Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Our Court of Appeals held that the defendant-town was not responsible for setting up or funding schools, and it lacked statutory authority to charge developers and/or builders a fee designed to ensure adequate funding for area schools. With Justice Jackson not participating, the remaining members of the court are equally divided, with three members voting to reverse and three members voting to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.

Tagged with: appeals Civil Practice Constitutional developer & builder fees Due Process equal protection interlocutory mootness Municipal Schools & School Boards standing Statute of Limitations

  By PAUL THARP, Staff Writer [email protected]rsweekly.com Charlotte attorney James B. Gatehouse said he always hopes for an amicable result in litigation, especially in complicated construction matters. That said, “I anticipate that this one will be tried,” Gatehouse said of ...

Tagged with: commercial real estate Construction developer & builder fees Development general contractor

Charlotte attorney James B. Gatehouse of Rayburn Cooper & Durham said he always hopes for an amicable result in litigation, especially in complicated construction matters. That said, "I anticipate that this one will be tried," Gatehouse said of Signature Development, LLC v. Sandler Commercial at Union, LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-07-1057, 33 pp.).

Tagged with: developer & builder fees general contractor Lease Mecklenburg County

Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary. The defendant-town was not responsible for setting up or funding schools, and it lacked statutory authority to charge developers and/or builders a fee designed to ensure adequate funding for area schools. [...]

Tagged with: appeals Civil Practice Constitutional developer & builder fees Due Process equal protection interlocutory mootness Municipal Schools & School Boards standing Statute of Limitations