Editor’s note: This story was updated on February 20 to include comments from W.B. Brawley Co.
Fayetteville’s sprawling construction lawsuit over the failed Fire Station 4 project has been dismissed as all 21 parties have agreed to pause their legal fight and attempt mediation.
The voluntary dismissal was filed February 13, the same day a Superior Court judge denied a request to delay the trial until 2027. The trial was scheduled to start March 23.
City Attorney Lachelle Pulliam did not respond to CityView’s request for comment. But in a press release from Communications Manager David Scott, the city said the dismissal allows the parties “to participate in a mediation” and preserves their ability to refile claims for up to one year if mediation fails.
The move comes just days after the Fayetteville City Council voted unanimously to demolish the partially built fire station on Bragg Boulevard, following a blistering consultant report that found widespread construction failures and recommended starting over.
City: Demolition Needed to Calculate Damages
In its press release, the city said it will continue gathering information—including demolition and rebuild cost estimates—to determine the damages it intends to seek.
The city sued contractor W.B. Brawley Co. in September 2024, alleging the firm repeatedly performed defective work, refused to correct it, and allowed the project to fall more than a year behind schedule. By the time Fayetteville terminated Brawley for cause in late 2024, the $9.4 million project was only 60% complete, according to the city.
The city also sued Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Brawley’s bond provider, accusing the insurer of failing to meet its obligations.
The litigation quickly ballooned. Twenty‑one parties—including the architect, engineer, and numerous subcontractors—filed claims, counterclaims, and cross‑claims. Over the last nine months, the docket filled with requests for extensions, motions for more time to answer claims, and delays tied to the volume of discovery.
In December, all parties jointly asked the court to push the trial to July 2027. They argued the March 2026 date was “unrealistic” given the need for roughly 50 depositions and outstanding discovery.
Their motion noted that the city’s consultant had determined the building must be “completely demolished and rebuilt,” and that Fayetteville expected that work to begin in March and take 14 months to complete.
The judge denied the request on February 13. Hours later, the parties dismissed the case.
Consultant Blamed Contractor; Brawley Blamed Design
The lawsuit’s collapse follows the city council’s Feb. 9 vote to tear down the structure after receiving a 57‑page report from Applied Building Sciences (ABS). The consultant documented a number of issues, including improper roof panel seams, unsupported insulation, unsealed roof‑to‑wall gaps, a concrete slab thinner than code requires, and plumbing installed with the wrong material.
Steve Moore, who leads ABS’ Charlotte office, told council members the defects were so severe and intertwined that repairing the building was not a safe or reliable option.
“In over 17 years of work in this area, I have never recommended that a partially constructed building be torn down,” Moore said. He added that the failures were “100% attributable to the contractor.”
ABS also cleared the architect, Stewart‑Cooper‑Newell Architects (SCNA), the special‑inspections firm, and city staff of responsibility.
Brawley has long disputed those findings.
In its counterclaim, the company placed much of the blame on SCNA, calling the design “flawed” and alleging the architect directed the contractor to perform work that was “impossible.” Brawley claimed the city negotiated a reduction in SCNA’s fee by cutting site visits to once per month. The company also said the architect’s reports often arrived 30 to 45 days later, by which point issues were “obsolete” or far more expensive to fix.
That delay in reporting echoed concerns raised by council member Antonio Jones during the February 9 meeting. Jones questioned how the project advanced so far despite multiple layers of oversight.
“It’s difficult to understand how we reached this point with so many eyes on it,” he said. “This new information only raises further questions.”
The company also accused the city of failing to pay properly, denying justified time extensions, and improperly terminating the contract based on problems caused by its design team.
Jon Gore, Brawley’s president, said in a statement provided to CityView that the company looks forward to “a reasonable and productive discussion” about the future of the fire station.
“The dismissal was a mutual decision by the City of Fayetteville and Brawley to withdraw our respective claims and enter mediation for the next 60 days,” Gore said. “It is our sincere hope that this will create space necessary for a reasonable and productive discussion about the future of Fire Station No. 4. We are committed to working together with the City to complete Fire Station No. 4, so Fayetteville residents can finally receive the safety benefits this project was intended to provide.”
In past statements, Gore has said the company “stands behind the quality of our work” and that Brawley’s inspections found that many issues cited by ABS stemmed from incomplete work, long‑term exposure to the elements, or were unsupported by evidence.
Government reporter Rachel Heimann Mercader can be reached at rheimann@cityviewnc.com or 910-988-8045.
Did you find this story useful or interesting? It was made possible by donations from readers like you to the News Foundation of Greater Fayetteville, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization committed to an informed democracy in Fayetteville and Cumberland County. Please consider making a tax-deductible donation so CityView can bring you more news and information like this.
