Inside ex-Durham official’s lawsuit against the city and developer over extortion claim

Monique Holsey-Hyman, a former Durham City Council member who was accused then cleared of extortion and campaign-finance violations last year, has sued the city and several others involved.

Holsey-Hyman is seeking damages from:

• The city of Durham

• Jarrod Edens, the developer who made the allegation, and his company Edens Investments

• Sara Young, the planning director

• Kimberly Rehberg, the city attorney

• Jillian Johnson, a former council member

• Mark-Anthony Middleton, mayor pro tempore.

In a lawsuit filed in Superior Court last week, Holsey-Hyman accused them of a conspiracy to slander, libel and retaliate against her. She made 11 claims, each valued “in excess of $25,000.”

Edens accused Holsey-Hyman in 2023 of asking for a campaign contribution in exchange for a favorable vote, the city attorney’s email records show.

A criminal investigation hung over Holsey-Hyman for months, but Edens refused to sit for an interview with the State Bureau of Investigation, the agency reported to District Attorney Satana Deberry. The investigation turned up “no evidence” of the allegations and Deberry closed the case in September, shortly before Holsey-Hyman lost her election bid.

The 59-page lawsuit alleges “direct negligence” by the city and defamation by its employees. No court date has been set.

Edens’ attorney Ryan Adams, based in Raleigh, said Wednesday that they are still reviewing the allegations.

“Mr. Edens is prepared to tell his story in court at the appropriate time and we are confident that once his side of the story is told, he will be dismissed from this lawsuit,” Adams said in an email.

A city spokesperson rebutted the allegations.

“The City and the named City defendants disagree with the claims in the lawsuit and look forward to presenting actual facts and vigorously defending themselves in court,” the statement said.

“This filing is an intensely bizarre hodgepodge of conspiracy theory and alternate reality. I look forward to a robust and fact-based vetting at the appropriate time,” Middleton added in a message to The News & Observer.

Defamation cases tough for public officials

Winning defamation cases as a public official is difficult, due to a 60-year-old Supreme Court ruling meant to protect free speech. In addition to proving that statements were false and harmful, a public official must prove there was “actual malice” involved in spreading them.

Actual malice implies a “reckless disregard” for the truth, according to the 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

Holsey-Hyman rests her case on the contention that those passing along information “knew it was extremely unlikely that someone of Dr. Holsey-Hyman’s background and career would commit such a serious crime.” She said city leaders were seeking to “punish and embarrass” her for voting against developments.

Holsey-Hyman said she has suffered embarrassment, post traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, sleeplessness, panic attacks and migraines. She blames the allegations for losing the election and job and publishing opportunities.

Holsey-Hyman is being represented by Florida attorney Corey Cartwright and Raleigh-based attorney James T. Johnson.

The backstory

Holsey-Hyman is a social work professor at N.C. Central University who moved to Durham in 2006. She was appointed in May 2022 to an open seat on the Durham City Council.

At the time, a majority of council members were generally voting in favor of rezoning requests for denser housing developments. Holsey-Hyman often voted the other way and called the pro-housing voting bloc — Middleton, Johnson, Javiera Caballero and Leonardo Williams — the “group of four” in her lawsuit.

She said they thought anyone who voted against development plans “did not know enough about the issue, were voting purely on passion, or just should not be on the Council.”

Holsey-Hyman says the planning director “seemed to be controlled” by private builders and “big-name developers.” She also added that the city attorney was frustrated that Holsey-Hyman had not supported her request for a raise.

The extortion allegation

The City Council was set to vote on one of Edens’ annexation requests on March 6, 2023. He hoped to build 235 homes on acreage in southeast Durham, and sought an annexation so the homes could have city water and sewer.

Johnson, who likely would have supported the project, was absent. Edens spoke with Holsey-Hyman on the telephone a few hours before the meeting, according to the lawsuit.

She told him she was kicking off her campaign with an event that weekend.

“Mr. Edens stated that he wanted to support Dr. Holsey-Hyman in her endeavors of running for City Council. Dr. Holsey-Hyman responded jokingly that she did not think he could support her because she did not want to go to jail,” the lawsuit states.

“She then laughed, and so did Mr. Edens,” it continues.

They talked about the annexation proposal, a conversation Holsey-Hyman “made contemporaneous notes of.”

“Mr. Edens never asked Dr. Holsey-Hyman to vote a certain way on the annexation proposal. Dr. Holsey-Hyman never implied she was going to vote a certain way,” the lawsuit states

The vote that night was 3-3, with Holsey-Hyman voting no. She said Edens emailed her the next two days requesting to “check in,” but she did not respond.

Involving other city staff

Five days after the meeting, Edens called the planning director and told her Holsey-Hyman had asked for a campaign contribution in exchange for her vote. Holsey-Hyman said this was in retaliation for the annexation vote failing and because he wanted her off the council.

“This accusation was categorically false, and Mr. Edens knew this accusation was false,” the suit states

Planning Director Young told City Attorney Rehberg, who put the findings in a March 13, 2023, letter to the City Council. Rehberg wrote that she did not know if the allegation was true, but Holsey-Hyman argued the letter implied her guilt before a full investigation could be conducted.

“It is unlikely that a developer would report conduct that has no factual basis or to maliciously cause harm, particularly a developer who regularly brings matters before the city,” Rehberg said in an email to council members the following day.

The letter also contained details about work a city employee did on Holsey-Hyman’s campaign while on the clock. The employee had shared a Facebook invite to a campaign event, according to the lawsuit. The SBI later determined that Holsey-Hyman did not solicit that, and the employee was reprimanded.

The case against elected leaders

Johnson, a former council member who did not run for re-election in 2023, drafted a resolution to formally censure Holsey-Hyman for her employee’s campaign work done during the workday.

The allegations came into public view when the censure was debated during a heated meeting on March 23, 2023.

Holsey-Hyman alleges Johnson’s and Mayor Pro Tem Middleton’s support for the censure — which was never voted upon — and statements about her “pattern of behavior” were defamatory.

Edens’ name was kept secret until May 15, 2023, when former Mayor Elaine O’Neal revealed the name around 9:30 p.m., after City Hall had largely emptied out, calling it an “open secret among certain community members.”

That same night, Edens asked again for an annexation on the same property. The modified proposal passed 4-3, with Holsey-Hyman again voting against it.

Edens has repeatedly declined to discuss the case publicly.

NC Reality Check is an N&O series holding those in power accountable and shining a light on public issues that affect the Triangle or North Carolina. Have a suggestion for a future story? Email realitycheck@newsobserver.com