Weaver, Bennett & Bland, P.A. – Case Results*
This case involving the Caveat of a Last Will and Testament was tried by Dave Bland in Cabarrus County Superior Court in September of 2008 and was heard in the North Carolina Court of Appeals in September of 2009. This case arose from a dispute between four brothers over the last will of their mother. The three older brothers wrongfully alleged undue influence by their younger brother in the execution of their mother’s will and further wrongfully alleged that their mother was mentally incompetent to execute her will. The will was successfully defended by the firm and the trial court’s decision was upheld on appeal.
FACILITATION OF FRAUD
Grace Waldon and Environmental Water Solutions, Inc. a North Carolina corporation v. Danny Burris, Water Resources Corp., DynPar LLC, Computer Sciences Corporation and DynCorp, 3:04-CV-00050 (October 2008).
This case was tried by Attorney Dave Bland to a jury verdict in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina in October of 2008. The suit arose from an alleged conspiracy between the Defendant DynPar, LLC and a former employee of the Plaintiffs. The conspiracy sought to defraud the Plaintiffs out of the proceeds of a contract to operate the industrial waste water treatment plant on the Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The jury found in its verdict that the Defendant DynPar, LLC had conspired with the Defendant Dan Burris to facilitate a fraud being perpetrated on the Plaintiffs. The District Court entered a combined judgment against DynPar, LLC for $2,914,279.09. The Defendant DynPar, LLC is a limited liability company that was set up as a joint venture of its two managing members Parsons Corporation and DynCorp Technical Services, LLC (a wholly owned entity of Computer Sciences Corporation).
BREACH OF CONTRACT
ValuePest.com of America v. Larry Davidson et al. 3:06 cv-00507 (2006)
This case was brought by attorney Dave Bland in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina on behalf of ValuePest.com of America, Inc. against one of its former franchisees for breach of contract, trademark infringement, and unfair trade practices. The case was settled and a judgment was entered by the Court which (1)prohibited the Defendants from using the ValuePest trademark, (2) ordered the Defendants to turn over a complete customer list to Plaintiff, (3) ordered Defendants to refrain from utilizing or making any offer similar to a program offered by ValuePest for a period of one year, (4) ordered Defendants to transfer all telephone numbers to ValuePest, and (5) finally ordered the Defendants to refrain from soliciting the business of any ValuePest customer for a period of two years.
City of Charlotte v. Derek A. Lawson and wife, Carlyn M. Lawson, 05-CVS-4482, Mecklenburg County, November 2006
City Offer: $ 3,775.00
Jury Verdict: $ 52,400.00
This case arose from a condemnation action brought by the City of Charlotte against Derek A. Lawson and wife, Carlyn M. Lawson for taking of a permanent drainage easement and temporary construction easement across the Lawson’s property. Attorney Dave Bland tried this case to a Mecklenburg County jury and obtained a verdict for the Lawsons, which was over ten times what the City offered to pay.
Grace R. Waldon and Environmental Water Solutions. INC., a North Carolina Corporation, Plaintiffs v. Danny L. Burris, Jesse James Waldon JR. and Environmental Water Solutions, INC., an Oklahoma Corporation, Defendants, Union County, 01-CVS-1455; 172 N.C. App 594, 616 S.E.2d 693 (2005)
This case was tried by Attorney Dave Bland in Union County, North Carolina in September of 2003. The case arose out of a conspiracy between the client’s ex-husband and a former officer of the client’s company. The two individual Defendants planned and attempted to misappropriate the client’s majority ownership interest in a business that had obtained a lucrative contract to perform services for the federal government. The Union County jury, after a seven day trial, returned a record verdict in favor of the firm’s client. The jury verdict and judgment was upheld in two separate appeals to the North Carolina Court of Appeals.
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LITIGATION
Raintree Homeowners Association, et al v. Club Corporation of America, Inc., et al (1998)
This case arose out of a dispute between the homeowners who resided in the Raintree Planned United Development and Club Corporation of America, Inc. who had a sixty year lease on the two championship 18 hole golf courses, club house and amenities. The case drew national attention with articles in Sports Illustrated, the New York Times, and other national news sources. The case spanned twelve years. Ultimately, the firm was able to force Club Corporation to turn over the two championship golf courses, the club house, and all amenities. The twelve-year legal battle was memorialized by an article written by the Honorable Kevin Dugan, United States Administrative Law Judge entitled Barbarians on the Green. The value of the property recovered for the homeowners in the planned community exceeded fifty million dollars.
ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
Raintree Homeowners Ass’n, Inc. v. Bleimann, 116 N C. App. 561, 449 S.E. 2d 13, (1994) rev 342 N. C. 159, 463 S.E. 2d 72 (1995)
This case was tried by Attorney Dave Bland in Mecklenburg County before a jury as an action by the homeowners association to enforce restrictive covenants in the Raintree Planned Unit Development and to require the homeowner to remove vinyl siding which was installed without the approval and over the objection of the architectural review committee. The jury found against the homeowner’s association and the North Carolina Court of Appeals in a unanimous decision affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The firm continued to fight for the right of the homeowners association to enforce its covenants and persuaded the Supreme Court to grant discretionary review of the Court of Appeals’ decision. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded the case back to the trial court with instructions to enter a directed verdict for the Plaintiff homeowners association.
PRODUCT DEFAMATION, UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES, TRADEMARK LITIGATION
Leonard Automatics v. Sussman, ST-C-88-100 (1990)
This case was tried by attorney Dave Bland in United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina in the Statesville Division. The suit was a Lanham Act false claim and product defamation case, which took three weeks to try. The case involved a situation where an established competitor attempted to crush a new competitor in its marketplace by publishing a false “technical bulletin” about the Plaintiffs product to all of its potential customers in the industry. The length of the trial was a record for the Statesville Division and the verdict was the largest ever rendered by a jury in the Statesville Division. The jury awarded the firm’s client over $500,000.00 in actual and punitive damages.
*The outcomes described above were based on the particular facts of each case. The outcome in any case is dependent upon the specific facts and circumstances of that case. The above information is provided for informational purposes and should not be viewed as a guarantee that we can obtain the same or similar results for you.