Former Durham official can proceed with suit over extortion claim

Former Durham City Council member Monique Holsey-Hyman can move forward with her lawsuit against the city, former colleagues, and city staff over extortion claims linked to a 2023 development vote.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal Wednesday from defendants challenging Holsey-Hyman’s suit.

She filed her complaint in March 2024 against Council Members Jillian Johnson and Mark Middleton, Planning Director Sara Young, and City Attorney Kimberly Rehberg. A trial judge ruled that much of Holsey-Hyman’s complaint could proceed. The two council members, Young, and the city appealed.

“Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint because ‘[l]egislative immunity bars the claim[s] against Defendants Middleton and Johnson that are based on their presenting a resolution of censure against Plaintiff during a City Council meeting,’” Judge Allegra Collins wrote for a unanimous three-judge Appeals Court panel. “Defendants argue that the denial of legislative immunity to Johnson and Middleton affects a substantial right and therefore permits immediate review of the entire order. We disagree.”

“Legislative immunity does not apply to administrative, executive, or political acts, nor to conduct undertaken with malice or corruption,” Collins added. “The complaint alleges that Johnson and Middleton: leaked Plaintiff’s identity to the press as the subject of an ‘extortion probe’; demanded Plaintiff’s resignation within minutes of receiving the City Attorney’s letter; coordinated with a private developer to remove Plaintiff from office; presented a Resolution of Censure they knew was false; made defamatory statements during the 23 March 2023 meeting that Plaintiff had engaged in illegal campaign activity; and used the censure process as a tool to ‘defame, disparage, denigrate, humiliate and embarrass’ Plaintiff.”

“The complaint further alleges that the Resolution of Censure: was not properly before the Council under its Rules of Procedure because censure requires ‘extreme or outrageous conduct,’ which Defendants knew was absent; was never voted on; and was introduced solely for reputational harm, not for any legitimate legislative purpose,” the Appeals Court opinion continued.

“[T]he conduct described is administrative, political, or personal–not legislative,” Collins wrote.

“Because the complaint alleges conduct outside the ‘sphere of legitimate legislative activity,’  Defendants have failed at this stage to show that legislative immunity applies to Johnson and Middleton,” she explained. “Without a valid claim of immunity, no substantial right is implicated.”

Collins’ ruling extended beyond the two council members named in Holsey-Hyman’s suit.

“Defendants further argue that, because Johnson and Middleton assert legislative immunity, this Court should review claims involving Young and the City ‘in the interest of judicial economy,’” Collins wrote. “First, Defendants have failed at this stage to show that legislative immunity applies to Johnson and Middleton such that a substantial right is implicated. Furthermore, when an interlocutory appeal is properly before the Court, we may review only those issues that themselves affect a substantial right.”

“Defendants identify no substantial right implicated by the denial of the motion to dismiss as to Defendant Young or the City,” the opinion continued. “Defendants’ assertion that it ‘makes sense’ to review everything now is insufficient as a matter of law.”

The dispute stemmed from Durham City’s March 2023 vote on the Carpenter Falls development. Holsey-Hyman voted against the project, which failed when the council deadlocked at 3-3.

“Five days later, developer Jarrod Edens reported to Defendant Sara Young, the City’s Planning Director, that Plaintiff had solicited a campaign contribution in exchange for her vote,” Collins wrote. “Plaintiff alleges the accusation was false and that Young, City Attorney Kimberly Rehberg, and Councilmembers Defendants Jillian Johnson and Mark Middleton repeated or acted upon the accusation without investigation.”

“Rehberg circulated written communications to Councilmembers on 13 and 14 March 2023, describing the extortion allegation; Plaintiff alleges these communications implied her guilt and became public records,” Collins wrote. “Plaintiff further alleges that Middleton immediately demanded her resignation and that Johnson later disclosed to the press that Plaintiff was the subject of the accusation. The Council subsequently referred the matter to the State Bureau of Investigation (‘SBI’). The SBI ultimately exonerated Plaintiff.”

Judges April Wood and Michael Stading joined Collins’ opinion.

“Former Durham official can proceed with suit over extortion claim” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.