A recent legal battle between a homebuilder and a lot developer has reached the North Carolina Court of Appeals, capturing attention due to its implications on real estate contracts and financial bonds. The plaintiff, Eastwood Construction Partners, LLC, filed a complaint against Waxhaw Developers, LLC and Waxhaw, LLC in Mecklenburg County on December 3, 2025. This case involves an appeal concerning a $495,000 appellate bond and attorneys’ fees related to a contract for residential lots.
The dispute dates back to August 29, 2022, when the trial court ordered the defendants to specifically perform a contract by selling residential lots to Eastwood Construction Partners. The court concluded that there was an enforceable purchase agreement between the parties. The first appeal in this matter resulted in Eastwood I, where the appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision. In response to this order, Waxhaw Developers posted an appeal bond amounting to $495,000 under Section 1-292 of North Carolina General Statutes. This statute requires such a bond when appealing orders directing real estate sales.
Upon remand from Eastwood I, the trial court directed that the full amount of the appeal bond be paid to Eastwood Construction Partners due to their loss of possession and use of property during the appeal process. The defendants challenged this decision by arguing that Eastwood failed to prove that their damages equaled the bond amount. However, evidence presented showed that increased construction and borrowing costs in 2023 alone exceeded $495,000 from Eastwood’s perspective. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision.
In addition to seeking compensation through the bond order, Eastwood Construction Partners cross-appealed regarding attorneys’ fees denied by the trial court under General Statutes 1D-45 and 6-21.6. These statutes allow for fee recovery if claims are deemed frivolous or malicious or if business contracts include fee provisions. Although Eastwood argued for fees based on increased litigation costs due to defendants’ claims—particularly slander of title—the trial court found no abuse of discretion in denying these fees since no malicious intent was proven nor were defendants’ claims deemed frivolous.
Ultimately, both appeals were resolved with affirmations from Chief Judge Dillon and Judges Stroud and Gore at North Carolina Court of Appeals as per Rule 30(e). Legal representation for Waxhaw Developers came from Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson P.A., including Matthew W. Sawchak among others; while Brooks Pierce McLendon Humphrey & Leonard LLP represented Eastwood Construction Partners with Katarina K Wong leading their team.
Source: COA25174_Eastwood_Construction_Partners_LLC_v_Waxhaw_Developers_LLC_Complaint_North_Carolina_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
