On November 4, 2026, the North Carolina Court of Appeals reinstated breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims in 41 lawsuits that Piedmont Roofing Services, LLC filed against homeowners’ insurance companies. Each suit rests on an assignment of benefits, the agreement in which a North Carolina homeowner hands a storm damage insurance claim to the contractor who repairs the home. The ruling reverses Mecklenburg County Superior Court orders that had thrown out those claims at the pleading stage, before any evidence was heard.
Denham Property & Injury Law Firm represents Piedmont with co-counsel Salter, Shook & Conner, PC. The appeal team included Bart Denham and Jacob Busey of Denham Law and Joseph R. Pellington of Salter, Shook & Conner.
“This is a win for policyholders and for the contractors who repair their homes,” said Bart Denham, founder and managing attorney of Denham Property & Injury Law Firm. “The insurers wanted these cases thrown out at the courthouse door, and the Court of Appeals refused.”
What happened in the 41 cases
Each case began with storm damage to a North Carolina home. The homeowner signed a contract with Piedmont to repair the damage. As part of that contract, the homeowner assigned Piedmont the insurance claim for the loss and agreed that the policy benefits would be paid directly to Piedmont. Piedmont made the repairs and then sought payment from each insurer. Piedmont alleges the insurers refused to pay all the benefits due under the policies.
The insurers include Allstate, Nationwide, Travelers, USAA, Erie, Auto-Owners, Safeco and North Carolina Farm Bureau. They argued that the homeowners’ claims could not be assigned and that Piedmont had not adequately pleaded valid assignments. The trial court dismissed the claims, and Piedmont appealed.
What the Court of Appeals decided
Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Dillon, joined by Judge Flood, reversed the dismissal of Piedmont’s breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims. The opinion makes four points that matter to anyone who gives or takes an assignment of benefits in North Carolina.
1. Contract claims can be assigned
The court reaffirmed that claims arising out of contract are generally assignable under North Carolina law, a rule the state Supreme Court has recognized since 1871. A contractor that holds a valid assignment of a homeowner’s claim can bring that claim against the insurer in its own name.
2. Assigning the claim itself is not void
The insurers argued that a homeowner can assign only the proceeds of a claim, not the claim itself. The court rejected that argument. The 1995 state Supreme Court decision the insurers relied on drew that line for personal injury claims, not contract claims.
3. A general allegation that the policy conditions were met is enough to proceed
The policies in these cases allow an assignment of benefits after a loss only when certain conditions are met, such as an inspection of the damage by an authorized adjuster or the insurer’s consent. Piedmont alleged that it and each homeowner met every condition the policies set for recovering benefits. The insurers said that was not detailed enough.
The court held that Piedmont’s allegation satisfied North Carolina’s notice pleading standard. Citing recent state Supreme Court decisions, it said a complaint survives unless it is certain the plaintiff could prove no set of facts entitling it to relief. An insurer that wants more detail should ask for a more definite statement, not dismissal. Whether the conditions were actually met is a factual dispute for later in the case.
4. Blanks on an assignment form did not defeat the claims
Some of the written assignment forms left blanks, such as the claim number or the date of loss. The court said those gaps do not defeat the claims at this stage. An assignment of a contract claim is not one of the agreements the law requires to be in writing, so missing details can be filled in with other evidence.
What happens next
The 41 cases return to Mecklenburg County Superior Court for further proceedings. The court noted that those proceedings may include discovery on whether the policy conditions were met.
Why assignments of benefits matter to homeowners
“Many families can’t front the cost of a new roof after a storm and then fight their insurer for months to get paid back,” Denham said. “An assignment gets the roof fixed now and hands the claim to the contractor who did the work and knows what it cost.”
“Homeowners should be able to choose who repairs their homes and who handles their insurance claim,” said Joseph R. Pellington of Salter, Shook & Conner. “This decision confirms that a contractor holding an assignment can take the insurer to court, and that protects policyholders and contractors alike.”
If you are a homeowner thinking about signing an assignment of benefits:
- Read it before you sign, and keep a copy.
- Make sure it lists the date of loss, your claim number and the property address.
- Check your policy’s assignment clause. Some policies allow an assignment after a loss only once the insurer’s adjuster has inspected the damage or the insurer has consented.
What the ruling means for roofing contractors
- The Court of Appeals rejected the argument that a homeowner’s contract claim against an insurer cannot be assigned.
- Read the policy’s assignment clause. In these cases, the policies allowed an assignment after a loss once an authorized adjuster had inspected the damage or the insurer had consented. Keep records that show which one happened, such as the adjuster’s inspection date or a written consent.
- Fill in every blank on your assignment form, including the claim number and date of loss. The court excused missing details at the pleading stage, but a complete form avoids the fight.
Frequently asked questions about assignment of benefits in North Carolina
Is an assignment of benefits valid in North Carolina?
Generally, yes. North Carolina law allows contract claims to be assigned, and a homeowner’s claim for insurance benefits after a loss is a contract claim. A policy can set conditions on an assignment after a loss, such as an adjuster’s inspection or the insurer’s consent, and whether those conditions were met depends on the facts of each case.
Can a roofing contractor sue my insurance company?
If you assigned your claim to the contractor and the assignment is valid, the contractor can bring the breach of contract claim against your insurer in its own name. That is what Piedmont did in these 41 cases, and the Court of Appeals refused to let the insurers end the cases at the start.
Does my insurance company have to agree to an assignment of benefits?
It depends on your policy. The policies in the Piedmont cases allowed an assignment after a loss once an authorized adjuster had inspected the damage or the insurer had consented. Read your policy’s assignment clause, or have a lawyer read it, before you sign.
What happens next in the Piedmont cases?
The cases go back to Mecklenburg County Superior Court for further proceedings, which may include discovery on whether the policy conditions were met.
Talk to a North Carolina insurance claim lawyer
If your insurer has denied or underpaid a roof damage claim or storm claim, or you are a contractor holding an assignment of benefits the insurer will not honor, our North Carolina property damage lawyers can help. Call Denham Law at (859) 900-BART (2278) or request a free consultation. We serve clients statewide in North Carolina. No fee unless we win.
The case is Piedmont Roofing Services, LLC v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., et al., No. COA25-712 (N.C. Ct. App. Nov. 4, 2026). Read the court’s opinion.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
