4 Decades of Million Dollar Recoveries

(919) 683-2135


Reported Cases

Attorney Reported Cases

The attorneys at Mills & Mahoney, P.A. have helped develop the law in the State and Federal Courts of North Carolina. Below is a list of the reported cases that have been handled by the firm since 1980.

Personal Injury/Wrongful Death
Green ex rel Crudup vs. Kearney, ___ N.C. ___, 748 S.E.2d 143 (2013) (amicus curiae) – holding that the parents remained liable for courts costs incurred by their son after summary judgment was entered against them

Other Areas
State vs. Gamez, ___ N.C. App. ___, 745 S.E.2d 876 (2013) – holding that a criminal action arises on the date when the bill of indictment is filed

Personal Injury/Wrongful Death
Fraley v. Griffin, ___ N.C. App. ___, 720 S.E.2d 694 (2011) (amicus curiae) – holding that an emergency medical technician is not entitled to public official immunity

Andrews ex. rel. Andrews vs. Haygood, 362 N.C. 599, 669 S.E.2d 310 (2008), cert. denied, 129 S.Ct. 2792 (2009) (amicus curiae) – holding that North Carolina’s Medicaid reimbursement statute complies with federal law

Jones vs. City of Durham, 183 N.C. App. 57, 643 S.E.2d 631 (2007) – allowing a trial on the plaintiff’s claim for obstruction of justice and reversing the court’s order enjoining the City from asserting governmental immunity in violation of the due process and equal protection clauses

Jones vs. City of Durham, 361 N.C. 144, 638 S.E.2d 202 (2006) – holding that an injured pedestrian was entitled to a trial on her claim for gross negligence against a police officer

Lassiter vs. Cohn, 168 N.C. App. 310, 607 S.E.2d 688, review denied, 359 N.C. 633, 613 S.E.2d 686 (2005) – dismissing a pedestrian’s claims against a police officer based on the public duty doctrine

Jones vs. City of Durham, 168 N.C. App. 433, 608 S.E.2d 387 (2005) – recognizing that an officer responding to an emergency call may not be held liable for ordinary negligence

Miller vs. Forsyth Memorial Hosp., 159 N.C. App. 681, 587 S.E.2d 352 (2003), on rehearing, 173 N.C. App. 619, 625 S.E.2d 115 (2005) (amicus curiae) – affirming the exclusion of testimony at a medical malpractice trial and the denial of a motion to compel discovery

Yancey vs. Lea, 354 N.C. 48, 550 S.E.2d 155 (2001) – defining the scope of gross negligence in a motor vehicle negligence case and affirming the trial court’s decision to not instruct the jury on the issue of gross negligence

Chamberlain vs. Thames, 131 N.C. App. 705, 509 S.E.2d 443 (1998) – affirming the trial court’s evidentiary rulings during a personal injury trial

Williams vs. Holsclaw, 128 N.C. App. 205, 495 S.E.2d 166 (1998) (amicus curiae) – recognizing that a claim for uninsured motorist coverage can be pursued if a motor vehicle claim against the government is barred by immunity

Regan vs. Amerimark Bldg. Products, Inc., 127 N.C. App. 225, 489 S.E.2d 421 (1997) – affirming the entry of summary judgment for the defendants in a Woodson claim

Regan vs. Amerimark Bldg. Products, Inc., 118 N.C. App. 328, 454 S.E.2d 849 (1995) – reversing the dismissal of a Woodson claim

Camalier vs. Jeffries, 340 N.C. 699, 460 S.E.2d 133 (1995) (amicus curiae) – holding that there was insufficient evidence that an employee was acting within the course and scope of his employment when he attended and consumed alcohol at a party

Insurance Disputes
Argonaut Great Central Ins. Co. vs. McDowell County, 626 F.Supp.2d 554 (W.D.N.C. 2009) – dismissing a federal lawsuit filed by an insurance company seeking a determination of insurance coverage for civil claims filed against the McDowell County Sheriff in state court

Sitzman vs. Government Employees Ins. Co., 182 N.C. App. 259, 641 S.E.2d 838 (2007) – determining the availability of underinsured motorist coverage following a jury verdict

Simpson vs. Life Investors Ins. Co. of America, 367 F.Supp.2d 875 (M.D.N.C. 2005) – entering summary judgment for an insurer in a life insurance dispute

Durham City Bd. of Educ. vs. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 109 N.C. App. 152, 426 S.E.2d 451,review denied, 333 N.C. 790, 431 S.E.2d 22 (1993) – affirming the existence of insurance coverage for negligence claims against the school board in a case where a teacher sexually assaulted a student

Requeno vs. Integon General Ins. Corp., 332 N.C. 339, 421 S.E.2d 784 (1992) (amicus curiae) – determination of uninsured motorist coverage

St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. vs. Duke University, 670 F.Supp. 630 (M.D.N.C. 1987) – summary judgment rulings in an insurance coverage dispute following a jury verdict inRaymond U vs. Duke University

Employment Law
Mancinelli vs. Momentum Research, Inc.
, 2012 NCBC 4 (2012) – summary judgment rulings by North Carolina Business Court on claims for breach of an employment agreement, breach of a pre-incorporation or shareholder agreement, and violations of the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act

Williams vs. New Hope Foundation, Inc., 192 N.C. App. 528, 665 S.E.2d 586 (2008) – affirming an award of attorney’s fees and court costs following a jury verdict under the North Carolina Wage & Hour Act

Hinton vs. Conner, 366 F.Supp.2d 297 (M.D.N.C. 2005) – denying summary judgment to the City of Durham in a First Amendment retaliation case

Hinton vs. Conner, 225 F.R.D. 513 (M.D.N.C. 2005) – requiring the City of Durham to respond to a request for personnel information

Tarrant vs. Freshway Foods of Greensboro, Inc., 163 N.C. App. 504, 593 S.E.2d 808 (2004) (amicus curiae) – reversing the dismissal of an employee’s wrongful discharge and REDA claims

Johnson vs. Board of Trustees of Durham Technical Community College, 157 N.C. App. 38, 577 S.E.2d 670 (2003) – holding that after-acquired evidence did not bar a teacher’s disability discrimination claim

Johnson vs. Trustees of Durham Technical Community College, 139 N.C. App. 676, 535 S.E.2d 357, review denied, 353 N.C. 265, 546 S.E.2d 101 (2000) – reversing the entry of a directed verdict on a teacher’s claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act

Watson vs. Dixon, 352 N.C. 343, 532 S.E.2d 17 (2000) – affirming a $605,000 jury verdict for intentional infliction of emotional distress, including a separate punitive damages claim against the corporate defendant, Duke University

Henson vs. Liggett Group, Inc., 61 F.3d 270 (4th Cir. 1995) – affirming the dismissal of claims for age discrimination, ERISA discrimination, and wrongful discharge

Taborn vs. Hammonds, 324 N.C. 546, 380 S.E.2d 513 (1989) – affirming an administrative decision to dismiss a teacher’s claim for improper dismissal

Raymond U vs. Duke University, 91 N.C. App. 171, 371 S.E.2d 701 (1988) – reversing a jury verdict for malicious prosecution and affirming a verdict for libel and slander

Taborn vs. Hammonds, 83 N.C. App. 461, 350 S.E.2d 880 (1986) – holding that a probationary teacher has the right to a new hearing for an improper dismissal under the Teacher Tenure Act

Civil Rights
State vs. Dubose, 208 N.C. App. 406, 702 S.E.2d 330 (2010) – holding that defendant was entitled to a new sentencing hearing when the judgments included criminal street gang findings that were issued without notice to defendant and outside of his presence

State vs. Dewalt, 190 N.C. App. 158, 660 S.E.2d 111, review denied, 362 N.C. 684, 670 S.E.2d 906 (2008) – affirming the denial of a motion to suppress under the Fifth Amendment

Massasoit vs. Carter, 439 F.Supp.2d 463 (M.D.N.C. 2006), affirmed, 253 Fed. Appx. 295 (4th Cir. 2007) (unpublished), cert. denied, 128 S.Ct. 2933 (2008) – holding that a deputy sheriff was not entitled to qualified immunity or public official immunity in an excessive force case

Massasoit vs. Carter, 227 F.R.D. 264 (M.D.N.C. 2005) – determining a reasonable fee for the deposition of a law enforcement expert

Dawson vs. Page, 286 F.Supp.2d 617 (M.D.N.C. 2003) – denying post-trial motions following a civil rights trial

State vs. Marcopolos, 154 N.C. App. 581, 572 S.E.2d 820 (2002), affirmed and remanded by, 357 N.C. 245, 580 S.E.2d 691, on remand by, 159 N.C. App. 707, 583 S.E.2d 726 (2003) – affirming convictions for second-degree trespass against protestors at CP&L

Johnson vs. Harris, 149 N.C. App. 928, 563 S.E.2d 224 (2002) – reversing the imposition of Rule 11 sanctions against civil rights attorneys

ACT UP Triangle vs. Commission for Health Serv. of the State of N.C., 345 N.C. 699, 483 S.E.2d 388 (1997) – holding that a citizen organization may file a constitutional challenge under the Administrative Procedures Act

Moore vs. City of Creedmoor, 345 N.C. 356, 481 S.E.2d 14 (1997) – holding that restaurant owners were entitled to a trial against the city and police chief on their claims under the First Amendment

Skipper vs. French, 130 F.3d 603 (4th Cir. 1997) – vacating the district court’s decision to deny a writ of habeas corpus in a post-conviction capital case

Jarrell vs. Town of Topsail Beach, 105 N.C. App. 331, 412 S.E.2d 680 (1992) – holding that a civil action under the Disabled Persons Protection Act for the right to use a beach may be brought in the disabled person’s county of residence

Wills, Estates, and Real Property
In re Will of Baitschora, 207 N.C. App. 174, 700 S.E.2d 50 (2010) – affirming a jury verdict setting aside a contested will on the grounds of undue influence and addressing the waiver of the Dead Man’s Statute in a will contest

Woods vs. Mangum, 682 S.E.2d 435 (2009), affirmed by, 362 N.C. 827, 689 S.E.2d 858 (2010) – affirming the entry of summary judgment in a real property/estate dispute

Barnes vs. Wells, 165 N.C. App. 575, 599 S.E.2d 585 (2004) – affirming the denial of a motion to set aside an adoption decree

In re Will of Smith, 159 N.C. App. 651, 583 S.E.2d 615, review denied, 357 N.C. 657, 590 S.E.2d 861 (2003) – reversing the trial court’s entry of a directed verdict on the issue of undue influence in a will contest

In re Will of Dunn, 129 N.C. App. 321, 500 S.E.2d 99 (1998) – holding that the parties to a caveat proceeding may not waive, either by consent or implication, a jury trial on disputed issues of fact, and affirming the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees and costs to the propounder

Riddle vs. Nelson, 84 N.C. App. 656, 353 S.E.2d 866 (1987) – reversing summary judgment in a real property dispute

Ellis vs. Poe, 73 N.C. App. 448, 326 S.E.2d 80 (1985) – reversing the entry of summary judgment in a real property dispute on the grounds of that the evidence of a constructive ouster was undisputed

Commercial/Business Disputes
Mancinelli vs. Momentum Research, Inc.
, 2012 NCBC 28 (2012) – pre-trial rulings by North Carolina Business Court holding that shareholder claims were governed by Delaware law under the internal affairs doctrine

AEL Financial LLC vs. City Auto Parts of Durham, Inc., 70 UCC Rep. Serv. 2d 230 (N.D. Ill. 2009) (applying Illinois law) – initial trial court rulings in a dispute over a contract for the lease of telecommunications equipment

Merritt, Flebotte, Wilson, Webb & Caruso, PLLC vs. Hemmings, 676 S.E.2d 79, review denied, 363 N.C. 655, 686 S.E.2d 518 (2009) – affirming the entry of summary judgment for a law firm in an action to enforce a settlement agreement

Centura Bank vs. Miller, 138 N.C. App. 679, 532 S.E.2d 246 (2000) – affirming the denial of a motion for change of venue

Byers vs. North Carolina Sav. Institutions Div., 123 N.C. App. 689, 474 S.E.2d 404 (1996) – dismissing an appeal of an order denying a motion to dismiss and remanding the case for an administrative hearing to review the agency’s approval of the conversion and merger of a savings and loan bank into Centura Bank

Custom Molders, Inc. vs. Roper Corp., 101 N.C. App. 606, 401 S.E.2d 96, affirmed by, 330 N.C. 191, 410 S.E.2d 55 (1991) – affirming a jury verdict on an unfair and deceptive trade practices claim

Industrial Innovators, Inc. vs. Myrick White, Inc., 99 N.C. App. 42, 392 S.E.2d 425, review denied, 327 N.C. 483, 397 S.E.2d 219 (1990) – holding that an arbitration award permitted defendants to recover damages for the issuance of a wrongful injunction in a case involving the misappropriation of trade secrets

Aderon Group, Inc. vs. Industrial Innovators, Inc., 90 N.C. App. 758, 370 S.E.2d 66 (1988) – affirming the entry of summary judgment for a real estate broker in a lawsuit to recover real estate commissions

Williams vs. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 67 N.C. App. 271, 312 S.E.2d 905 (1984) – affirming the entry of a directed verdict on claims for slander and interference with contract

Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. vs. Rubish, 306 N.C. 417, 293 S.E.2d 749 (1982) – ordering a new trial in a commercial landlord-tenant dispute

Central Carolina Farmers, Inc. vs. Hilliard, 54 N.C. App. 418, 283 S.E.2d 558 (1981) – affirming a judgment allowing a recovery on a promissory note and reversing the judgment on the counterclaim for payment of seed corn, fertilizer, and other farm supplies

Fleming vs. Apollo Motor Homes, Inc., 87 F.R.D. 408 (M.D.N.C. 1980) – trial court rulings on a motion to dismiss various claims arising from the purchase of a motor home

Other Areas
Hooks v. Eckman, 159 N.C. App. 681, 587 S.E.2d 352 (2003) – affirming the dismissal of a lawsuit alleging a claim for fraud

Phelps vs. Phelps, 337 N.C. 344, 446 S.E.2d 17 (1994) – affirming the trial court’s custody order

Kilpatrick vs. University Mall Shopping Center, 68 N.C. App. 629, 315 S.E.2d 786 (1984) – reversing the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for directed verdict

Moore vs. Crumpton, 306 N.C. 618, 295 S.E.2d 436 (1982) – recognizing that a parent may be held liable for failing to take reasonable steps to exercise control over an unemancipated minor

Client Testimonials

“I came to Glenn, Mills, Fisher, and Mahoney with an extremely difficult legal dilemma that seemed impossible to resolve fairly and favorably. I was completely floored–and relieved beyond belief–when Carlos Mahoney called the next day to let me know that he had found a way out of the morass. It was a brilliant solution. Mahoney and his assistant made a truly awful situation much easier to deal with because of the integrity which they brought to the work. They answered all my questions promptly. They never dropped the ball, and were always up to date on the issues when I called, which was no small feat, since the matter had many moving parts and extended over several years. Through it all, Mahoney offered truly wise counsel, making sure that my emotions did not get in the way of my interests. He also guided the case toward a conclusion that was far better than I ever hoped or imagined. I cannot recommend the firm more highly.”

- Laura Edwards

Could not be more pleased with my results. Carlos did an outstanding job in presenting all the facts in my case. He is held in high regards among his peers, and I was able to witness first hand why. Very thorough, with no wasted time. A truly class act. Highly recommend his services.

- Curley Schwatka

“Carlos’ knowledge of applicable law as well as his recall of pertinent facts and attention to detail are impeccable. He kept me informed of all developments and took care to ensure that I understood strategies and next steps. Fellow attorneys assured me that my case was in good hands with Carlos and that proved true. I was confident in his pursuit of justice for me. I recommend him without reservation.”

- Marilyn Chism