DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Page | 1

KAK.6690

CAUSE NO. DC-15-05418

DAVID and MARLITT GRAY,

Plaintiffs,

v.

NORTH TEXAS PREMIER SOCCER

ASSOCIATION, INC. and PREMIER

PARK, INC.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

14th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

COME NOW, NORTH TEXAS PREMIER SOCCER ASSOCIATION, INC. and

PREMIER PARK, INC., Defendants in the above entitled and numbered cause, and pursuant to

Rule 192.6 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, files this, their Motion for Protective Order,

and would respectfully show unto this Court as follows:

I.

This premises liability matter arises from two occasions on which Plaintiff David Gray

claims that he was injured while playing adult men’s recreational soccer at the Premier Park

recreational soccer field complex in Balch Springs, Texas. Defendant North Texas Premier

Soccer Association, Inc. (hereinafter, “NTPSA”) is a Texas non-profit corporation that promotes

adult men’s recreational soccer in Dallas and surrounding areas. Defendant Premier Park, Inc.

(hereinafter, “Premier Park”) is a Texas corporation through which NTPSA owns and operates

the Premier Park recreational soccer field complex in Balch Springs, Texas.1

1 See Exhibit A, “Certificate of Stock.”

FILEDDALLAS COUNTY

2/15/2016 3:40:29 PMFELICIA PITRE

DISTRICT CLERK

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Page | 2

III.

Defendants herein seek protection from the Court for the following discovery abuses

perpetrated by Plaintiffs in this matter.

A. Defamation of Defendants’ Principals

Upon information and belief, Plaintiff David Gray has repeatedly misrepresented to

NTPSA members and other members of the local soccer community that president Larry Hall

and general manager Andrea Hall own Premier Park and/or have engaged in self-dealing

regarding the operation and administration of the NTPSA and Premier Park.

B. Threats Regarding Criminal Prosecution and/or Media Coverage

Moreover, Plaintiffs have threatened to incorporate these misrepresentations into their

pleadings in this matter, for the purpose of encouraging criminal prosecution of Mr. and Mrs.

Hall (via the Texas Attorney General’s office) and generating negative media attention (via the

Dallas Morning News) for Mr. and Mrs. Hall, the NTPSA, and Premier Park.2

C. Unauthorized Entry onto Defendants’ Premises

It is undisputed that Plaintiffs and their agents have entered onto Defendants’ premises, in

an unauthorized fashion, for the purpose of conducting discovery in this matter, without

notifying Defendants that they intended to enter the premises or requesting permission from

Defendants to enter the premises.3 Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs not only instructed or

authorized their retained expert, Charles Wheeler, to enter Defendants’ premises for the purposes

of conducting discovery, but also entered the premises themselves, for the purposes of

conducting discovery, taking photographs (which they have not produced to date), interviewing

2 See Exhibit B, Correspondence from Ramon Rodriguez to Randall W. Miller (1/6/16); Exhibit C, Correspondence

from Ramon Rodriguez to Scott W. Self (1/12/16).

3 See, e.g., Exhibit D, AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES WHEELER (12/30/15).

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Page | 3

witnesses (whom they have not disclosed to date), and soliciting other persons to file suit against

Defendants.

IV.

In light of the foregoing, Defendants respectfully request that the Court exercise its

powers under Rule 192.6(b) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, in order to protect

Defendants from the undue burden, harassment, annoyance, and invasion of property rights that

Plaintiffs have visited upon Defendants and which Plaintiffs appear poised to continue visiting

upon Defendants for the remainder of this litigation, absent intervention by and relief from the

Court.

Defendants request that the Court prohibit Plaintiffs from conducting discovery

regarding, e.g., Defendants’ corporate formation and governance; Defendants’ books and

financial records; the acquisition of the Premier Park recreational soccer complex from the City

of Balch Springs; Defendants’ property tax liabilities and payments; etc. In the alternative,

Defendants request that the Court limit the extent of the discovery to which Plaintiffs may be

entitled on these issues. Defendants likewise request that discovery on these issues, if permitted

by the Court, be undertaken only by such terms and conditions and/or at the time and place

directed by the Court.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendants NORTH TEXAS PREMIER

SOCCER ASSOCIATION, INC. and PREMIER PARK, INC. pray that the Court grant this,

their Motion for Protective Order; that the Court enter an Order protecting Defendants from the

undue burden, harassment, annoyance, and invasion of property rights addressed herein; that

Plaintiffs take nothing by this suit; that Defendants go hence with their costs without delay, and

for such other and further relief, both general and special, at law and in equity, to which

Defendants may be justly entitled.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Page | 4

Respectfully submitted,

FEE, SMITH, SHARP & VITULLO, L.L.P

/s/ Scott W. Self

THOMAS W. FEE

State Bar No. 06873160

tfee@feesmith.com

SCOTT W. SELF

State Bar No. 24033176

sself@feesmith.com

RANDALL W. MILLER

State Bar No. 24092838

rmiller@feesmith.com

Three Galleria Tower

13155 Noel Road, Suite 1000

Dallas, Texas 75240

(972) 934-9100 Telephone

(972) 934-9200 Facsimile

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

THIS WILL CERTIFY that Counsel for Defendants and counsel for Plaintiffs have

personally conducted a conference at which there was a substantive discussion of every item

presented to the Court in this Motion and, despite best efforts, the counsel have not been able to

resolve all the matters presented.

/s/ Scott W. Self

SCOTT W. SELF

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

THIS WILL CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served

via electronic filing upon all counsel of record in this matter on the 15th

day of February, 2016.

/s/ Scott W. Self

SCOTT W. SELF

EXHIBIT A

.. ,

UIRTifiUATE Of STOVH

: Premier Park,· lr1c. Richardson, Texas · ·

·, '( ~. . ·~.

This certifies that ··'~ ~ .j .. :< ...

North Texa$ .. Pr~mier Socce~ :A~sociatio'n, .Inc.. . .

is el~titled lo · .. J,o~o,()oo sh~res of the par valu~· .. ·,.oti.$.o~~~o~ii'1:'~-~~~ach of' the 'S. ... r-. . ' . : ,. ' ..•

·.common sto«:-k · · o.f Premier Park, l.r:tc., transferable· in .. :Person qr .. by.·. •. i. . l ,. • • • •• • . . ' :. ' • • ~. ~ ~

Attorney only .Jn the books of th~ ... 9ompariy ~nd upon the surr~pq~r. o_f this Certificate~·-~ .. ·;. In witness whereof. Rrerriier Park, Inc. has caused .this Certificate to be signed by its· President and Treasurer her~ at Richardson, Texas this 12 May, 2003.

&A~ Treasurer

EXHIBIT C

From: Ramon Rodriguez [mailto:ramon@rrtxlaw.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 11:56 AMTo: Scott W. Self <sself@feesmith.com>Cc: Randall W. Miller <rmiller@feesmith.com>Subject: Re: Gray v. North Texas Premier Soccer Association, Inc., et al., Our File: KAK.6690 Good morning Scott:

I would be happy to discuss this matter with you. However, you should know that I intend tofile the amended pleadings as soon as possible. I am still working out the details, but myhope is to file the amended pleadings tomorrow. If your intention is to dissuade this action,then I would suggest that we speak today.

Again, I am simply looking for an explanation of the relationship between the parties. Basedon the public records--and your clients evasive answers--the impropriety seem obvious, but Ialso understand that the records may not tell the whole story, which is why I invited Randallto provide me an explanation.

I am available this afternoon between 2 and 5.

Thanks,

Ray

Ramon Rodriguez | T: (972) 242-8887 | AttorneyRamonRodriguez.com| ramon@rrtxlaw.com The information contained in this e-mail is attorney-client privileged and confidential informationintended only for the use of the intended recipient or agent responsible to deliver it to the intendedrecipient. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communicationis strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us bytelephone at (972) 242-8887 and please return the original message to us at the following address viathe U.S. Postal Service. Ramon Rodriguez, 1620 E. Beltline Rd., Carrollton, Texas 75006. As requiredby U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice, you are hereby advised that any written taxadvice contained herein was not written or intended to be used (and cannot be used) by any taxpayerfor the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Communications by email are not intended to and should not be construed to create any contractual orother legal obligation unless the context of the email unequivocally indicates an intention by the senderof this email to create a legally binding obligation.

EXHIBIT B

3

From: Ramon Rodriguez <ramon@rrtxlaw.com> Date: January 6, 2016 at 11:47:34 AM CST To: "Randall W. Miller" <rmiller@feesmith.com> Subject: Gray v. NTPSA

Randall:

I received your notice of cancellation. Assuming everything is ok with you personally, I am glad you cancelled the hearing because I was considering filing a motion for continuance based on the fact that I can't seem to get a straight answer about the corporate structure of the two entities.

After your email last week, I contacted the City of Balch Springs and obtained a copy of the attached special use permit. It was issued to the NTPSA years before the transfer of the property to Premier Park, Inc. I was told that the City of Balch Springs doesn’t and has never applied different land use restrictions to non-profit entities. Based on this information, and the evidence that was included in the response, I am seriously considering amending Mr. Gray's pleading to include Larry Hall, Andrea Hall, and Robert Malphurs personally, as this transfer appears less and less proper the more I investigate. If I do, please expect to receive a motion to disqualify you as counsel for both parties. If the transfer was not done in accordance with the law, there may be, at a minimum, significant conflicts of interest between your clients.

I am willing to entertain any other explanation your client might have for the transfer before I file the amended pleadings, but as of right now, I am also considering sending the pleadings to the AG's office and to a friend at the Dallas Morning News. Again, I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter, and I ask that it be given the attention it deserves.

As always, with regard,

Ray

Ramon Rodriguez | T: (972) 242-8887 | AttorneyRamonRodriguez.com | ramon@rrtxlaw.com The information contained in this e-mail is attorney-client privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the intended recipient or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at (972) 242-

4

8887 and please return the original message to us at the following address via the U.S. Postal Service. Ramon Rodriguez, 1620 E. Beltline Rd., Carrollton, Texas 75006. As required by U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice, you are hereby advised that any written tax advice contained herein was not written or intended to be used (and cannot be used) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Communications by email are not intended to and should not be construed to create any contractual or other legal obligation unless the context of the email unequivocally indicates an intention by the sender of this email to create a legally binding obligation.

<Special Use Permit.pdf>

EXHIBIT D

EXHIBIT KCAUSE NO. DC-15-05418

DAVID and MARLITT GRAY, § § § § § § § § § § §

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

Plaintiffs, v.

14th JUDICIAL DISTRICT NORTH TEXAS PREMIER SOCCER ASSOCIATION, INC., and PREMIER PARK, INC.

Defendants. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

AFFIDAVIT OF CHARLES WHEELER

Having been duly sworn, Charles 0. Wheeler, Jr. testifies as follows:

1. "I am over 18 years of age, suffer from no known disability, and I am capable of making this affidavit. The statements in this affidavit are based on my own personal knowledge.

2. The conclusions and opinions in this affidavit are based on my expertise and review of the property made the subject of this suit, Premiere Park, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference as if fully stated herein.

3. Upon visual inspection of Premiere Park, it does not appear that the industry standards for building an athletic surface on a substrate of high clay soils were followed by the builder of Premiere Park.

4. Visual inspection of Premiere Park quickly revealed humps that I had seen in satellite images from Google Earth (hereafter the "Images"). The Images are true and correct copies of satellite images of the fields at Premiere Park taken at various times from November 10, 2006 to March 28, 2015 that I obtained using the software Google Earth, and are attached to my expert report as Exhibits CW -3 through CW -10. The humps are especially visible in Exhibits CW-5, CW-6, CW-8, and CW-10, which were taken before and after the date of Mr. Gray's injury. The Images indicate clearly defined elevation changes, outlined by a collection of sedimentation in low areas. The only field that does not appear to be similarly afflicted by the undulation is field 1.

5. My speculations based on the Images were confirmed upon visual inspection. The humps begin in field 2, running north to south, cutting across the fields, growing bigger in field 3, and peaking in fields 4 and 5. It is immediately obvious that the fields have no crowning to drain water to the sides of the fields, or to remove the water from in between fields. In their current conditions, water simply sheets across all of the fields, from the north side of the complex to the south, flowing in the troughs created by the humps. The only visible drainage is a shallow man-made swale on the east and west ends of the fields running north-south, but most

AFFIDAVIT OF CHUCK WHEELER PAGEl

of the water likely never finds it's way to those swales, because of the lack of crowning in the fields.

6. I performed a preliminary inspection of fields 4 and 5, and visually inspected the field complex. I performed rudimentary measurements using a string and a yardstick. I measured the depth of the low areas between the humps in 6 places on field 5. Typically, the humps measured five to six inches high. Two of the humps on field 5 were nine inches high, with localized sudden elevation changes in some areas.

7. I reviewed the contract between North Texas Premier Soccer Assn, Inc. and Blake-Ali Inc. It stood out to me that the NTPSA paid $10,500 for the finish grading of the 7 fields after the original rough site grading, and approx. $50,000 for hydro mulch and seed, for a total cost of approx. $60,000 for playing surface finish, or less than $9,000 per field. The playing surface finish represents only 0.5% of the total improvement cost of the Premier Park Soccer Complex. Typically the athletic field improvements represent a substantial percentage of total improvement cost for open-air facilities. I am certain that the industry standards could not have been met with a budget of$9,000 per field.

8. In conclusion, after preliminary evaluation, I believe that the Premier Park field complex was not adequately designed or engineered for playing surface longevity and participant safety, and in my expert opinion; fields 3 through 7 at Premier Park are not suitable for competition due to extreme deviation from planarity. Fields 4 and 5 happen to be the fields which are most affected by the defective construction. From the point of view of a qualified athletic surface builder, fields 4 and 5 are objectively dangerous.

9. I affirm under penalty of perjury that the statements made above are true and correct.

Further affiant sayeth not.

I Dat~

The foregoing affidavit was signed to and subscribed before me this 301h day of December, 2015.

AFFIDAVIT OF CHUCK WHEELER

CATHY LYNN TRUMAN My Commission Expi res

April 11 . 2017

PAGE2

Texas Sports Builders Inc 417 North Rudd Street ~ Burleson. TX 76028

Office: 817.447.9988 Fax: 817.447.7885

Legal Name: Texas Sports Builders, Inc. Address: 417 North Rudd Street Burleson, TX Phone: 817-477-9988 Fax: 817-477-7885 Web: www.texassportsbuilders.com President: Chuck Wheeler Email: chuck@txbsports.com Prepared for: David Gray

EXPERIENCE

1. I, Charles O. Wheeler, Jr. prepared this report. This report contains opinions based on information available to me at the time of its writing, and I expressly reserve the right to change those opinions should any new information become available.

2. I am President of Texas Sports Builders Inc. I founded Texas Sports Builders in

2006, and I have worked in the athletic field industry for over 20 years. Texas Sports Builders provides complete turn-key solutions for professional quality athletic surfaces. As the President of Texas Sports Builders, I manage complete site preparation and installation of award winning track surfaces, and synthetic and natural turf sports fields. I have personally been involved in the installation or renovation of over 100 natural grass athletic fields, and have served as a paid consultant on the construction or repair of many more.

3. Some of our recent installations include:

• Natural grass field at the University of Arkansas • Baseball field at University of Oklahoma • Baseball field at Baylor University • Synthetic field at Southern Methodist University • Synthetic field at Mary Harden Baylor University • Natural grass field at Southwestern State University

4. I was retained by Mr. David Gray to evaluate the soccer fields at Premier Park

Soccer Complex, which is located at 1115 Elam Road, in Balch Springs, Texas. I was informed that my opinion would be used in a lawsuit. I visited the site on December 9, 2015, found the gate unlocked and entered the complex. Prior to visiting the site, I familiarized my self with the site using satellite imagery.

DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON

5. I have relied upon the following documents in reaching my conclusions, and, where indicated, I have attached some as exhibits to my report:

Texas Sports Builders Inc 417 North Rudd Street ~ Burleson. TX 76028

Office: 817.447.9988 Fax: 817.447.7885

• Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Contractor of April 25, 2007 ASTM

E 1527-00 • Environmental Site Assessment for the NTPSA • Google Earth Satellite Image from November 10, 2006 • Google Earth Satellite Image from October 25, 2007 • Google Earth Satellite Image from October 30, 2008 • Google Earth Satellite Image from December 4, 2009 • Google Earth Satellite Image from March 31, 2011 • Google Earth Satellite Image from April 04, 2012 • Google Earth Satellite Image from August 2, 2012 • Google Earth Satellite Image from October 18, 2013 • Google Earth Satellite Image from March 28, 2015 • Photographs taken by Mr. Gray at Premier Park on December 9, 2015 • Photographs provided by Mr. Gray by email prior to my inspection

CONCLUSION

6. In more than 20 years in this industry, I have never seen active sports fields that

are in worse condition than Fields 3 thru 7 at Premier Park. Industry standards for building and/or repurposing athletic fields require contractors and builders to ensure that an athletic playing surface is relatively planar, or flat, to prevent injuries. This is typically achieved by implementing standard installation procedures that are described below.

7. Without the benefit of knowing precisely what method of grading and installation

that was used to construct the fields at Premier Park, I cannot say with absolutely certainty whether the fields were constructed using industry standards. However, upon visual inspection, the playing surface on the fields 3 through 7 at Premier Park fall well-below the industry standards, with the surface elevation varying, constantly, up and down six to nine inches in a short distance, and it is very likely, in my opinion, industry accepted methods of playing surface preparation were not used. This is especially true for fields 4 and 5 of Premier Park, which contain the worst of the undulation. Native soil athletic fields are particularly challenging, and the humps at Premier Park were likely created by inconsiderate earth moving operations during rough grading, resulting in uneven distribution or compaction of the base layer high-clay soils. In my opinion, the conditions of the fields at Premier Park were created by improper construction, and do not satisfy any reasonable standards for athletic field construction.

INDUSTRY STANDARDS

8. The standards used in the construction and maintenance of athletic facilities exist

for the purpose of protecting the participants from non-activity related risk. In the evaluation of existing outdoor athletic fields for repair or renovation, the acceptable deviation from planarity is one inch in ten feet. By that standard, a depression in a field that is twenty feet across can be no more than two inches deep. This is a condition that many players have likely seen on some public soccer fields, and maybe worse, especially in a high traffic area in front of goal. Standards for planarity in professional facilities are typically only 10 millimeters overall, or 2/5 of an inch, which is far more stringent, requiring that operators conduct regular inspections.

Texas Sports Builders Inc 417 North Rudd Street ~ Burleson. TX 76028

Office: 817.447.9988 Fax: 817.447.7885

9. To ensure a planar surface for an athletic field, a builder should first determine the Potential Vertical Rise (“PVR”) of the surface that he or she intends to place the field upon. This is done by conducting site-specific soil quality tests at various locations in the field complex area. The subsurface soil quality of the athletic field base zone will determine the PVR. A substrate containing soil with a high clay content, for example, presents unique challenges because of the increase in volume of clay when it becomes saturated, causing vertical rise.

10. If site-specific soil sample studies indicate a stable base with a PVR of less than one inch, then a builder can use the simplest and most inexpensive procedure for building the athletic field. This is known as a six-inch lime cap installation, which is the least expensive installation that Texas Sports Builders, Inc. offers. However, this installation method is only available under low PVR conditions.

11. Generally accepted industry standards for a six-inch lime cap installation require

the following, at a minimum, for the installation of a natural grass playing field:

* Six-inch excavation or a six-inch cap, at a minimum; * The base surface is graded using lasers to ensure a planarity; * The base is then sealed with lime; * Subsurface irrigation is then installed above the lime layer; * The installation is completed using six inches of fine-grade root-zone material

(topsoil) using laser guided hydraulic installation equipment.

12. To ensure that the playing surface remains planar, the installer must maintain the root-zone area to plan elevations until hydro mulch operations begin. When a natural grass athletic surface is properly installed using the aforementioned technique, deviations in the finished surface elevation are typically ¼ inch or less, measured horizontally over 25’ x 25’ grids. To maintain this planar surface, athletic fields also require proper drainage and irrigation. Fields must contain “crowns,” or high areas in the center so that water drains to the side and away from the playing surface in the shortest possible distance. A field properly constructed using this process costs a minimum of $2.50 per square foot, or $160,000 for one full-size soccer field, not including irrigation. Some sites however, may not achieve acceptable results with this basic process, and require substantially more excavation and fill with a dimensionally stable base material.

REVIEW OF PREMIER PARK

13. I have reviewed the geological survey information that was provided in the

September 2007 Environmental Site Assessment. No site-specific soil study data was provided, but this report indicates that the base layer soils in the Premier Park area contain high amounts of clay, and a soil study would be required to determine with certainty the environmental considerations at the site, and the problems they present to the athletic playing surface builder. Care must also be taken in the rough grading phase of the athletic field base zones to prevent the inadvertent disturbance or compaction of clayey soils during the operation of earth moving equipment, or during channeling into the athletic field base zone for irrigation or electrical utilities.

14. Upon visual inspection of Premier Park, it appears that industry standards for

building an athletic surface on the subject site were not followed by the builder of Premier Park.

Texas Sports Builders Inc 417 North Rudd Street ~ Burleson. TX 76028

Office: 817.447.9988 Fax: 817.447.7885

Visual inspection of Premier Park quickly revealed humps that I had seen in satellite images from Google Earth (hereafter the “Images”). The Images are true and correct copies of satellite images of the fields at Premier Park taken at various times from November 10, 2006 to March 28, 2015 that I obtained using the software Google Earth, and are attached hereto as Exhibits CW-1 through CW-9. The humps are especially visible in Exhibits CW-4, CW-5, CW-7, and CW-9, which were taken before and after the date of Mr. Gray’s injury. The Images indicate clearly defined elevation changes, outlined by a collection of sedimentation in low areas. The only field that does not appear to be similarly afflicted by the undulation is field 1.

15. My speculations based on the Images were confirmed upon visual inspection.The humps begin in field 2, running north to south, cutting across the fields, growing bigger in field 3, and peaking in fields 4 and 5. It is obvious that the fields have no crowning to drain water to the sides of the fields, or drainage to remove the water from in between fields. In their current condition, water simply sheets across all of the fields, from the north side of the complex to the south, flowing in the troughs created by the humps and pooling in some. The only visible drainage is a shallow man-made swale on the east and west ends of the fields running north-south, but most of the water likely never finds it’s way to those swales, because of the lack of crowning and drainage.

16. I performed a preliminary inspection of fields 4 and 5, and visually inspected thefield complex. I performed rudimentary measurements using a string and a yardstick. I measured the depth of the low areas between the humps in six places on field 5. Typically, the humps measured five to six inches high. Two of the humps on field 5 were nine inches high, with localized rapid elevation changes in some areas.

17. I reviewed the contract between North Texas Premier Soccer Assn, Inc. andBlake-Ali Inc. It stood out to me that the NTPSA paid $10,500 for the finish grading of the 7 fields after the original rough site grading, and approx. $50,000 for hydro mulch and seed, for a total cost of approx. $60,000 for playing surface finish, or less than $9,000 per field. The playing surface finish represents only 0.5% of the total improvement cost of the Premier Park Soccer Complex. Typically the athletic field improvements represent substantial percentage of total improvement cost for open-air facilities. I am certain that industry standards could not have been met with a budget of $9,000 per field.

18. In conclusion, after preliminary evaluation, I believe that the design andconstruction of the Premier Park soccer field complex are sub-standard, resulting in extremely poor playing surface quality, and endangering participant safety. In my expert opinion, fields 3 through 7 at Premier Park are not suitable for competition due to extreme deviation from planarity. Fields 4 and 5 happen to be the fields which are most affected by the dangerous condition, and from the point of view of a qualified athletic surface builder, fields 4 and 5 are objectively dangerous.