Carl and Stephanie Firley are embroiled in a legal battle against the Town of Marshall, North Carolina, over claims that their property was effectively condemned without compensation due to municipal negligence. The complaint, filed by the Firleys on June 30, 2023, in Madison County Superior Court, names the Town of Marshall as the defendant. This case has escalated to the North Carolina Court of Appeals following a trial court’s dismissal of their claim.
The roots of this dispute trace back to April 19, 2019, when an unexpected deluge led to catastrophic flooding and landslides in Marshall. One such landslide at 107 Candler Drive sent debris cascading down onto Carl and Stephanie Firley’s rental property at 632 Walnut Drive. The aftermath left their storm pipe irreparably clogged and their tenants displaced. Alleging inverse condemnation under N.C.G.S. § 40A-51 (2025), the Firleys contend that the town’s failure to maintain essential stormwater infrastructure permanently diminished their property’s market value.
In response, the Town of Marshall denied these allegations and sought summary judgment. During a fact-finding session on November 18, 2024, expert testimony revealed that while Candler Drive was maintained by the town, the adjacent storm pipe was not within its purview—a point underscored by Forrest Gilliam, the Town Administrator. Despite efforts to mitigate debris flow post-flooding with concrete bags along Candler Drive’s side, no direct action had been taken regarding the storm pipe itself.
The trial court ruled on December 2, 2024, that no taking had occurred under constitutional or statutory definitions. It found that the flooding resulted from an extraordinary weather event rather than any municipal oversight or structure failure attributable to the town’s actions or omissions. This decision hinged on findings that excessive rainfall—far exceeding initial estimates—was responsible for overwhelming local infrastructure.
On appeal, Carl and Stephanie Firley argued procedural errors and contested evidence validity but faced an uphill battle against established legal standards requiring demonstrable municipal control over implicated structures for liability in takings claims. The appellate court upheld the lower court’s decision across all points.
The plaintiffs seek reversal of this dismissal and compensation for damages they attribute to governmental neglect. Their pursuit hinges on proving substantial interference with property rights due to foreseeable consequences of government-maintained structures.
Representing Carl and Stephanie Firley are attorneys Brian D. Gulden & Taylor D. Osborne from Van Winkle, Buck, Wall, Starnes & Davis PA; Jamie A. Stokes from Leake & Stokes PLLC represents the Town of Marshall. The case is presided over by Judge R. Gregory Horne with appellate oversight by Judges Murry and Griffin under Case ID No. COA25-408.
Source: COA25408_Firley_v_Town_of_Marshall_Opinion_North_Carolina_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
