By Jordan Meadows
Staff Writer
More than a decade after filing a civil lawsuit over an alleged timber fraud, a group of brothers from Martin County, North Carolina, say they are still struggling to access basic court documents and have faced repeated procedural and financial setbacks they believe reflect deeper inequities in the state’s civil justice system.
The case, first filed in 2009 in Martin County Superior Court, centers on a contract between the Black Brothers and a local timber cutter. The brothers allege that he harvested and sold timber from their family land but failed to pay them more than $300,000 in proceeds.
The written contract included a clause stating that “scaled receipts and records of Buyer shall be binding upon all parties,” a provision that later made it difficult for the Black Brothers to challenge the cutter's accounting of the timber or payments. Such clauses can complicate fraud or misrepresentation claims unless the agreement specifically allows independent audits or inspections.
Court records show that the brothers filed their complaint in 2009. According to later filings, issues with service by law enforcement may have affected the case’s progress. The defense moved to dismiss in 2010, and the court ultimately entered an order of dismissal in 2014.
The plaintiffs say they were unaware that the case had been dismissed. According to correspondence reviewed by community advocate Rev. Isaiah Green, the brothers’ attorneys allegedly allowed the dismissal to proceed without consulting or notifying their clients. When Green contacted court officials within a year to request reinstatement, he was told the case had already expired under the statute of limitations.
Green later filed communications with the Clerk of Superior Court and attempted to reopen the matter, citing “new information discovered.” He also wrote to then–U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder seeking assistance, but said he received no response. The matter was not reinstated, and the case remains closed.
The brothers report that they have retained multiple attorneys since 2009, several of whom either withdrew, stopped responding, or accepted fees without completing work. In one instance, correspondence between two lawyers from Raleigh shows them asking for a $250 “consulting fee” to “help get the case reinstated.” They never returned any correspondence after payment.
In July 2025, the brothers submitted their first formal request in years for a written transcript of the proceedings. They say that the process has proven difficult, with confusion over which agency holds the record and what fees apply. Although the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) governs access to federal executive agency documents, it does not extend to state courts. That distinction has left the plaintiffs with few options to obtain transcripts or records from the Martin County Superior Court.
It’s possible there was an improper service of process —when legal notice is not correctly delivered—which can lead to dismissal or delay. Courts generally require proper service before a case can move forward. However, if plaintiffs can demonstrate that they made reasonable efforts to comply and that an officer or agency erred, judges may grant additional time or alternative service options.
When law enforcement officers fail to serve documents correctly, plaintiffs may file an affidavit of non-service or seek permission for a special process server. In rare cases where misconduct or negligence is suspected, plaintiffs can pursue a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for deprivation of due process.
Advocates like Rev. Green say the Martin County case reflects broader challenges faced by Black residents navigating North Carolina’s civil courts. While most public attention focuses on criminal justice, civil matters—including property disputes, contract claims, and inheritance cases—have also shown patterns of disadvantage.
In Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), Black employees successfully argued that Duke Power’s education and testing requirements unfairly limited their advancement. In Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital (1963), Black physicians and patients sued over segregated healthcare facilities funded by federal money.
More recently, in 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down a conviction after finding a Black juror was excluded on the basis of race—a first in state history. In May 2024, Black residents in Tyrrell County filed a federal lawsuit against county commissioners for maintaining a courthouse monument inscribed “In Appreciation of Our Faithful Slaves.” The plaintiffs alleged that the monument represented unlawful, racially discriminatory government speech.
As of September 2025, the Martin County plaintiffs continue to seek access to their original case transcript and to explore legal options for reinstatement. Rev. Green says he has spoken with the Clerk of Court and other officials about whether new evidence or procedural errors could allow the case to be reopened, though that remains uncertain.
The brothers say they hope to have the matter reviewed again, but after more than 15 years of filings, dismissals, and unanswered correspondence, their path forward remains unclear.
