March 25, 2026

By John Lee

“RENT REFUSED, REPAIRS IGNORED, EVICTION FILED”:

Inside the YorkeTowne Apartments Legal Showdown

Greensboro—What started as a routine landlord-tenant dispute has erupted into a high-stakes legal battle now raising serious questions about habitability, eviction practices, and corporate conduct behind the scenes.

At the center:

YORKETOWNE APARTMENTS LLC d/b/a YORK TOWNE APARTMENTS

v.

LAWANDA BODDIE-SLACK

But according to court filings, this case may be anything but ordinary.

THE CLAIM THAT’S TURNING HEADS

In a newly filed Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Sanctions, the defendant alleges something explosive:

The eviction was not based on unpaid rent—but on a “manufactured default” created after rent was refused.

Let that sink in.

According to the filing:

Rent was tendered Rent was rejected And then—just days later—eviction was filed anyway

MONTHS OF PROBLEMS—NO FIXES

The motion outlines a pattern of alleged unresolved issues inside the unit, including:

Electrical failures Plumbing and sanitation concerns Window defects affecting safety Possible mold exposure

Even more striking?

The filing claims these issues were reported as far back as August 2025.

A CRITICAL TIMELINE

Here’s where things get even more intense:

Jan 23, 2026 → First eviction filed (allegedly against the wrong person) Feb 11, 2026 → Case dismissed Feb 19, 2026 → 48-hour repair demand issued March 2, 2026 → Rent tendered… and refused March 4, 2026 → New eviction filed

Then comes the twist.

THE “REPAIR BLITZ” AFTER CODE ENFORCEMENT

According to the motion:

Repairs didn’t happen—

until after Code Enforcement stepped in on March 20, 2026.

That’s more than 30 days after the demand notice.

The filing describes what followed as:

A “superficial repair blitz”

—suggesting that action only occurred after outside pressure.

CLAIMS OF RETALIATION AND DISCRIMINATION

The defendant, identified as an African American disabled veteran, alleges:

Retaliatory eviction after complaints Discriminatory treatment in repair services Use of unqualified or unlicensed workers

If proven, these claims could raise serious implications under both:

Federal Fair Housing laws North Carolina housing statutes

MORE THAN ONE COMPANY?

Another layer to the case:

The motion suggests that multiple entities may be operating together behind the scenes—raising questions about:

Who actually controls the property Who made key decisions And whether responsibility is being shifted between entities.

The public records for YorkeTowne Apartments LLC, Harvest Investments LLC dba Harvest Properties reveal:

1. Harvest Investments LLC dba Harvest Properties is a foreign company located in CT; is NOT registered to conduct business in North Carolina; does not possess neither a real estate firm brokers license nor licensed property managers.
2. YorkeTowne Apartments LLC is not a true functional landlord. The entity is classified as a “Special Purpose Entity or SPE” which only exists in name and as title holder. The LLC only serves as a financial security avenue.
3. YorkeTowne Apartments LLC has never functioned as a true landlord as its public records reflect “stacking” being multiple instruments filled on the same day [deeds of trust, assignments, and other matters].
4. YorkeTowne Apartments LLC is under complete control and dominance of Harvest Investments LLC dba Harvest Properties.
5. RH Trading LLC is/was also owned by and operated by Harvest Investments LLC dba Harvest Properties and per public records acted as a lender for YorkeTowne Apartments LLC. RH Trading LLC subsequently dissolved in 07/2013 shortly following a loan to YorkeTowne Apartments LLC.

THE BIG LEGAL QUESTION

At its core, the case boils down to this:

Can a landlord refuse rent, delay repairs, and still move forward with eviction?

That’s what the court may soon decide.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

The Defendant is asking the court to:

Dismiss the eviction entirely Impose sanctions under Rule 11 And recognize what is described as a pattern of improper conduct

If the court agrees, the consequences could extend beyond this single case.

FINAL WORD

Whether this is a case of miscommunication—or something far more systemic—remains to be seen.

But one thing is certain:

All eyes in Greensboro housing circles are now on this case.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

This article is based on publicly filed court documents and allegations made therein. All claims are allegations unless and until proven in a court of law. The Greensboro Chronicle does not assert the truth of any allegations and reports them for informational and journalistic purposes only.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

© 2026 The Greensboro Chronicle. All rights reserved.

This publication may not be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form without prior written permission, except for brief quotations used for news reporting or commentary.

:::