before the Honorable Judge Schaffer, Deborah Jacobsen, Pine Village North Association Secretary, stated while under oath that she is currently a Home Owner within the Pine Village North Association community. Deborah Jacobsen knowingly and intentionally, while under oath made this false statement as is evidenced by the Harris County Appraisal District report (See Exhibit 5) and the Pine Village Owners List (See Exhibit 6), which clearly demonstrate that Nordeen Yates is the owner of the property in which Deborah Jacobsen resides. Pursuant to Texas Penal Code-Section 37.02 (Perjury), Deborah Jacobsen knowingly and intentionally perjured herself pertaining to a simple question that was asked of her “Do you OWN a home in Pine Village”. If Deborah Jacobsen is willing to perjure herself relating to a simple question concerning residency, then how can we as Defendants expect her to truthfully answer questions that are pertinent to this case that greatly impact an entire community of (500) plus resident units ? (See Tex-On Motor v. Trans South Financial (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] March 16, 2006)(Seymore) [Motion for new trial erroneously denied; new evidence of perjured testimony on controlling fact requires reversal]DISMISSED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART: Opinion by Justice Charles W. Seymore Before Justices Edelman, Seymore and Guzman 14-04-00366-CV Tex-On Motor Center v. Trans South Financial Corporation, Roy D. Fitzpatrick and Marsha J. Fitzpatrick Appeal from Co Civil Ct at Law No 4 of Harris County

    Upon further investigation it has been discovered that Deborah Jacobsen has illegally changed the By-Laws to reflect a (7) member Board instead of a (9) member Board and have personally caused the illegal changes to be filed with the Harris County Clerk. (See Exhibits 7-A, 7-B, 7-C & 7-D). (Exhibit 7-C ) demonstrates the illegal amendment of the change made to the Board Directors from (9) to (7) Board Directors. (Exhibit 7-D) evidence demonstrates the illegal amendment of the By-Laws changes of the regular Pine Village HOA Board meetings from once a month to only (6) per year. This illegal change further prohibits the Pine Village Community members from attending meetings on a regular basis for matters relating to issues within the community in which they reside, due to the purported HOA President Jim Nichols (a.k.a. James Nichols) residing in the state of California, thus inconveniencing his schedule for travelling to Houston, Texas for said meetings.
    (Exhibits 7-A, 7-B, 7-C) were filed illegally by Deborah Jacobsen on 4-22-13, but these illegal amendments/changes have been instituted prior to the filing of the aforementioned date of 4-22-13 and were made after a “NEW” Pine Village North Association Board had been duly elected by the members, due to the fact that Pine Village North Association has NOT held an HOA meeting since 11-9-12 , prior to the Special Meeting to remove the previous Board Of Directors on April 13, 2013. This action taken by Deborah Jacobsen and the amending of the By-Laws was intended to reduce the Board to create a legal quorum that was not present since the last meeting of 11-9-12. The Pine Village North Association’s By-Laws clearly state that Regular Meetings shall occur monthly, (See Exhibit 9), which states in relevant part, “ Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held monthly at a regular time and place to be determined by the Board of Directors. The meeting time and place shall be posted at the clubhouse at least (5) days before the meeting” (Article VI, Section 1 of Pine Village By-Laws).
    The Pine Village By-Laws clarifying the total number of Board seats consisting of (9) Directors was implemented in 2-17-10, (See Exhibits 8-A, 8-B & 8-C) . On 4-22-13 Deborah Jacobsen, without NOTICE to the association, defendants, and/or residents/members and without a vote, meeting or legal quorum amended/changed Pine Village North Association By-Laws stating a (7) member board was legal. All of the aforementioned is clearly in violation of Article IV., Sec. 3 of the Pine Village North Association’s By-Laws , Texas Property Code Section 209.0056 and Vernon’s Texas Civil Statute, Chapter 9, Article 1396-2.09.

    CONCLUSION

    At the hearing on June 14, 2013, this Honorable Court stated that if there were any deviations or issues
    from the proposed interim-agreement or processes that Defendants could return to court and re-introduce said issues before the court. This motion is based on the aforementioned and clearly demonstrates that Plaintiffs are blatantly disregarding this Honorable Court’s order to follow proper election proceedings, thus continuing to further deprive Defendants and the Pine Village North Community /Members of due process.

    Based upon all of the aforementioned, defendants move this Honorable Court to reconsider a decision in favor of the Defendants and the Pine Village Community that will grant injunctive
    and declaratory relief by granting the Pine Village Community’s choice of removing the old Board and enacting the newly elected HOA BOARD and any other relief this court deems necessary.

    Respectfully Submitted,

    (ALL OF THE AFOREMENTIONED IN PUBLIC INFORMATION FILED WITHIN HARRIS COUNTY AND CAN BE VIEWED ON THE HARRIS COUNTY COURT WEBSITE AT THE FOLLOWING:

    http://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/Edocs/Public/search.aspx?ShowFF=1

  • VIEW THE FOLLOWING VIDEOS TO WATCH HOA CORRUPTION AT ITS PEAK:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPn2ds_S46I

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfTUsr1f9E

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7efInVs9wU

    HELP STOP THE HOA CORRUPTION !!!

    WE ARE ORGANIZING A RALLY AND NEED AS MANY SUPPORTERS AS POSSIBLE!

    pinevillage2012@gmail.com

    (832)303-2886

  • PINE VILLAGE CORRUPTION CAN BE VIEWED:

    You Tube: “Pine Village North Association:

    Abc New: http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/video?id=8848247

    View Harris County Case: 2013-23075

    http://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/Edocs/Public/search.aspx?ShowFF=1

  • ELITE LADIES OF EXPRESSIONS
    (832) 767-1210

    Pending Harris County Case# 2013-23075
    Pine Village North v. Christopher Mitchell et. Al.
    This is a predominantly african-american community that is
    being controlled and destroyed by an illegal all white HOA board
    that has illegally removed ALL minority board directors.

    The Long Law Firm was assisting the community with the aforementioned matters and the illegal all white HOA board and its HOA attorneys purposely made false statements in a lawsuit that now names the LONG LAW FIRM
    as a defendant (Case# 2013-23075) in an attempt to further oppress a minority community.

    This community is fed-up and have scheduled a Rally on
    Saturday July 27, 2013 at 4: 00 p.m. at 12301 Wild Pine Drive
    Houston, Texas (See Rally Flyer)

    These issues are comprised of Civil Rights Violations, Theft, Embezzlement,
    Discrimination, Racial Discrimination, Illegal Foreclosures, Abuse Of Power,
    Abuse Of Elderly & Gross Misappropriation Of Funds

    This is some information of what we are fighting in the Pine Village Community.

    Please view the following links:

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8829464 (Channel 13)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPn2ds_S46I
    (Annual Meeting Video Part 1)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjfTUsr1f9E
    (Annual Meeting Video Part 2)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZqx44OytxE
    (Annual Meeting Video Part 3)

    We need everyone’s support for this rally and to overcome this oppression.

    Thank You

    ELITE LADIES OF EXPRESSIONS
    (832) 767-1210
    &
    PINE VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS COALITION
    (832) 303-2886

  • Hello, I am Diane Gonzales, President of the HOA of Pine Village North. I have only been President a short time. I have only good intentions toward Pine Village North. I work on the board for no pay, it is a volunteer position as are all the board positions. I have a full time job at a Hospital just outside Houston. My two children live in Pine Village and that is how I came to be familiar with this community. As a matter of fact I purchased two more homes with my retirement money because I can see the potential this community has. All the drama going on with the coalition has done little more than cost our community money and turmoil. I am asking for some of you to step up to be a nominee, in order to be elected a board member. We have one opening now and will have a couple more a little later in the year. You just have to be willing to devote time, mostly e mail time, one meeting a month, maybe 3 hours. Coming up to the office and spending more time is optional. We also have committees which you can be part of.
    The neighborhood has been neglected for many many years, therefore it is going to take a couple years to get things back on track. As mentioned earlier in this blog many of the homes were owned by an attorney who did not tend to his homes and many were vandalized. We are trying to work through this paperwork as well as the banks who foreclosed on some homes and just left them to be vandalized. As we get funds in from the community through HOA monthly fees we are able to start repairs on leaky roofs and siding. Once repairs are done we can concentrate on revitalization, redoing the whole building, repainting, siding and roof. Our goal is to get the pool up by next summer but this is a 60,000 job. We have done all the paperwork on the burned building and that started coming down today!!! Oh yes, the dreaded speed bumps, I have removed many at the entrance around the gate. I had good intentions when putting them there. To help save the gates from being hit as well as the well being of our children who get off the school bus near there. Here are some ways you can actively help our community:
    Call the non emergency number for Harris county (713-221-6000) if you see any illegal activity.
    Please pick up any trash you see in the courtyards or common areas, we want to take pride in where we live.
    Do not put your trash out until the morning of garbage day which is Tuesdays and Fridays.
    ………………. large trash collection up to 50 pounds is picked up every Friday but for the sake of the looks of our neighborhood please do not put it out by the curb until Friday mornings.
    We are overrun by stray dogs. Please make us aware of where they are all nesting at night or if you have any good ideas of how to stop them from coming in to our neighborhood.. Please also be a responsible owner of
    your animals
    Operating a business inside our community is prohibited by the by laws so if you know someone who is fixing cars, running a daycare, running a boarding house, these are some examples, let them know, you can also report it to the HOA office.
    If you would like a copy of the by laws please stop by the HOA office we are always happy to share this info.
    We are all responsible for carrying insurance on each of our homes. Please submit proof of this by February 1, 2014.
    Happy New Year everyone. I am so happy to be part of Pine Village. With your help we can bring it back to the glory of 1974 when it was built.

  • My name is Augustine Rodriguez and I am a board member elected August 2013. We have come along way since August 2013. The HOA under Diane Gonzales hired the Harris County Sheriff’s Department to patrol the community and Deputy Scott Dexter has been fantastic in his duties. The Board voted to turn over all responsibility to a Property Management Company in December of 2013 and Associa Principal Management took over operations of the Pine Village North Community February 2014. The burned unit located at 5802 A-F Twisted Pines was demolished in January 2014 and beginning in December of 2013 we partnered with the Harris County Animal Control to pick up the loose dogs in Pine Village North. 8 loose dogs were picked up since January to April of 2014. The board has decided to begin stenciling the addresses to all townhomes in Pine Village North. The work should begin this week and will take about a month to complete. This will eliminate some chaos in this subdivision. We are moving towards complete offsite management so the remaining staff located at the clubhouse will be layed off at the next meeting. We cannot afford to have employees in this clubhouse. The clubhouse and the recreational areas will be restored. We have moved all meetings to the Aldine Store Front located 5333 Aldine Mail Route until the clubhouse can be restored and new furniture ordered. The United States Post Office has informed the HOA that they will be replacing all the mailboxes in Pine Village North at no cost to the HOA and the property owners.
    We hope to have all lawsuits filed against the HOA dismissed by the end of the year and we hope to have judgments against all of the Coalition Members that incited these lawsuits. Tara Long the attorney representing the Coalition has had her law license suspended for the month of April 2014 and her probation has been extended another year until February 2015. The HOA currently has a lawsuit against the Coalition Members and their attorney Tara Long. The Coalition Members who are all mouth and no money have not paid their attorney’s so they might not have any legal representation. Mr Chris Mitchell chicagolander and his friend and comrade at arms Kenneth Suggs are representing themselves as they do not or cannot afford to pay an attorney.
    We have placed a priority on collection. Deadbeats that are behind on their maintenance fees will be receiving notices that there property are going to auction.
    At the April 8, 2014 3 well qualified property owners were appointed by the Board of Directors in the executive session. The board members are having the background check and after they pass the background check they will have to sign a Conflict of Interest Statement banning them from doing business with the HOA and banning them from purchasing properties that went to auction by the HOA.
    This is your Board working for you. The Coalition has caused nothing but conflict and wasted thousands of dollars in attorney fees that could have gone toward repairs. Please stand up to these deadbeats. Join us in rebuilding Pine Village North. It could be worth your while. Hang with the winners and not the losers.

    Augustine Rodriguez

  • PINE VILLAGE “THE SAGA CONTINUES”

    The aforementioned (2) has failed to commentators stated that they were “elected board of directors”,
    but have failed to post that on November 4, 2014, that the Honorable Judge Mike Miller concluded in open
    court that the purported board of directors of which includes “Augustine Rodriguez and Diane Gonzales” were not LEGALLY elected, could not show proof of a LEGAL election, nor of LEGAL meetings, thus rendering their actions ILLEGAL as per Texas State Laws. “READ” the case docket (Case # 2013-23075) for ACTUAL and VALID proof of actions in Pine Village. Also, the next court hearing has been set by the Honorable Judge Mike Miller (11th District) Tuesday March 10, 2014 @ 10:00 a.m. , 201 Caroline (9th Floor) 11th District , Houston, Texas. (Below is a copy of the latest filed court brief)

    CAUSE No. 2013-23075

    PINE VILLAGE NORTH ASSOCIATION, } In THE DISTRICT COURT OF
    Plaintiff, }
    VS. } HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
    CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, CRAIG MITCHELL, }
    KENNETH SUGGS, MARINA SUGGS, TONY HUGHES, }
    MARTHA MARIE PRESTON, TARA LONG AND THE LONG } 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    LAW FIRM PLLC, } Defendants’ Motion For
    Defendants, } Abatement Of Illegal Election/
    Annual Meeting of 12-17-14

    DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ABATEMENT OF ILLEGAL ELECTION/ANNUAL MEETING OF PINE VILLAGE NORTH ASSOCIATION ON 12-17-2014, AND APPOINTMENT OF COURT RECEIVER¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
    ¬¬¬
    COMES NOW, Defendant, CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL, a resident of Texas, Pro-Se and respectfully submits to this Honorable Court this Defendants’ motion for appeal and/or abatement of illegal election/annual meeting of Pine Village North Association on 12-17-2014, application for temporary injunctive relief and appointment of court receiver¬, due to numerous violations of Texas State Laws governing elections processes of a non-profit organization/corporation and the court agreement and newly discovered evidence, and would respectfully show unto this Honorable Court as follows:
    1.) Respondents blatantly and intentionally disregarded Judge Miller’s (11th Civil Dist.) order of November 4, 2014. Defendant is objecting to the election results of December 17, 2014 of the Pine Village North Association, which was conducted WITHOUT proper legal NOTICE to ALL members, lack of a LEGAL QUOROM, lack of a VALID Member’s List and in violation of various Texas State Laws.
    2.) Special Master, Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson failed to LEGALLY meet the provisions of his Court Appointment, but is still requesting payment of $ 23,476.05 for services that were NOT LEGALLY rendered.

    3.) On December 17, 2014, Special Master, Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson failed to establish a LEGAL QUORUM , knowingly and intentionally still conducted an Annual Meeting/Election for the Pine Village North Association. Attorney Wayman L. Prince knowingly and intentionally acted in concert with the Special Master, Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson in attempting to falsely establish a legal Quorum for the aforementioned meeting.

    4.) On January 30, 2015, Special Master, Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson knowingly and intentionally filed into the records of the Honorable Court a report (Election Results) that he personally knew contained falsified information and election results.

    5.) The purported “NEW” Pine Village Board of Directors (Sheila James, Shawn Gibson, John Pappapavlo, Tony Anthony Briscoe, Marcos Benitez, Richard Castro, Susan Brown, Augustine Rodriguez, Diane Gonzales) have taken official actions as a Board without an official meeting in violation of the the Court’s Order by acting prior to the Court’s approval of the election results and are in clear violation of Texas Business Organization. Code ANN. 22.220 & Texas Civil Code ANN. 1396-9.10 , in which said action has caused harm to the community/members.

    6.) Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson and Attorney Wayman L. Prince attempted to host a NON-NOTICED Pine Village Special Meeting, thus another secret meeting as is the practice of the purported board until I reminded them that they DID NOT give the members’ NOTICE. (See Exhibit 6)

    On 11-4-2014 during a hearing before the Honorable Judge Miller (11th Dist.) the Judge stated that the current board of directors were ILLEGAL as they could not prove that the previous meetings, appointments and elections of their board were conducted in accordance with Texas State laws, but were still allowed to operate for an additional (45) days. An interim agreement was reached to hold an HOA Annual Meeting for an election to elect a completely new board of directors. The agreement was that an Annual Meeting would be conducted utilizing a Special Master. On November 21, 2014 a conference was conducted by Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson relating to an agreement of the provisions of the Annual Meeting.

    On, November 24, 2014, I formally requested a copy of the most current Members List from David Orr Of PMG Management Co. ( who acts as the management company for Pine Village North Association) in accordance with the provisions of Texas Business Organization Code 22.158 (See Exhibit A-1, A-2). Wayman L . Prince illegally denied my request on November 26, 2014 stating, “The Owner’s List is the work product of PVNA and is therefore confidential and privileged” (See Exhibits B-1, B-2). On November 26, 2014 I made numerous requests of the aforementioned to Wayman L. Prince and Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson, (See Exhibits C-1, C-2, C-3, D-1, D-2, )

    On December 2, 2014, several requests were made to Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson pertaining to the non-receipt of the Members List. Finally , Special Master Attorney Dwight E Jefferson responded that he sent Attorney Tara Long A copy of the members list (See Exhibit E-1). (Attorney Tara Long DOES NOT represent me in these matters. Upon review of said members list ALL Defendant parties raised issues pertaining to the purported election packets that were to be mailed for the election and the non-compliance of the members list we provided the applicable citations of Texas Statutes to support our complaints. (See Exhibits F-1 through F-14). This was in violation of Texas Business Organization Code, Title 2, Chapter 22.158,22.351, Texas Property Code 209.005, Article X of the Pine Village North Association’s By Laws and Vernon’s Texas Civil Statute.

    On December 4, 2014 additional requests were made to Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson to rectify the issues of an incomplete Members List and Election Packets, (See Exhibit H-1). Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson merely stated that any objections that we had needed to be addressed in court, (See Exhibit G-1). On December 4, 2014 Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson Finally asked “Mr. Mitchell, exactly who do you represent and how are they not being able to participate in the election?”, (See Exhibit I-1).

    On December, 5, 2014, I responded to Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson, explaining that without a valid members list there is no way to conclude the LEGAL QUORUM and that many Members are being precluded from their right to vote and that the power to rectify this was within his appointment, (See Exhibits J-1 and J-2). On December 15, 2014, I personally filed a T.R.O. (Harris County Case# 2013-23075, Image # 63518418) and was granted a hearing before the Honorable Judge Mike Miller in an attempt to address the issues of an invalid Members’ List. Judge Miller advised Attorney Wayman L. Prince that he should make certain that ALL members are given NOTICE and the opportunity to vote. Judge Miller also stated that he did not want to see that there was a discrepancy based on a few votes. The Honorable Judge Mike Miller instructed Defendants to demonstrate a few of the discrepancies to validate the defendants’ point. On December 16, 2014, Defendants demonstrated that in accordance with Texas State Law that when a discrepancy exists as it relates to a members’ list that HCAD should be utilized. The defendants then provided proof that when a review was conducted of ONLY (2) of the (4) streets located within a defined area of Pine Village North, that (41) discrepancies were shown. (This was after a review of ONLY 2 of the 4 streets). A clear review of the Plaintiffs’ own Exhibit 6, (Harris County Case# 2013-23075, Image # 6405199) demonstrates (24) property listing WITHOUT A MAILING ADDRESS (Offsite Adress), therefore clearly evidencing that prior to my Defendants’ objections (24) members of the Association would NOT receive Notice or an Election Packet. Furthermore, in the Special Master’s Report, (Harris County Case# 2013-23075, Image# 64051993, Page 3 of 11 Paragraph 3), Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson clearly states that he mailed election packets to ALL owners on DECEMBER 22, 2014, (See Exhibit 12A). The aforementioned adds validity to Defendants’ objections that all members did NOT receive election packets and were not able to vote if the Special Master via his own admissions and report filed into the record of the Court states that he mailed election packets on December 22, 2014 for an election/meeting that took place on December 17, 2014.

    On November 4, 2014, Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson, knowingly and intentionally accepted a Court Appointment for the purpose of conducting an Annual Meeting/Election of The Pine Village North Association and failed to LEGALLY fulfill his appointment, but has submitted an invoice for payment of US funds totaling $ 23,476.05 (See Special Master Exhibit, Harris County Case# 2013-23075, image # 64052005)(Attached Exhibit 11), which if paid will constitute Theft By Deception Texas Title 7, Chapter 31, section 31.01 (A)(B)& (E). Sec. 31.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
    (1) “Deception” means:
    (A) creating or confirming by words or conduct a false impression of law or fact that is likely to affect the judgment of another in the transaction, and that the actor does not believe to be true;
    (B) failing to correct a false impression of law or fact that is likely to affect the judgment of another in the transaction, that the actor previously created or confirmed by words or conduct, and that the actor does not now believe to be true;

    On December 17, 2014, Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson and Attorney Wayman L. Prince knowingly and intentionally attempted to deceitfully establish a Quorum as Special Master’s Exhibit 5 (Defendant’s Exhibit 5A) clearly evidence that Attorney Wayman L. Prince signed his own signature on line # 20 on a list enetitled “Voting Member Sign In” when in fact Wayman Prince and Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson know that Attorney Wayman L. Prince does NOT own a property in the area defined as “Pine Village North” (See Exhibit 5A). This action was also affirmed by Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson when he in fact proceeded to verbally conduct roll-call as is evidenced in Special Master’s
    Transcription of the meeting, (Special Master’s Exhibit 10, page 8 of 20 lines 23-24)(See Defendant’s Exhibit 10A). Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson also counts the signature of Shawn Gibson of which Mr. Gibson had scratched his name off the list when it was reiterated that the sign-in sheet was for “Owners” ONLY. (See Special Master’s Exhibit 5) (Defendant’s exhibit 5A, Line 23) . Furthermore, the transcripts evidence that the Special Master Attorney Dwight E. Jefferson acknowledged that the signature had been scratched out as the Special Master failed to call Shawn Gibson’s name while conducting roll-call (See Exhibit 10B) (Note that Ray Jones is called, then Ms. Richard. In conclusion of the (51) signatures of property owners needed to establish a Quorum, (1) is of Attorney Wayman L. Prince and the other is scratched out, therefore should not be counted, but Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson knowingly and intentionally counted both and submitted both as part of his Official Report to the court, thus committing “Aggravated Perjury” by the definition of Texas Statute Title 8 Chapter 37.01 (2)(E), Aggravated Perjury 37.03 (a)(1) and Materiality 37.04 (a) , which states in relevant part:
    Sec. 37.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
    (1) “Court record” means a decree, judgment, order, subpoena, warrant, minutes, or other document issued by a court of:
    (A) this state;
    (B) another state;
    (C) the United States;
    (D) a foreign country recognized by an act of congress or a treaty or other international convention to which the United States is a party;
    (E) an Indian tribe recognized by the United States; or
    (F) any other jurisdiction, territory, or protectorate entitled to full faith and credit in this state under the United States Constitution.
    (2) “Governmental record” means:
    (A) anything belonging to, received by, or kept by government for information, including a court record;
    (B) anything required by law to be kept by others for information of government;
    (C) a license, certificate, permit, seal, title, letter of patent, or similar document issued by government, by another state, or by the United States;
    (D) a standard proof of motor vehicle liability insurance form described by Section 601.081, Transportation Code, a certificate of an insurance company described by Section 601.083 of that code, a document purporting to be such a form or certificate that is not issued by an insurer authorized to write motor vehicle liability insurance in this state, an electronic submission in a form described by Section 502.046(i), Transportation Code, or an evidence of financial responsibility described by Section 601.053 of that code;
    (E) an official ballot or other election record; or

    Sec. 37.03. AGGRAVATED PERJURY. (a) A person commits an offense if he commits perjury as defined in Section 37.02, and the false statement:
    (1) is made during or in connection with an official proceeding; and (2) is material.
    (b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.
    Sec. 37.04. MATERIALITY. (a) A statement is material, regardless of the admissibility of the statement under the rules of evidence, if it could have affected the course or outcome of the official proceeding.
    (b) It is no defense to prosecution under Section 37.03 (Aggravated Perjury) that the declarant mistakenly believed the statement to be immaterial.
    (c) Whether a statement is material in a given factual situation is a question of law.

    Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson knowingly and intentionally submitted to this Honorable Court an election report and election results that he and Attorney Wayman L. Prince knew to be fictitious and fraudulent in violation of Texas State Law Title 8, Section, 39.01, 39.02, 39.03

    CHAPTER 39. ABUSE OF OFFICE

    Sec. 39.01. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
    (1) “Law relating to a public servant’s office or employment” means a law that specifically applies to a person acting in the capacity of a public servant and that directly or indirectly:
    (A) imposes a duty on the public servant; or
    (B) governs the conduct of the public servant.

    (2) “Misuse” means to deal with property contrary to:
    (A) an agreement under which the public servant holds the property;
    (B) a contract of employment or oath of office of a public servant;
    (C) a law, including provisions of the General Appropriations Act specifically relating to government property, that prescribes the manner of custody or disposition of the property; or
    (D) a limited purpose for which the property is delivered or received.
    Sec. 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY. (a) A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly:
    (1) violates a law relating to the public servant’s office or employment; or
    (2) misuses government property, services, personnel, or any other thing of value belonging to the government that has come into the public servant’s custody or possession by virtue of the public servant’s office or employment.
    (b) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a Class A misdemeanor.
    (c) An offense under Subsection (a)(2) is:
    (1) a Class C misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is less than $20;
    (2) a Class B misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is $20 or more but less than $500;
    (3) a Class A misdemeanor if the value of the use of the thing misused is $500 or more but less than $1,500;
    (4) a state jail felony if the value of the use of the thing misused is $1,500 or more but less than $20,000;
    (5) a felony of the third degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $20,000 or more but less than $100,000;
    (6) a felony of the second degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $100,000 or more but less than $200,000; or
    (7) a felony of the first degree if the value of the use of the thing misused is $200,000 or more.

    (d) A discount or award given for travel, such as frequent flyer miles, rental car or hotel discounts, or food coupons, are not things of value belonging to the government for purposes of this section due to the administrative difficulty and cost involved in recapturing the discount or award for a governmental entity.
    (e) If separate transactions that violate Subsection (a)(2) are conducted pursuant to one scheme or continuing course of conduct, the conduct may be considered as one offense and the value of the use of the things misused in the transactions may be aggregated in determining the classification of the offense.
    (f) The value of the use of a thing of value misused under Subsection (a)(2) may not exceed:
    (1) the fair market value of the thing at the time of the offense; or
    (2) if the fair market value of the thing cannot be ascertained, the cost of replacing the thing within a reasonable time after the offense.

    Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION. (a) A public servant acting under color of his office or employment commits an offense if he:
    (1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful;
    (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful; or
    (3) intentionally subjects another to sexual harassment.
    (b) For purposes of this section, a public servant acts under color of his office or employment if he acts or purports to act in an official capacity or takes advantage of such actual or purported capacity.
    (c) In this section, “sexual harassment” means unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, submission to which is made a term or condition of a person’s exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, either explicitly or implicitly.
    (d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that an offense is a felony of the third degree if the public servant acted with the intent to impair the accuracy of data reported to the Texas Education Agency through the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) described by Section 42.006, Education Code, under a law requiring that reporting.

    On February 1, 2015 at approximately 11:37 a.m. I , Christopher Mitchell personally phoned “purported new board director Tony Anthony Briscoe to discuss the Notice that was posted on the Pine Village North Bulletin Board (See Exhibit 13), which states that by Order of the Pine Village Board Of Directors, (2) community access gates will be opened on February 3, 2015. I explained to Tony Briscoe that these gates had been chained shut for the past (4) years for a reason, to allow only one point of access to the property to minimize criminal activity. Tony Briscoe told me that Judge Dwight E, Jefferson had called him earlier in the week to tell them that they were O.K. to operate now that the results had been filed with the court. I explained to Tony Briscoe that the Honorable Court had NOT agreed and signed to ORDER to accept and validate the election results. This conversation was witnessed by another party during the call.
    The “New Purported Rogue Board” has without Court Approval or a meeting entered into new contracts, opened gates (See Exhibit 14) that have allowed a drunk driver to speed through an entrance once closed and hit a light post during the morning hours while community children are walking on the same street in transit to school (See Exhibit 15), several homes have been demolished (See Exhibit 16). All of the aforementioned actions have taken place in violation of the by-laws as well as Honorable Judge Mike Miller’s approval of the election results and signature on the Court Order as well as constituting Actions Without A Meeting in violation of Texas Civil Code 1396-9.10, which states in relevant part:
    A. Any action required by this Act to be taken at a meeting of the members or directors of a corporation, or any action which may be taken at a meeting of the members or directors or of any committee, may be taken without a meeting if a consent in writing, setting forth the action to be taken, shall be signed by all the members entitled to vote with respect to the subject matter thereof, or all of the directors, or all of the members of the committee, as the case may be.
    B. Such consent shall have the same force and effect as a unanimous vote, and may be stated as such in any articles or document filed with the Secretary of State under this Act.
    C. (1) The articles of incorporation may provide that any action required by this Act to be taken at a meeting of the members or directors of a corporation or any action that may be taken at a meeting of the members or directors or of any committee may be taken without a meeting if a consent in writing, setting forth the action to be taken, is signed by a sufficient number of members, directors, or committee members as would be necessary to take that action at a meeting at which all of the members, directors, or members of the committee were present and voted.
    (2) Each written consent shall bear the date of signature of each member, director, or committee member who signs the consent. A written consent signed by less than all of the members, directors, or committee members is not effective to take the action that is the subject of the consent unless, within 60 days after the date of the earliest dated consent delivered to the corporation in the manner required by this article, a consent or consents signed by the required number of members, directors, or committee members is delivered to the corporation at its registered office, registered agent, principal place of business, transfer agent, registrar, exchange agent, or an officer or agent of the corporation having custody of the books in which proceedings of meetings of members, directors, or committees are recorded. Delivery shall be by hand or certified or registered mail, return receipt requested. Delivery to the corporation’s principal place of business shall be addressed to the president or principal executive officer of the corporation.
    (3) Prompt notice of the taking of any action by members, directors, or a committee without a meeting by less than unanimous written consent shall be given to all members, directors, or committee members who did not consent in writing to the action.
    (4) If any action by members, directors, or a committee is taken by written consent signed by less than all of the members, directors, or committee members, any articles or documents filed with the Secretary of State as a result of the taking of the action shall state, in lieu of any statement required by this Act concerning any vote of the members or directors, that written consent has been given in accordance with the provisions of this article and that any written notice required by this article has been given.
    (5) A telegram, telex, cablegram, or similar transmission by a member, director, or member of a committee or a photographic, photostatic, facsimile, or similar reproduction of a writing signed by a member, director, or member of a committee shall be regarded as signed by the member, director, or member of a committee for purposes of this article.

    On January 15, 2015, prior to the Special Master Dwight E. Jefferson filing his Election Report to the Court an email was sent to me from Special Master evidencing that a meeting had been scheduled for that evening, but was not LEGALLY NOTICED (See Exhibit 6 & Exhibit 7), which evidence that the “Purported New Board and Attorney Wayman Prince had already had a secret meeting to make all of the aforementioned decisions.

    The Status Quo Is The Condition Of Non-Violation Of Law
    Where the acts that are sought to be enjoined are acts that constitute a violation of law, the status quo to be preserved should be non-violative of that law. Continued violation of the law cannot be permitted. Houston Compressed Steel Corp. v. State, 456 S.W. 2d 768, 773 (Tex. Civ. App-Houston [1st Dist.] 1970, no writ). See also; Texas Pet Food, Inc. v. State, 529 S.W. 2d 820, 829 (Tex. Civ. App-Waco 1975, writ ref’d n.r.e.). Accordingly, in this case, the continuing violation of the Pine Village By-Laws, Texas Open Meetings Act and Texas Business Code, which ensure the health, safety, comfort and legal rights of its residents’ should not be considered the status quo, pending a trial on the merits.

    Duty Of The Court To Restrain Violations

    “In an injunction case wherein the very acts sought to be enjoined are acts which, prima facie, constitute the violation of expressed law, the status quo to be preserved should never be a condition of affairs where the respondent would be permitted to continue the acts constituting that violation. In such instances, the status quo to be preserved by temporary injunction is the last actual, peaceable, uncontested status which preceded the pending controversy, and when it is determined that the law is being violated it is the province and the duty of the court to restrain it. ”Houston Compressed Steel Corp. v. State, 456 S.W. 2d 768, 773 (Tex. Civ. App-Houston [1st Dist.] 1970, no writ); RAttikin Title Co. v. Grievance Committee, 272 S.W. 2d 948 (Tex. Civ. App-Fort Worth 1954, no writ).
    CONCLUSION
    At the hearing on November 4, 2014, the Honorable Judge Mike Miller stated that this election would be conducted in accordance with the Laws Of The State OF Texas and the Pine Village North By-Laws. This motion is based on the aforementioned and clearly demonstrates that Respondents are blatantly disregarding the interim agreement to follow proper LEGAL procedures, thus continuing to further deprive Defendants and the Pine Village North Community /Members of due process and loss of Community Funds (Special Master invoice, See Exhibit 11) plus Attorney Wayman Lee Prince fees prior to trial. The purported Annual Meeting also violated Texas Business Organization Code Title 2, Chapter 22, Sec. 22.352 as David Orr of PMG Management did NOT provide an accurate financial report that conforms to accounting standards as adopted by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants as is a requirement of Sec. 22.352, which states in relevant part:
    Sec. 22.352. FINANCIAL RECORDS AND ANNUAL REPORTS. (a) A corporation shall maintain current and accurate financial records with complete entries as to each financial transaction of the corporation, including income and expenditures, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
    (b) Based on the records maintained under Subsection (a), the board of directors of the corporation shall annually prepare or approve a financial report for the corporation for the preceding year. The report must conform to accounting standards as adopted by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and must include:
    (1) a statement of support, revenue, and expenses;
    (2) a statement of changes in fund balances;

    (3) a statement of functional expenses; and
    (4) a balance sheet for each fund.
    Based upon all of the aforementioned, Defendant/Member moves this Honorable Court to Restrain Plaintiffs and the management company, David Orr of PMG Management from operations and duties of the Pine Village North Association and grant Injunctive Relief by appointing a Court Receiver to handle the daily operations of the Pine Village North Association and its Members, thus abating the illegal election results of December 17, 2014 Annual Meeting immediately. The election processes have been contaminated by the Plaintiffs and new Legislature has passed new voting procedures clearly addressing these matters. Respondent’s legal counsel (Attorney Wayman Lee. Prince) is aware of all of the aforementioned as he has received Copies of several Legal Notices of the aforementioned issues and has written corresponded and has demonstrated that he does not have to abide by the Texas Laws entailed within the Notices sent to him .

  • I walked through this property Sunday cause I was thinking of finding a place there since it’s close to my job but the property is trash it’s not safe for children to be out playing in that mess. I know the people that live there pay to live there so it the property should be clean every day for the sake of the lil ones. I change my mind fast cause that place is not even worth renting for a 1.00 living under a bridge is probably cleaner.

  • A few notes/questions:

    I’m interested in buying a townhome in this community to live in and in the soon after to purchase others for investment, meaning I will be onsite to pay attention to my potential renters and to genuinely be a part of the community.

    In doing a walk and drive through I noticed per the complaints from the past I’ve seen here and elsewhere online matched my immediate concerns which is: what exactly is the HOA doing with the fees that they collect and who is actually managing the property? I saw several vacant units that had broken windows and sliding glass doors which were not boarded up. I saw several units being lived in with obvious repairs needed to siding and roofs which I would guess aside from a visual problem of neglect tells me that there is probably damage being done internally due to water leakage and animals being able to get in.

    Have the HOA issues from the past become just that? Is there a new board that is addressing the issues that I saw and do they have a plan in place to begin revitalizing the community? Is there also going to be a change to HOA rules and regulations that investors need to either live on site or at least be limited on how many units they can purchase with the HOA having background checks and final authorization as to who is able to rent said units in order to cut down and vandalism and neglect of properties?

  • @Michelle, what investment value could you possibly see in this property?

  • LOL – If the HOA is or will do their job, there is much potential. Maybe I’m a little Polly Anna in my way of looking at the world but I believe that with the proper infrastructure and support from the HOA this place could be turned around in a way that benefits homeowners, investors and tenants. I’m not saying that even with that in place that the entire community would be turned around a matter of days, but I that with a solid plan of action by all parties with HOA setting the proper pace of maintaining the properties for which they are being paid and not just the ones at the front, establishing background checks for anyone moving and/or buying into the community that this place could be turned around rather quickly.