CORNEJO HOLDINGS LLC SERIES 7

Landlord profile

Cornejo Holdings Llc Series 7

on the county rolls as CORNEJO HOLDINGS LLC SERIES 7 · mail to 2056 UNION WINE RD NEW BRAUNFELS TX 78130No Texas filing under this name

$1,454,564Market value

9Properties

8,363Sq ft living area

≈8Units estimated from floor area

The unit figure is the only estimate in that row: floor area divided by 900 square feet, so it is the third figure restated

Portfolio totals

9parcels on the rolls

8 of them are inside the registry lookup scope

≈8units, estimated

Floor area divided by 900 sq ft, not a count

$1,454,564total market value

County roll value across all 9 parcels

$106,590median parcel value

The middle parcel, which a total hides

County spread: Comal 5, Guadalupe 4
ZIPs: 78123, 78130, 78132, 78133, 78156, 78638
Parcels whose tax bill leaves Texas: 0 of 9
Parcels flagged owner-occupied: 0 of 9
Most recent purchase date on the roll: 20089
Earliest purchase date on the roll: 18731

Source: 2 county appraisal rolls · roll year 2025 to 2026 · purchase dates are the roll's own recent-purchase field and are not reliable deed dates

Download this portfolio as CSV

The Texas business filing behind this name

Texas has no business filing under this name

The registry answered, and the answer was that nothing is filed in Texas under this name. That is a finding. Plenty of rentals are held by a person under their own name, by a trust, or by an out-of-state company that never registered here

This owner is in the no record state. The three states are different claims, and the method page gives the current count for each

Source: Texas Comptroller franchise tax registry · 8 registry rows carry this owner

Every property on the rolls under this owner

9 parcels held by this owner, with size, age, acquisition date, and market value
Parcel ID	Address	County	Market value ↑	Sq ft	Built	Acquired
000000034752	719 LA CRESTA DR CANYON LAKE 78133	comal	$24,250	0	not on the roll	19319
000000034753	727 LA CRESTA DR CANYON LAKE 78133	comal	$27,560	0	not on the roll	19319
000000000480	792 S SEGUIN AVE NEW BRAUNFELS 78130	comal	$60,270	704	1930	18731
000000029775	227 S PECAN DR MCQUEENEY 78123	guadalupe	$76,000	980	1980	19144
000000053332	111 TREASURE WY CANYON LAKE 78133	comal	$106,590	1,008	0	20089
000000013918	298 ROSEMARY LOOP NEW BRAUNFELS 78130	guadalupe	$154,444	1,148	2008	19230
000000106352	643 CHEROKEE BLVD NEW BRAUNFELS 78132	comal	$211,301	1,807	2005	18731
000000065651	321 LEISURE VILLAGE DR KINGSBURY 78638	guadalupe	$350,650	1,456	1986	18731
000000018739	2056 UNION WINE RD SEGUIN 78156	guadalupe	$443,499	1,260	1920	19143
9 properties			$1,454,564	8,363

Values are the county market value on the roll, not a sale price · roll year 2025 to 2026

Companies linked to this one

There is no network to draw yet. Linking one company to another needs a franchise filing on both ends, and this owner has no matched filing. The links this tool will draw are a shared officer, a shared registered agent, and a shared mailing address, in that order of strength

How to read the end of a chain

A chain can end three ways, and the difference matters. Two of them are answers. One of them is a gap in what we know, and it is drawn as a gap so you never mistake it for an answer

Matched

The name on the roll lines up with a Texas business filing. We show both names side by side so you can reject a bad match yourself

25,455 owners of the 71,735 inside the coverage rules, 35.5% so far

No record

We searched and Texas has no business registration under this name. That is a finding, not a miss: plenty of rentals are held by a person or an out-of-state entity that never registered here. The line stops on a hard bar because the search finished

37,870 owners so far

No answer

No usable answer came back for this name. Almost all of these are lookups the registry rejected outright, which is our query failing, not Texas reporting that nothing is filed. That claim is the middle column, and this is not it. We do not know either way here, so the line trails off dashed and open

8,410 owners in scope: rejected lookup or never queried

One more case borrows that same dashed ending: a parcel outside the coverage rules. The registry was never asked about it, on purpose, so the chain is a gap here too, and the page names the rule that put it outside instead of implying an answer is on its way. 147,384 of the 2,117,593 parcels on the rolls are inside the rules

11.7%

of the 71,735 owners inside the coverage rules have no registry answer. The scrape has finished, so these are not owners waiting in a queue: almost all of them are lookups the registry rejected. Read them as unknown, never as unregistered