Smith loses court battle over Broad Street

By Lynn Hotaling and Rose Hooper

Hyatt's ruling came at the conclusion of the plaintiff's case. She allowed defendants' motions to dismiss based on the facts and asked one of the defense attorneys to draft a judgment.

After hearing a day's worth of testimony, mostly from plaintiff Wayne Smith, Judge Hyatt reached a decision before defendants' attorneys presented their case.

At issue is whether Sylva officials acted properly when they closed Broad Street in April 2000, a move Smith claimed deprived him of access to property he planned to develop. Smith's suit named as defendants the town of Sylva and two adjacent landowners - local corporations Nuhart, owned by James and Marie Searcy, and Pameco, the corporate entity of P&M Automotive owners Larry Parris and James Messer.

Attorney Bill Coward of Cashiers, who represented Smith, cited a number of what he termed procedural violations as he tried to prove town officials erred when they voted to close the street. Coward also maintained that closing Broad Street amounted to "unlawful seizure" and denied Smith access to property he planned to develop.

The description published in the legal notice did not include a "meets and bounds" description, Coward said, and at least one adjoining property owner was not notified by registered letter of the town's intent to close the street.

Sylva officials' decision was a "classic case of deprivation of vested rights and unvested rights," Coward said. Smith obtained a building permit to develop a mobile home park on his property and attached a map including Broad Street to his permit application. He then spent some $400,000 on the site, Coward said.

"Mr. Smith has vested rights, and the Supreme Court has ruled that one who makes significant expenditures based on a permit cannot be deprived of subsequent future development by revocation of the permit or other means," Coward said.

But defendants' attorneys Eric Ridenour representing Sylva and Randy Seago representing the Searcys successfully argued that Smith had not shown anyone deprived him of reasonable access. Also, Smith waited too long to file an appeal, and Smith's own testimony established that he understood town officials intended to close Broad Street in advance of Smith's property, the defendants' lawyers said.

"The statute governing appeal says no property owner may be deprived of reasonable access," Ridenour said. "(Smith) had access from Bridge Street and deeded it away. He also eliminated his access from Business 23 where Waffle House is. He hasn't shown that anyone deprived him of reasonable access."

Seago argued that Smith's complaint should be dismissed because state statutes dictate an appeal must be filed within 30 days of a town's decision to close a street. Smith filed a suit, had it dismissed and then re-filed more than 30 days after the fact, Seago said.

In announcing her decision in favor of the defendants, Judge Hyatt said she found Seago's arguments most persuasive. She asked Seago to draft a judgment based on several points, including Smith's voluntary dismissal of his May 8, 2000, appeal and re-filing after the 30-day time limit had expired; the plaintiff's failure to show closing Broad Street was detrimental to the public interest; and that the plaintiff had two other legal means of access besides Broad Street when he acquired the tract in question but voluntarily gave them up.

The almost three-year controversy involving Smith and the town of Sylva first surfaced during an October 1999 board meeting when Smith asked town officials for a ruling on Broad Street's status. Sylva Mayor Brenda Oliver postponed a ruling pending the outcome of litigation between Smith and the Searcys.

Though Broad Street historically was town-maintained only from its origin on West Main Street between Performance Motors and P&M to First Charter Bank, a right of way for the remainder of the street was platted about 1924. On some maps the Broad Street corridor is shown intersecting with Bridge Street, which leaves West Main between Taylor Auto Parts and the Merita Bread store.

The Searcys obtained a court order in September 1999 to prevent Smith from accessing his property from Broad Street. Judge Richlyn Holt dissolved the restraining order in February 2000 and granted Smith access via Broad Street. Judge Holt's preliminary ruling stated that a town's acceptance and maintenance of a portion of a street constitutes acceptance of the street as it is fully platted.

The Searcys then dropped their lawsuit and Marie Searcy asked town board members in March to close Broad Street at First Charter Bank. Smith had previously requested that if Broad Street extended to his property, it be closed at that point.

At the town's public hearing prior to closing Broad Street, those in favor of the move included representatives of all affected businesses and property owners, with the exception of Smith.

Smith first filed suit in May 2000, alleging that when town officials closed Broad Street they effectively destroyed his plans to build a trailer park on property he owns near First Charter Bank. That suit was dismissed in July 2000 at the plaintiff's request, and a similar suit was filed a month later.

Back to Archive: 09/05/02.