251 N.C. App. 514
N.C. Ct. App.2016Background
- Wilkies own two adjacent lots bordering Spring Lake; City owns the lake and drainage system.
- In 2006 the City replaced two drainage pipes at the west end of Spring Lake; in 2013 elbows were added to raise the lake level by six inches to maintain existing level.
- A petition from nearby property owners (including Wilkies) sought raising lake level; City voted to restore lake to its pre-2013 level and installed elbows on July 11, 2013.
- Flooding issues on Wilkies’ property followed the elbow installation; subsequent meetings debated lowering the lake level and further engineering studies were undertaken.
- By 2014–2015, SunGate recommended reducing the lake to pre-elbow levels and adding a drainage pipe; elbows were removed by July 2014; Wilkies filed inverse condemnation suit on May 23, 2014.
- The trial court held there was a taking by inverse condemnation; City appealed; the Court of Appeals reversed, holding no taking because actions were not for public use or benefit, and remanded for related NC Constitution claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a public-use taking for inverse condemnation? | Wilkies contend the City’s actions benefited private landowners but nonetheless deprived them of property. | City argues the actions were not for a public use/benefit and thus not subject to inverse condemnation. | No inverse condemnation for lack of public-use purpose. |
| Is the appeal interlocutory and properly reviewable here? | N/A | N/A | Interlocutory order; review proper under § 40A-47 because it affects title/area taken and a substantial right. |
| What standard of review applies to the § 40A-47 order on issues other than damages? | N/A | N/A | De novo review for legal conclusions; factual findings reviewed for support. |
| Does the case present any remaining NC Constitution claim if inverse condemnation is not available? | Wilkies assert constitutional rights under the NC Constitution for damages. | N/A | Remand for consideration of NC Constitution claim; reverse on inverse condemnation grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Greensboro v. Pearce, 121 N.C. App. 582 (1996) (inverse condemnation tool used when government acts, not for public use)
- Town of Matthews v. Wright, 354 N.C. 336 (2001) (de novo review for non-damages issues in eminent domain)
- Piedmont Triad Airport Auth. v. Urbine, 354 N.C. 336 (2001) (eminent domain context for de novo review)
- L&S Water Power, Inc. v. Piedmont Triad Reg’l Water Auth., 211 N.C. App. 148 (2011) (factual findings reviewed for support; conclusions de novo)
- Corum v. Univ. of N.C., 330 N.C. 761 (1992) (direct constitutional claims when statutory remedies inadequate)
- Midgett v. N.C. State Highway Comm’n, 260 N.C. 241 (1963) (constitutional remedy for just compensation where inverse remedy inadequate)
- Lea Co. v. N.C. Bd. of Transp., 308 N.C. 603 (1983) (partial limitations on inverse condemnation remedies)
- Bigelow v. Town of Chapel Hill, 227 N.C. App. 1 (2013) (NC constitutional claims in land-taking context)
- Patterson v. City of Gastonia, 220 N.C. App. 233 (2012) (direct constitutional claims post-inverse-condemnation framework)