Representative Matters & Notable Recoveries

A land developer represented by James Scarbrough and a former law partner argued to the North Carolina Supreme Court that Cabarrus County did not have statutory authority to require “voluntary mitigation payments” from developers for public facilities. The Supreme Court agreed, finding that the fees were coercive, establishing an unlawful “pay-to-build system for developers.” 366 N.C. at 161. The Supreme Court further explained that “[i]n practice, the [Board of Commissioners] has leveraged this dynamic to generate substantial revenues for the County, which once again, demonstrates the precise harm that [the ordinance] may inflict on unpopular groups. Such government action should not be permitted without specific enabling legislation enacted by the General Assembly.” Id. at 167. Read More

In QBH I, homebuilders represented by James Scarbrough and a former law partner argued to the North Carolina Supreme Court that the Public Enterprise Statutes did not grant the Town of Carthage the necessary authority to charge water and sewer impact fees. The Supreme Court agreed. Chief Justice Newby wrote: “From the very formation of our State government, municipalities, in their various forms, have been considered creatures of the legislative will, and are subject to its control.” QBH I, 369 N.C. at 18. “Because the legislature alone controls the extension of municipal authority, the impact fee ordinances on their face exceed the powers delegated to the Town by the General Assembly, thus overstepping Carthage’s rightful authority.” Id. at 22. In QBH II, the North Carolina Supreme Court agreed with the homebuilders (this time represented by John Scarbrough and a former law partner) that they had an “inherent right to recoup” the unlawful fees. QBH II, 371 N.C. at 73. Justice Ervin wrote: “Here, plaintiffs do not appear to have received any benefit from the payment of the challenged water and sewer impact fees that they would not have otherwise been entitled to receive…in an instance in which the only alternative was to submit to an illegal exaction or discontinue its business, the payment of money under such pressure has never been regarded as a voluntary act.” Id. at 75. Read More

Property owners represented by the firm argued that the City of Charlotte exceeded the scope of its authority in charging water and sewer capacity use fees. The trial court and Court of Appeals agreed, and the North Carolina Supreme Court denied Charlotte’s petition for discretionary review. As a result, Charlotte was required to return $106,000,000 in fees to more than 5,000 property owners. Read More

A land developer represented by the firm argued that the Town did not have statutory authority to require the construction of offsite road improvements. The trial court and Court of Appeals agreed. The firm also recovered attorney’s fees and costs for the developer. Read More

Represented a landowner challenging a town’s two-year moratorium on residential development. The lawsuit resulted in the moratorium being declared invalid and void for procedural defects. Read More

Represented a landowner challenging a town’s amendment to its zoning ordinance which increased the minimum lot size for residential development from one acre to two and a half acres. The zoning amendment was declared invalid and void. Read More

Represented a land developer challenging a city’s denial of a rezoning which would allow a 500-home subdivision. The lawsuit resulted in the rezoning being approved. Read More

Represented a developer of manufactured home parks in litigation concerning whether manufactured homes were an allowable use under the property’s zoning classification. Obtained summary judgment declaring that a previous city planner’s favorable “zoning verification letter” was binding on the city and the manufactured home development was allowed. Read More

Represented an apartment builder in negotiations concerning development fees being required by a town in a development agreement. The negotiation was successful and resulted in the town waiving nearly one million dollars in development fees. Read More

Represented a homebuilder who received a notice of violation from a town for failure to maintain streets and other infrastructure in a residential development. Subsequent litigation resulted in the Town accepting ownership and maintenance of the infrastructure and dismissing the notice of violation. Read More