By Don Mahan
On Monday and Tuesday of this week I attended a trial in Alpine
regarding the lawsuit brought forth by Julianne Braun.
Julianne presented 17 documents of evidence to the Judge, jury, defense
attorney, most of the current POATRI board, and interested property
The evidence consisted of two (2) documents filed by POATRI that were
alleged to be fraudulent and (15) documents submitted to prove that the
first two (2) documents submitted contained fraud. All the documents
were either documents filed at the Brewster county courthouse or
documents from POATRI.
The defense attorney presented no evidence that the evidence submitted
by Julianne Braun was not true factual evidence. The defense lawyer did
object to each and every document of evidence submitted to the court
stating that "The evidence was not relevant because Julianne did not
own her land when the document was filed". The judge overruled all
the objections accept one concerning liens.
The defense attorney in his cross examination of Julianne Braun and his
presentation of evidence did not refute the evidence produced by
Julianne Braun. The defense attorney asked the judge for a directed
verdict in favor of his client on a technical item because Julianne had
not filed under the proper section of the law. The judge ruled in favor
of the defense attorney's interpretation and the jury was dismissed.
Ladies and gentlemen, the suit was lost on a technical item, but the
evidence still stands. Hopefully Julianne will present a summary of all
the evidence presented. Also she has the option to appeal the judge's
A polling of the jury after the trial indicated that most believed that
POATRI had wronged the property owners based on the evidence presented
Julianne Braun. The current board heard evidence that the property
owners of Terlingua Ranch had been wronged by a previous board of
Now what will the current board do with the evidence they heard
presented at the trial? They heard exactly how the previous board had
manipulated the bylaws and TRMA to raise maintenance fees.
They can no long plead no knowledge of previous wrongdoings of the
previous board. Tanya Phillips, Charlie Oaks, Marbert Moore, Vernon
Stump, Randolph Williford, Frank Oxsheer, and Jeff Daly (partime) heard
the evidence. Dori Ramsey and Dr. Paul Burger did not attend the
I think the board will not do a thing, to right the wrong done by the
previous board. Why do I say that, because the present board is already
making false statements about the trial? On the POATRI web site Tanya
Phillips has stated:
"LAWSUIT Update - J Braun vs. POATRI -
Judge entered a Directive Verdict based on lack of evidence to show
The above statement is clearly false because the trial was won on a
technical error, not based on a lack of evidence to show fraud. I call
on Tanya Phillips to remove this false statement from our Web site.