Town of Nags Head v. Toloczko The plaintiff-town no longer seeks removal of defendants’ beachfront cottage and has invited defendants to apply for a building permit to repair storm damage to their property. Nevertheless, the town maintains that the cottage sits in a “public trust area” and seeks civil penalties for defendants’ refusal to comply with the town’s declaration that the damaged cottage is a nuisance. Resolution of the town’s claim and defendants’ numerous counterclaims would require this federal court to delve into important and unresolved issues of N.C. law, including the definition of “public trust area.”
Fairfield Harbour Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Drez Even though a planned community’s covenant declarations give the plaintiff-homeowners’ association the authority to acquire and own recreational amenities, neither the declarations nor the Planned Community Act gives the association the authority to use annual assessments from homeowners to finance the purchase of recreational amenities.
Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Teague When judgment creditors agreed to reduce the judgment debtors’ $800,000 debt by $200,000 in exchange for the debtors’ property, the judgment creditors became bona fide purchasers for value. The judgment creditors were not required to prove that they relied on the mistaken property description in the plaintiff-bank’s deed of trust on the debtors’ land.
Wright v. Oakley Even though the disputed area between the parties’ lots contained a clothesline erected by plaintiffs and a utility pole marked with plaintiffs’ address, plaintiffs did not erect the utility pole, and the parties both used the clothesline.
Jernigan v. McLamb For years, plaintiff had permission to use a path across defendants’ property; however, after defendant McLamb revoked such permission, plaintiff intentionally broke a taillight on McLamb’s vehicle, and plaintiff was convicted of injury to personal property and ordered not to contact McLamb. The history of violence and turmoil between the parties justified the trial court’s refusal to locate plaintiff’s easement over McLamb’s driveway and next to McLamb’s home.
Jernigan v. McLamb For years, plaintiff had permission to use a path across defendants’ property; however, after defendant McLamb revoked such permission, plaintiff intentionally broke a taillight on McLamb’s vehicle, and plaintiff was convicted of injury to personal property and ordered not to contact McLamb.
Fairway Forest Townhouses Association, Inc. v. Fairfield Sapphire Valley Master Association, Inc. As part of a settlement with Sapphire Valley’s original developer, plaintiff agreed to continue to collect amenities fees from its timeshare owners. Plaintiff’s amendment of its declaration not only ignored its responsibilities under the settlement agreement, but also exceeded the purpose of its declaration.
Willis v. Willis Even if the grantor received no consideration for the deed, her unilateral mistake does not entitle her to reformation of the deed.
Cantillana v. Five Oaks Homeowners Association Although the parties’ condominium community was developed before the N.C. Planned Community Act was enacted, the Act nevertheless gives the defendant-homeowners association authority to fine plaintiff for violating restrictive covenants concerning door color.
In re Foreclosure by Five Oaks Recreational Association, Inc. Respondent had not communicated with petitioner at all, much less disputed the amount he owed, before he dropped off a check for less than the full amount at petitioner’s lawyer’s office. Even though respondent purportedly wrote (illegibly) “full payment” on the memo line, petitioner’s cashing of the check did not constitute an accord and satisfaction.
