the merits of such matters in an interlocutory appeal from the granting of a jurisdictional plea. Moreover, we must take as true the factual allegations in the protesting parties’ petition and construe it in their favor, and, fairly read, that petition implied that the parties’ agents entered into the Appraisal Agreement. See Tex. Ass'n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440, 446 (providing that, in review of ruling on jurisdictional plea, court must construe pleadings in plaintiff's favor and look to pleader’s intent). 13 . Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 41.01(a)(1) (Vernon 2001). 14 . See Tooke v. City ofMexia, 197 S.W.3d 325, 332-33 (Tex.2006) (considering suit for damages resulting from breach of contract); Catalina Dev., Inc. v. County of El Paso, 121 S.W.3d 704, 706 (Tex.2003) (<HOLDING>); Travis County v. Pelzel & Assocs., Inc., 77
recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract holding that trial court erred by dismissing breach of contract claim because appellee made promises to perform specific acts in contract the breach of which would give rise to a breach of contract action holding that immunity from suit precluded claim for breach of contract for sale of county property and request for specific performance of contract holding party in breach could not maintain suit for breach of contract holding breach of contract claim not preempted as a straightforward breach of contract action as it alleged violation of specific covenant