## Facts

- The City of Newton developed a park on land adjacent to James W. Powell, Jr.’s property and retained contractors to clear timber and manage the project.
- Powell alleged the city’s agents trespassed on his land and wrongfully cut and removed hardwood trees; he sued the city asserting, among other claims, trespass and wrongful cutting/removal of trees.
- The city filed third-party claims against Shaver Wood Products, Inc. and W.K. Dickson Engineering, Inc. for indemnification if the city was found liable.
- During a jury trial, the parties announced in open court that they had settled: Powell would quitclaim his interest in the disputed land in exchange for $30,000 from the city and $5,000 each from the two contractors (total $40,000).
- The trial judge questioned Powell on the record; Powell confirmed the settlement terms as his agreement, and the jury was dismissed.
- Counsel later exchanged emails memorializing the terms; a written settlement agreement and quitclaim deed were drafted, and the settling defendants transmitted the $40,000 to Powell’s counsel.
- Powell refused to sign the written agreement and deed, contending the settlement was unenforceable under the statute of frauds because it involved an interest in land and lacked his signed writing.

## Issues

1. Whether an oral settlement concerning an interest in land, announced and ratified in open court but not later signed by the party to be charged, is unenforceable under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22-2 (statute of frauds).
2. Whether judicial estoppel bars a party who assented to an open-court settlement from later invoking the statute of frauds to avoid performance.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of North Carolina affirmed enforcement of the settlement, modifying the rationale used below.
- The court accepted that the statute of frauds would otherwise require a signed writing for an agreement to convey an interest in land.
- The court held that judicial estoppel prevented Powell from repudiating a settlement he clearly and deliberately accepted on the record in open court.
- The court relied on the formal in-court assent, the court’s reliance in dismissing the jury, and the parties’ post-announcement conduct (including tender of funds) as demonstrating a settled, relied-upon agreement.

## Legal Principles

- N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22-2 generally requires a writing signed by the party to be charged for contracts to sell or convey land or interests in land.
- Judicial estoppel bars a litigant from taking an inconsistent position in litigation when doing so would compromise the integrity of the judicial process.
- A party who personally confirms a settlement in open court may be estopped from later invoking the statute of frauds to escape performance, where the court and opposing parties relied on the announced settlement.

## Conclusion

An open-court settlement requiring conveyance of a land interest may be enforced despite the absence of a later signed writing when the settling party knowingly assented on the record and judicial estoppel is necessary to prevent repudiation that would impair reliance on in-court settlements.


Powell v. City of Newton, 703 S.E.2d 723 (N.C. 2010)