With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". a waiver of the restrictive covenant, PBPOA presents a relative statistical analysis of cases where the courts have found no waiver of a restrictive covenants. See Dempsey, 737 S.W.2d at 595(no waiver where 11 of 2,460 properties (4%) violated covenants); Tanglewood Homes Assoc. v. Henke, 728 S.W.2d 39, 44 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1987, writ ref'd n.r.e.)(no waiver where five violations existed in total of 560 properties (.89%)); New Jerusalem Baptist Church, 598 S.W.2d at 669 (finding no waiver where four violations in total of 169 properties (2.3%) existed); Underwood v. Webb, 544 S.W.2d 187, 190 (Tex.Civ.App.—Waco 1976, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (waiver did not exist when two violations existed in total of 493 properties (.4%)). But see Tanglewood Homes Ass’n, 728 S.W.2d at 43 (<HOLDING>). PBPOA’s level of violations fits within the

A: holding that if a reasonable fact finder could make a particular finding on the administrative record then the finding is supported by substantial evidence
B: holding lab report properly admitted as business record supported finding of violation of probation
C: holding on allegation of separate violation that eight violations of particular covenant in total of 56 properties 1428 supported finding of abandonment of restrictive covenant
D: holding substantial evidence supported jury finding of abuse of process
C.