in the Court of Appeals 28 November 2017.
by Plaintiff from order entered 10 October 2016 by Judge Alan
Z. Thornburg in Buncombe County Superior Court No. 15 CV
Robert Mahaffey, Plaintiff-Appellant, pro se.
McGuire, Wood & Bissette, P.A., by Matthew S. Roberson,
for the Defendant-Appellee.
February 2015, Todd Robert Mahaffey filed a complaint
alleging that Christopher C. Boyd (the "Executor"),
the executor for the estate of Dorothy C. Boyd, owed him
payment for renovations Mr. Mahaffey made to Ms. Boyd's
record shows as follows:
Boyd died in July 2014. However, in the years before she
died, she engaged Mr. Mahaffey to perform work on her home
and yard. Mr. Mahaffey continued to perform work on the
property at Ms. Boyd's direction, and after Ms.
Boyd's death, at the direction of the Executor.
September 2014, two months after Ms. Boyd's death, Mr.
Mahaffey delivered documents to the Executor's law firm
consisting of receipts, bills, and time sheets relating to
projects he completed at Ms. Boyd's property. Shortly
thereafter, an employee at the law firm asked Mr. Mahaffey to
provide clearer documentation of the work he had completed
and any payments which had already been made.
letter dated 19 November 2014, the Executor informed Mr.
Mahaffey that, based on his lack of response to the law
firm's request, he was denying Mr. Mahaffey's claim
in accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 28A-19-16, which
requires that a claim against a decedent's estate be
"in writing and state the amount or item
claimed[.]" N.C. Gen. Stat. § 28A-19-1 (2013).
months later, in February 2015, Mr. Mahaffey commenced this
action. In April 2015, the Executor answered the complaint
and served requests for admissions, to which Mr. Mahaffey
failed to respond in a timely fashion.
2015, the Executor moved for summary judgment, contending
that Mr. Mahaffey (1) failed to comply with the requirements
of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 28A-19-1 in order to preserve his
claim against Ms. Boyd's estate, and (2) performed
illegal contracting services because he was not a licensed
contractor and undertook a project for which the cost
of improvement was greater than $30, 000.
2015, after a hearing on the matter, the trial court entered
an order granting the Executor's summary judgment motion,
based in part on Mr. Mahaffey's failure to respond to the
requests for admissions. Mr. Mahaffey timely appealed from
the order (the "Summary Judgment ...