Title: Banyan GW, LLC v. Wayne Preparatory Acad. Charter Sch., Inc
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 188A18-2
State: north-carolina
Issuer: north-carolina Supreme Court
Date: April 3, 2020

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 
No. 188A18-2  
Filed 3 April 2020 
BANYAN GW, LLC 
 
 
v. 
WAYNE PREPARATORY ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL, INC. and its BOARD 
OF DIRECTORS; SHARON THOMPSON, Chair of the Board of Directors; and 
JOHN ANKENEY and LUCIUS J. STANLEY, as members of the Board of 
Directors; and VERTEX III, LLC 
 
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the unpublished decision of a 
divided panel of the Court of Appeals, No. COA18-378, 2019 WL 438327 (N.C. Ct. 
App. Feb. 5, 2019), affirming an order granting partial summary judgment in favor 
of plaintiff and denying defendant Wayne Preparatory Academy Charter School, 
Inc.’s motion for summary judgment entered on 6 November 2017 by Judge Carl R. 
Fox in Superior Court, Wake County. On 30 October 2019, the Supreme Court 
allowed defendant Wayne Preparatory Academy Charter School, Inc.’s petition for 
discretionary review of additional issues. Heard in the Supreme Court on 10 March 
2020. 
 
Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, L.L.P., by J. Mitchell 
Armbruster, for plaintiff-appellee Banyan GW, LLC. 
 
Haithcock, Barfield, Hulse & Kinsey, P.L.L.C., by Glenn A. Barfield, and 
Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, by Richard A. Vinroot, for defendant-appellant 
Wayne Preparatory Academy Charter School, Inc. 
 
No brief for defendant-appellees Board of Directors, Sharon Thompson, John 
Ankeney, Lucius J. Stanley, and Vertex III, LLC. 
 
PER CURIAM. 
BANYAN GW, LLC V. WAYNE PREPARATORY ACAD. CHARTER SCH., INC. 
 
Opinion of the Court 
 
 
-2- 
 
As to the appeal of right based on the dissenting opinion, we affirm the 
majority decision of the Court of Appeals. We conclude that the petition for 
discretionary review as to additional issues was improvidently allowed. Therefore, 
the decision of the Court of Appeals as to these matters remains undisturbed. 
 
AFFIRMED; DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED. 
 
Justice DAVIS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.