At Roberts & Stevens, success is defined by meeting or exceeding our clients’ expectations within a fair and competitive value. While traditional notions of ‘winning’ and ‘losing’ do apply for certain cases and clients, more often success is achieved through the combination of legal expertise, strong communication and negotiation skill. At Roberts & Stevens, we put our clients’ true interests first. Sometimes that means helping clients to set emotions aside. From the outset, we provide clear and realistic expectations, while offering best options or presenting opportunities. To learn more, please contact us.
North Carolina Court of Appeals Reverses a $560,000 Jury Verdict for Roberts & Stevens’ Clients
June 2011 - Roberts & Stevens attorneys F. Lachicotte ("Lach") Zemp, Jr. and Ann-Patton Hornthal obtained reversal of a $560,000 jury verdict in a breach of contract case.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals, in the case of Lorenz v. O’Haire, reversed a jury’s award of more than $560,000 against the owners of a 480 acre tract of land in Jackson County, North Carolina. The case involved the issue of whether the owners/sellers of the property were contractually liable to a realtor for his commission when a $10 million sale of the property never closed. The jury found that the owners/sellers had breached the purchase agreement with the buyers and were therefore liable to the realtor for $560,000 in commission even though the sale never occurred. The owners contacted attorney Zemp after the trial about appealing the verdict to the NC Court of Appeals. Attorneys Zemp and Hornthal were able to demonstrate to the Court of Appeals that the contracts at issue were unambiguous as a matter of law, warranting a reversal of the jury’s verdict and a successful outcome for their clients.
North Carolina Court of Appeals Upholds Enforcement of Conservation Easement
March 2011 - Roberts & Stevens attorneys F. Lachicotte ("Lach") Zemp, Jr. and Ann-Patton Hornthal obtained a permanent injunction and punitive damages in a jury trial enforcing the terms of a Conservation Easement in Haywood County in 2008. The defendants appealed the jury's verdict and the Zemp/Hornthal team defended the verdict on behalf of their clients on appeal. On August 17, 2010, the North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the jury's verdict in the case of Thomas L. Woltz, Trustee of the Crawford Creek Trust Agreement, et al. v. Donald S. Taylor, et al. The unanimous decision authored by Judge Barbara Jackson may be found here.
Zemp and Hornthal represented the landowner, The Crawford Creek Trust, and the co-holder of the conservation easement, the Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy (SAHC) headquartered in Asheville. The protected property is a 488-acre tract of undeveloped land in Haywood County adjacent to the Shining Rock Wilderness and included Crawford Creek, a spring-fed creek that is designated an outstanding watershed by the State of North Carolina. The property has been owned by the same family since 1917 and was placed in a conservation easement with SAHC and the North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund in 2000. The case involved a variety of claims and issues, including the enforceability of a Conservation Easement, adverse possession, prescriptive easement, easement by necessity, and trespass. The jury trial and verdict were featured in North Carolina Lawyers Weekly.
Roberts & Stevens Successfully Defends Adventist Health Care System
March 2010 - Roberts & Stevens attorney, Jacqueline Grant, with co-counsel from Mississippi, successfully defended a National Health Care System and its local hospital in a Federal lawsuit filed by three former physicians seeking declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages arising out of their loss of hospital privileges. Upon Motion to Dismiss and after numerous briefs, the Court dismissed all of the Plaintiffs' claims against the Defendants.
Roberts & Stevens Represents General Contractor in Successful Construction Settlement
December 2009 - Roberts & Stevens attorney, Cynthia S. Grady successfully represented a general contractor, who received a satisfactory settlement from a Bank and property owners. The property went into foreclosure before the general contractor had been fully paid for construction of the condominium project. Therefore, the Bank was likely not to pay the remaining payments.
Grady, with many years experience in representing banks making commercial real estate and oil and gas loans, inspected the Bank's loan documents. She found that when the Bank made its second loan to the property's owners and placed a new deed of trust on the property, it had failed to renew and extend its prior note and deed of trust. This meant that the general contractor had begun work on the project before the Bank's second lien on the property arose, and thus the general contractor's lien was superior to the Bank's lien because the Bank's first promissory note had been terminated and replaced by the Bank's second promissory note.
This argument resulted in the general contractor and its subcontractors receiving a sizable negotiated settlement amount from the Bank instead of being left empty-handed.
Roberts & Stevens’ Trial Victory for Employment Discrimination Case
December 2009 - Roberts & Stevens attorney, Jacqueline Grant, with co-counsel from Georgia, successfully defended a security company and its president in a federal employment discrimination action. The plaintiff sued for discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act for not hiring him as a security guard. The plaintiff also sued his current employer and Ingles Supermarket for whom security services was provided. Upon Motion to Dismiss and after numerous briefs, the Court dismissed all of the Plaintiff's claims against her clients.
Roberts & Stevens Successfully Defends Sexual Misconduct Case
October 2009 - Roberts & Stevens attorney, Jacqueline Grant, successfully obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a National Church (Church of God in Christ, Inc.), State Church, and Local Church in a civil action filed by five men who alleged they were sexually abused by the Local Church's Choir Director when they were teenagers. The plaintiffs sought over $35 million in compensatory and punitive damages. The plaintiffs alleged that the National, State, and Local Church were negligent in their selection, retention, and supervision of the Director. The plaintiffs also asserted a claim against the defendants for intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress. The jury returned a verdict on all counts in favor of the defendants.
