IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA

David Locklear, Case No. 2021-001

Petitioner

vy.

Ron Oxendine, PETITIONER’S MOTION

Respondent TO SHIFT THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO CANDIDATE

and

Tribal Elections Board,

Intervenor

NOW COMES David Locklear, the Petitioner in this matter, by and through his counsel,

respectfully requesting this Honorable Court in the hearing of this matter to require the

Respondent and candidate, Ron Oxendine to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he

meets the residency requirements set out in the Lumbee Constitution, and in support of this

motion states the following:

1,

It is undisputed that the Respondent lived out of the Lumbee territory and only recently

had been physically present in the territory.

The Petitioner, based upon information and belief and after reasonable inquiry,

questioned whether the Respondent met the residency requirements; thus, this challenge

Petition.

The Respondent has within himself all the particulars needed for the Court to make a

reasoned and sound determination as to whether the Respondent meets the candidacy

requirements.

With all due respect, the standards and burden of proof set out in the Election Board

Policy and Procedures is outdated and unworkable. All jurisdictions know to this

Petitioner require the candidate, when his/her residence is challenged, to prove that

he/she meets the requirements. In other words, when a candidate’s residency is

challenged, the burden shifts to the candidate to prove residency, rather than the

challenger. The North Carolina Statute 163-127.5 Burden of Proof states that “the

burden of proof shall be upon the candidate, who must show by a preponderance of

the evidence on the record as a whole that he or she is qualified to be a candidate for

the office.” It goes on to say that the candidate must show, among other things, “actual

abandonment of the first domicile.”

It is for the reasons stated above that Petitioner prays that the Court adopt the commonly

accepted requirement that when a candidate’s residency is challenged, that the burden shifts to

the candidate.

Respectfully submitted electronically this 13" day of October, 2021.

Gary L. Locklear

Attorney for Petitioner

locklearlaw(@gmail.com

Copy sent to Matt Roller for the Court at Mroller@lumbeetribe.com

Copy sent to Respondent at Ron.oxendine1954@gmail.com

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA

David Locklear, Case No. 2021-001

Petitioner

Vv.

Ron Oxendine, PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR COURT

Respondent TO RECONSIDER INTERVENTION

and

Tribal Elections Board,

Intervenor

NOW COMES David Locklear, the Petitioner in this matter, by and through his counsel,

respectfully requesting this Honorable Court to reconsider its October 8, 2021 Order

that allowed the Lumbee Tribal Election Board to intervene in this matter, and in support thereof

avers as follows:

I. Neither the Lumbee Constitution nor the Judicial Code of the Lumbee Supreme Court

make any provisions for intervention, not by right nor by permission; however, Petitioner

acknowledges the Court has inherent authority to enter certain orders when special and

rare circumstances require it to do so. Petitioner argues that this case is not the

appropriate case to exercise such discretion and is prepared to offer compelling evidence

at the hearing to support this claim.

2, The Tribal Election Board never filed a motion seeking to intervene so they should not be

allowed to intervene.

3. Petitioner was not noticed nor made a party to the intervention; thus, Petitioner never had

an opportunity to oppose the intervention.

4. Articles [X and X of the Lumbee Constitution clearly place jurisdiction of this challenge

before this Court in the nature of an appeal. Appeals in this context do not normally give

the body that issued the original rulin , the Election Board, an opportunity to be heard

again. This Court can and should resolve this matter based solely upon the evidence

presented at the hearing between the Petitioner and the Respondent, and not be swayed

by outside influences.

5. The Policy and Procedures of the Election Board provide that any matter certified by it

shall be final and reviewable by the Supreme Court. Nothing in their Policy and

Procedures remotely suggests that the Election Board gets to participate in the appeal

process. They’ve already ruled. Nobody expects that the Election Board will do

anything different if the Court gives them a forum to demean and question the Court’s

authority to resolve this matter in a fair and equitable way after a hearing. It would be

totally unfair for the Court to allow the Election Board to help Ron Oxendine make is

case. Make the Respondent prove to the Court by a preponderance of the evidence that

he meets the constitution residency requirement. Why give the Election Board a forum to

deflect from the real issue, that being whether the Respondent meets the residency

requirements?

6. Allowing the Election Board to be a party in this action going forward means that the

Election Board will in affect, represent the Respondent, Ron Oxendine. That’s totally

wrong. That’s allowing them to take a side in this matter. Appearance and perception are

reality, should that occur.

7. The Court should not be concerned about “how the members of the Election Board feel

when their authority is questioned” by the Petitioner. This matter is far greater than the

hurt feelings. Petition has never suggested that the Election Board intentionally did

anything wrong; but rather, simply didn’t ask all the requisite questions of the

Respondent to ensure that he met the residency requirement. This is a case of first

impression, so Petitioner appreciates the dilemma the Election Board faced.

8. Lastly, the Election Board should not be allowed to intervene because they failed to share

even the most basic information with the Petitioner when Petitioner sought a copy of

Respondent’s candidacy application in order to determine how long the Respondent

claimed that he had been in the territory. The Election Board sent a totally redacted

(blank) copy of the application (attached) containing only the Respondent’s name. That

alone should bar the Election Board from participating further in this case.

Respectfully submitted electronically this 13 day of October, 2021.

Gary L. Locklear,

Attorney for Petitioner

locklearlaw@gmail.com

Copy sent to Matt Roller for the Court at Mroller@lumbeetribe.com

Copy sent to Election Board at

THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA

David Locklear, Case No. 2021-001

Petitioner

v. PETITONER’S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF |

DISQUALIFICATION OF THE CANDIDACY OF

RON OXENDINE FOR TRIBAL CHAIRMAN

Ron Oxendine,

Respondent

and

Tribal Elections Board,

Intervenors

NOW COMES David Locklear, the Petitioner above, by and through counsel, submitting this

Memorandum of Law in support of the Petition previously filed and now being considered by

this Court wherein the Petitioner seeks the disqualification of the candidacy of Ron Oxendine for

Tribal Chairman of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.

SUMMARY OF THE CASE AND PERTINENT FACTS

Respondent Ron Oxendine and three (3) other members of the Lumbee Tribe filed candidacy

applications with the Lumbee Tribe Election Board within the filing deadline of September 3,

2012 seeking the office of Lumbee Tribal Chair in an election schedule for November 9, 2021.

The Lumbee Constitution requires, among other things, that a candidate for Tribal Chair meet the

residency requirement set out in Article VIII, section 2(b). It reads as follows:

“b. have maintained his or her principal place of residence in the territory of the

Tribe for the preceding one (1) year.”

The application for Tribal Chair contains wording similar to the above with the additional clause

of “no less than, the” and requires the applicant to state the “length of time at this residence”. It

also contains a certification sheet with similar language. Other than personal information, the

application does not require additional proof of residency for the required period in order to file

1

om a

for Tribal Chair, The application does not require the applicant to swear or affirm before a

Notary Public that the responses are true. It only has a statement about the residency

requirements and requires the applicant’s signature and an accompanying witness’ signature.

The Respondent, was born and lived in the territory during his youth; however, he spent most, if

not all, of his adult life elsewhere, and has only recently returned to the territory, as the evidence

will show. Petitioner concedes only that the Respondent recently lived in a residence within the

territory when he filed his application seeking election to Tribal Chair. The conduct of the

Respondent (which will be further developed and brought to the Court’s attention at the

challenge hearing) has created a reasonable and well-founded suspicion among many Tribal

members that while the Respondent may have lived in the territory foran undetermined period,

he does not otherwise meet the constitutional requirement set out in the Lumbee Constitution.

Petitioner is an active and concerned Lumbee Tribal member. After hearing countless rumors

regarding the Respondent’s conduct that was contrary to his claim of residency in the territory,

he waited and waited for someone, preferably one or all of the other candidates for Tribal Chair,

to challenge the residency of the Respondent. When that did not happen, he filed this Petition on

October 7, 2021 by himself on behalf of the many concerned members of the Lumbee Tribe who

simply want this cloud of suspicion lifted before the election of Tribal Chair on November 9,

2021.

The Court issued an Emergency Order on October 7, 2021 seeking guidance from all candidates,

including Tribal Council candidates, who seck office during this election cycle as to how this

case should proceed, given that the election is set for November 9, 2021. The Court thereafter

issue subsequent Orders setting the matter for hearing on Thursday, October 14, 2021 and fixing

a deadline for filing legal briefs, that being 10:00 p.m. on Monday, October 11, 2021.

The attorney for the Election Board sent a “To Whom it May Concern” letter, including several

attachments, dated October 8, 2021 (apparently sent to this Court) demanding that the Court

apply the standards and procedures of her client, the Lumbee Tribe Election Board, in this

matter; and further, challenging the Court’s authority to direct the Election Board to stop

processing absentee ballots until this case is resolved. The Court in a subsequent Order allowed

the Election Board to intervene in the matter of Locklear v. Oxendine 2021-0001.

Petitioner filed a written request with the Election Board before the Petition was filed for

redacted copies of the applications for Tribal Chair in order to determine what information the

Respondent and others included in their applications. When the Election Board finally

responded to the request at 8:00 a.m. Monday, October 11, 2021, they sent fully redacted copies,

which is to say they sent a four (4) page application for each of the candidates for Tribal Chair

that contained only the name of the candidate with every space for information blacked out. This

puts the Petitioner and every Tribal member at a disadvantage in getting information that they

should be unquestionably entitled to have.

ISSUES PRESENTED

1, Does the Tribal Election Board have standing to intervene in this matter?

2. Does the Supreme Court of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina have original

jurisdiction and/or inherent authority to resolve the residency question raised by the

Petition?

3. Is this Court bound by the procedures, standards, and/or definitions adopted by the

Election Board?

4. Whether the burden of proof is on the Petitioner or on the Respondent?

5. Can a person be physically present in the territory for more than a year from the

commencement of the term for Tribal Chair and still not meet the constitutional residency

requirement?

6. Has the Respondent abandoned his former residence outside the territory, and if so,

when?

7. Does the Respondent meet the constitutional requirement to file for Lumbee Tribal

Chair?

ARGUMENT

Issue one: Does the Tribal Election Board have standing to intervene in this matter?

The answer is NO. Lumbee Tribal Election Board is a necessary and vital Board created by

Article X of the Lumbee Constitution to conduct Lumbee Tribal elections. The same Article X

gives the Election Board the authority to make rules and regulations for conducting elections.

This Board serves an extremely worthwhile purpose when they do what they are charged with

doing. Item 3 of Article X in the Constitution reads as follows:

“Any matter decided or certified by the Tribal Elections Board shall be

deemed final tribal action and shall be reviewable by the Supreme Court of

the Lumbee Constitution”.

The Election Board certified the candidacy of the Respondent. That final action is reviewable by

the Supreme Court; thus, the Election Board no longer has jurisdiction in this matter. As result,

the Election Board has no standing to intervene and should not have been allowed to do so.

Further, Section 7(5.) of the Election Board Policy and Procedures (for reference see documents

filed by Election Board) reads as follows:

“Any matter decided or certified by the Tribal Elections shall be deemed final

Tribal action and shall be reviewable by the Supreme Court of the Lumbee

Constitution”.

This is nearly identical language to that found in the Lumbee Constitution, as set out above.

Correctly or incorrectly, the Election Board certified the Respondent’s candidacy. They did

what they were charged with doing. That should end the Election Board’s participation in the

certifying process. Petitioner raised the residency challenge in the Supreme Court which is, as

stated above, the proper forum for this issue to be resolved. This challenge is in effect an appeal.

The Election Board is not a party to this Petition; they have no standing to intervene. Allowing

the Election Board to intervene is tantamount to allowing the Election Board to represent Ron

Oxendine. That certainly is the appearance if not the reality if the Election Board is allowed to

intervene,

Petitioner restates his position that the Election Board is not a party in this action and should not

be allowed to participate in it as an intervenor. The Lumbee Constitution grants no right of

intervention. Petitioner-concedes that the Court may have limited discretion to allow

intervention but that this case is not the appropriate case because, if allowed, it means the

Election Board represents Ron Oxendine and the Flection Board’s attomey will be paid for by

the Lumbee people. This situation is untenable for reasons that need not be argued.

Issue two: Does the Supreme Court of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina have original

jurisdiction and or inherent authority to resolve the residency question raise by the Petition?

The answer is YES. Article LX of the Lumbee Constitution states “The Supreme Court of the

Lumbee Constitution shall have original jurisdiction over all cases and controversies arising

underthe Lumbee Constitution and all ordinances of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.”

Further, as stated above in issue one, Article X Section 3 of the Constitution and Section 7(5) of

the Election Board Policy and Procedures, both clearly state that the Supreme Court is the proper

forum to resolve the constitutionally required residency of the candidate.

Issue three: Is the Court bound by the procedures, standards, and/or definitions adopted by the

Election Board?

The answer is NO. It has been well settled law since U.S. Supreme Chief Justice John Marshall

in 1803 uled in the Marbury v. Madison case that the Supreme Court decides what the law is

and that the Court has the power to overturn acts of Congress, or in this instance, acts of the

Election Board. It is also universally known and accepted that the Supreme Court, wherever

located, not only is the ‘highest law of the land” and “the highest tribunal”, but has the power to

rule and/or change existing law. In the October gt" letter from the Election Board’s attorney (for

reference see documents submitted by Election Board) she stated unequivocally that the Supreme

Court, must use the standards established by the Election Board. That is simply wrong and

4

totally misplaced. The letter further states that “the Supreme Court lacks any authority over

the independent Board of Elections as it is not a party to any action to prohibit any action

authorized by statute to stop the issuance of ballots”. Wrong again! That is a direct

challenge to your authority as members of the Supreme Court. Again, it is well settled that the

Supreme Court is the highest law of the land, and in this instance, the highest law and final

arbiter of constitutional questions arising among and between members of the Lumbee Tribe.

The Election Board adopted the definition for “voter residence”, as opposed to residency fora

candidate, from the N.C. General Statute 163-

57(1),https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PD F/BySection/Chapter 163/GS 16

3-57.pdf except that the Election Board failed to include the several exceptions set out in the

state statute. Failing to include the exceptions makes all the difference in the world in the

definition. The Election Board’s definition, without the many exceptions, fails to address the

real issue and fails to distinguish residency from domicile. There is a huge difference in being a

qualified voter and being a qualified candidate. The requirements are much different. Hopefully

this Court will adopt a definition of residency that is appropriate in this hearing and more

applicable in all situations, not just the current one.

Issue four: Whether the burden of proof in this resid ency challenge is on the Petitioner or on the

Respondent?

The burden of proof should be on the Respondent. Petitioner concedes that the Election Board in

Section 7(4) of their Policy and Procedures (see documents submitted by Election Board) states

that the burden of proof is upon the challenger. That requirement is totally misplaced and

contrary to common sense and contrary to all statutory provisions known to the Petitioner. It is

well settled and commonly accepted that after a minimal showing, e.g., reasonable suspicion

formed after good faith inquiry by the Petitioner (challenger), the burden of proof shifts to the

Respondent (the challenged candidate) in this context. This is for good reason. It is the

challenged person who has all of the pertinent information necessary to sustain the challenge. In

this instance, the Election Board refused to share any information with the Petitioner other than

the candidate’s name. No reasonable system of justice can survive under this scheme. How can

people have faith in the election process when basic information is kept from them? The Court

through this hearing can rectify this misplaced burden,

Issue five: Can a person be physically present in the territory for more than a year from the

commencement of the term for Tribal Chair and still not meet the constitutional residency

requirement?

The answer is YES. The rule in all jurisdictions is that you may have multiple residences, even

in many states, but you can have only one state of domicile. Residence and domicile are not

interchangeable. It is a matter of what the facts show. Don Wright, former General Counsel to

the N.C. State Board of Elections wrote a lengthy article in 2007 entitled Residency for Election

Purposes https://www.waynegov.com/DocumentCenter/View/63/Residency-for-Election-

5

Purposes-PDF that is helpful in this challenge. Wright states that a person may have an actual

abode (residence) in one place, and his permanent established home (domicile) in another. He

cites Lloyd v. Babb 296 NC 416 (1979) stating that “a person has domicile for voting purposes at

a given place if he/she 1) has abandoned his prior home (emphasis mine) and he is residing

elsewhere; and 2) has a present intention to make that place his home, and 3) has no intention

presently to leave that place. He goes on to say that “to establish a change of domicile, a person

must show: (1) an actual abandonment of the first domicile, coupled with an intention not to

return to it (emphasis mine); (2) the acquisition ofa new domicile by actual residence; and (3)

the intent of making the newer residence a permanent home. Farnsworth v. Jones 112 N.C. App.

187 (1994)”.

Petitioner intents to show at the hearing of this matter that the Respondent, by his conduct, has

not abandoned his first domicile, that is his residence in Virginia; further, Petitioner will show

that regardless of the period of time Respondent claims physical presence in the territory, even if

the time frame fits the residency time frame, that alone does not mean he meets the constitutional

residency requirement. Petitioner will show that simply “being here in the territory” does not

meet the requirements.

Issue six: Has the Respondent abandoned his former residence outside the territory, and if so,

when?

Respondent’s conduct suggests that the answer is NO. Petitioner will solicit evidence at the

hearing of this matter to support Petitioner’s claims. The Respondent has all the necessary

information to establish this claim. Ifthe Court shifts the burden of proof to the appropriate

party, the Respondent, then he will explain to the Court his position and will be subject to cross

examination. Ifthe Court does not shift the burden, then the Respondent will be called as the

first witness and have to answer questions on direct examination, and there will be many.

Issue seven: Does the Respondent meet the constitutional requirement to file and run for Tribal

Chair?

The answer is NO. Again, the Respondent has all the necessary information. It will be solicited

from him either on direct examination or on cross examination, depending upon the Court’s

ruling on who has the burden of proof. Petitioner intends to show through the evidence that the

Respondent cannot meet the constitutional residency requirements to file and run for Tribal

Chair, even if he has been physically present in the territory for what would otherwise be the

required period.

SUMMARY

The Petitioner never intended to create a firestorm. He simply wants what every other

member of the Lumbee Tribe should want, and that is what is best for the Lumbee Tribe. In this

instance, Lumbee Tribal members are absolutely entitled to know that the candidate for Tribal

6

Chair that they vote for does in fact meet the constitutional residency requirements. Surely Ron

Oxendine wants this, too. One would think that the Respondent would be eager to prove that he

meets the residency requirement, but regrettably, it seems otherwise.

Petitioner closes with a question: What if no challenge hearing was held in this matter and

the Respondent went on to win the election for Tribal Chair, and then after the fact, subsequent

evidence revealed that he never met the residency requirement? What a colossal and

embarrassing mess that would be. That is precisely why the Petitioner brought this challenge.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Respectfully submitted this 11 day

of October, 2021 by email to: mroller@lumbeetribe.com

Gary Locklear, Attorney

locklearlaw@gmail.com

THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF

NORTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA CASE NO. 2021-001

ROBESON COUNTY

DAVID LOCKLEAR,

Petitioner

PETITIONER’S RESPONSE

Vv. TO THE COURT’S INQUIRIES

RON OXENDINE,

Respondent

COMES NOW David Locklear, the Petitioner in the above-styled matter, by and through

counsel, respectfully responding to the inquiries of the Honorable Joshua D, Malcolm, Chief

Justice of the Supreme Court of the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina, on behalf of the full Court,

as follows:

1. What Order(s), if any should the Court issue to ensure eligible tribal voters are not

disenfranchised during the pendency of the Court considering the as of Locklear v.

Oxendine, File no, 2021-001?

Qualified Tribal voters should under no circumstances be deprived of voting, and they

will not be deprived, regardless of the outcome of this requested candidate

challenge.

As set forth in the Petition, the Petitioner is of the strongly held opinion that the Court

can and should hold an expedited hearing, given the significant constitutional issue at

stake, in no Jess than seven (7) days from date of filing (and subsequent notice to the

Respondent). This action was filed on Wednesday, October 6, 2021. A full seven (7)

days would be Wednesday, October 13, 2021. The tribal election is some twenty-seven

(27) days after the suggested hearing date.

Requests for absentee ballots must be received by 5 p.m. on Friday, October 8, 2021. As

of Thursday, October 7, 2021, approximately 100+/- absentee ballots had been mailed

out. Of course, it is likely that some limited number of timely requests remain to be

processed. At the end of the absentee ballot request period, the Tribal Election Board

will know precisely the number of absentee ballots mailed out, each person’s name and

the addresses of all who received absentee ballots.

If the Respondent is able to prove to the Court that he meets the residency requirement,

then no changes in the election process would be required; however, the Court could and

probably should direct the Election Board to hold the remaining absentee ballot requests

until the challenge hearing is resolved. That should only be a few days from October 8%

until the date of the hearing.

If the Respondent is not able prove to the Court that he meets the residency requirements,

then only the limited number of persons who have received absentee ballots would be

impacted; however, they certainly would not be deprived of voting. New ballots

would need to be printed with the proper listing of candidates and re-sent to those who

previously received the original absentee ballot. Again, no Tribal member would be

deprived of his or her right to vote.

The short answer to the Court’s question above is that no Order is needed “during the

pendency of the Court considering the case”. Only a directive to the Election Board to

hold the unprocessed absentee ballots would be needed. Once the case is heard, if the

Respondent cannot prove that he meets the constitutional residency requirements, the

Court should direct (order) the Tribal Elections Board to re-print ballots with the

corrected candidates and send the new ballots to those Tribal members who previously

received an absentee ballot.

. What procedure(s), if any, should the Court follow in response to Petitioner’s

request for it to “set this matter for an immediate and/or expedited hearing within

seven (7) days or sooner so that it can be quickly resolved in order to not interfere

with Tribal elections scheduled for November 9, 2021”?

Petitioner acknowledges that the Court’s Judicial Code sets out time constraints as it

should. If the Petitioner is bound by those constraints, especially in this instance where

there is a significant constitutional question at issue, then the Court will have chosen

form over substance. If the Court does not hold an expedited hearing before the election,

Tribal members will be deprived of knowing whether the Respondent was held to the

same residency standard as all other candidates. In other words, the election of the Tribal

Chairperson has the potential of being severely tainted if this expedited challenge hearing

is not allowed. A challenge hearing after the election is a situation that no reasonable

person or court wants. That would be an untenable and potentially disastrous situation.

Petitioner acknowledges that courts have procedural rules for obvious reasons, and that

they almost always follow their established rules; however, courts also have inherent

authority and discretion to veer from those rules when exigent circumstances exist or

when the particular situation demands it, such as in this case. For example, Courts

regularly hold expedited hearings when significant harm could/would otherwise occur.

The significant harm in this instance is the possibility that a person could be elected

leader of the Lumbee people who does not meet the constitutional residency

requirements. That would be an embarrassment of epic proportions should that happen.

The Lumbee tribe would lose all credibility should that occur. The future of the Lumbee

people is too important to let procedural rules get in the way of finding out the truth.

No candidate should be allowed to remain a candidate when the candidate’s residency is

challenged and the candidate is unable to prove that he meets the residency requirements

imposed by the Lumbee Constitution. In the present case all our Tribe has is a signed

statement by the Respondent that he met the residency requirements, What assurances, if

any, do the Lumbee people have that official checks were made to verify the residency

claim when the application was filed? The circumstances in this case are unique and

unlike any others, given Respondent’s recent move to the territory from another state, as

opposed to have been in the territory for years. Under these circumstances, when

officially challenged, it is incumbent upon the candidate to prove that he meets the

requirements. This will never happen without a hearing. The Lumbee people will never

know withouta hearing. Only this Court can grant that hearing. If the Court has the

power to grant the hearing, then the Court has the power to grant an expedited hearing.

The short answer to this question is that the Court should consider the seriousness of this

matter, the harm and negative implications that potentially would follow if a candidate

who fails to meet the residency requirements is allow to run and possibly get elected as

Tribal Chaitman, and as a result, exercise its inherent authority and enter a simple order

expediting the hearing, hopefully within the period requested by the Petitioner.

Again, at the risk of being redundant, if the Court grants the hearing on October 13",

2021 and finds in favor of the Respondent, then the voters have full confidence that all

candidates meet the residency requirements set out in the Lumbee Constitution.

However, if the Court grants the hearing on October 13, 2021 and disqualifies the

Respondent, that leaves twenty-seven (27) days before the November 9, 2021 Tribal

elections in which the Tribal Election Board can order and receive new ballots and resend absentee ballots to approximately 100+/- absentee ballot recipients. While this is a

condensed time to conduct the election, it is nevertheless, adequate time to get it done.

3. What procedure(s), if any, should the Court follow in response to Petitioner’s

request for it to “direct the Lumbee Tribal Election Board to withhold the printing

of ballots until this matter is resolve,” which this Court has interpreted as a request

for the Court to order the Election Board to “cease distributing absentee ballots

until such time as the Court decides otherwise and/or until this matter is resolved”?

Given that October 8, 2021 is the deadline for seeking absentee ballots, at the end of the

day, the Tribal Election Board will know exactly how many absentee ballots have been

sent to voters (100+/-) and how many remaining pending requests for absentee ballots

that have not been processed and sent. The initial Court Order should direct the Tribal

Election Board to hold any un-sent absentee ballots until the challenge hearing is

completed and to await further orders from the Court.

If the Respondent is able to prove that he meets the residency requirements at the

requested challenge hearing, the Court would direct the Election Board to continue

processing the timely absentee ballot requests and the election process would continue as

planned.

If the Respondent is unable to prove that he meets the residency requirements at the

requested challenge hearing, the Court would direct the Election Board to immediately

re-print ballots with the names of all candidates that meet the residency requirements,

send the new ballots with appropriate instructions to those voters who had requested and

received absentee ballots, and then process any remaining timely absentee ballot requests

by sending the new ballots. The Court should also direct the Election Board to develop a

process whereby only the corrected absentee ballots are processed and counted.

Respectfully submitted via electronic mail this 88 day of October, 2021.

/s/ David Locklear

David Locklear, Petitioner

2822 Saddletree Road

Lumberton, N.C. 28360

Tribal Enrollment # 116049

/s/ Gary L. Locklear

Gary L. Locklear

Attorney for Petitioner

910-618-4327

locklearlaw@gmail.com

THE SUPREME COURT OF THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF ‘o

NORTH CAROLINA 3

NORTH CAROLINA CASE NO. 7021 - 00 (od

ROBESON COUNTY N77

PETITION

CHALLENGING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT OF

RON OXENDINE, CANDIDATE FOR TRIBAL CHAIRPERSON

DAVID LOCKLEAR,

Petitioner

RON OXENDINE,

Respondent

1. David Locklear, hereinafter the Petitioner, resides in the territory of the

Tribe at 2822 Saddletree Road, Lumberton, N.C. 28360, Robeson County,

North Carolina; my telephone is 910-734-1 870; I am an active Tribal

member and my enrollment number is 116049.

2. Ron Oxendine, hereinafter the Respondent, based upon information and

belief, claims residency at the home of the late Emma Locklear at 1837

Hezekiah Road, Maxton, N.C. 28364. (NOTE: During the drafting of this

Petition, the Tribal Elections Board would not disclose the residency date

claimed by the Respondent or any other non-personal information in his

application for Tribal Chairperson.)

3. A significant Lumbee Tribal constitutional question, set out more fully

below, is at issue; thus, this Court has jurisdiction to hear this matter and this

Court is the proper forum in which to resolve this matter.

4. Respondent filed a timely application with the Lumbee Tribal Elections

Board seeking the office of Lumbee Tribal Chairperson for the three-year

term beginning January 2022.

5. This petition seeks a judicial ruling on the issue of whether the Respondent

meets the residency requirement set out in Article VIII, Section 2(b) of the

Lumbee Constitution. Section 2 of Article VIII reads in part that:

“,... the privilege to run for the office of Tribal Chairperson shall

be limited to those tribal members who at the commencement

of the term:

a). are thirty-five (35) years of age;

b). have maintained his or her principal place of

residence in the territory of the Tribe for the

preceding one (1) year;

¢). (Not applicable in this instance)”

6. The Petitioner alleges and says that to the best of his knowledge, information

and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, the Respondent failed to meet

the residency requirement set out above in the Lumbee Constitution in that

Respondent has not maintained a principal place of residence in the territory

for the preceding one (1) year prior to the commencement of the term;

therefore, his candidacy is in violation of Article VILL, Section 2(b) of the

Lumbee Constitution,

7. The Petitioner alleges that evidence will be shown at the hearing of this

noatter that will convince the Court that the Respondent has not abandoned

his former residence (for one year preceding the term) regardless of how

long the Respondent claims residency in the Tribal territory; and further,

upon information and belief, that residence is outside of the Tribal territory

in the State of Virginia; and even further, that the evidence will prove more

than sufficient to convince the Court when the it considers the totality of the

circumstances, that the Respondent is not eligible to be a candidate for

Tribal Chairperson in this election cycle,

8. This Court should follow the generally accepted legal practice of requiring

the candidate, Ron Oxendine in this instance, when the challenge or protest

is based upon failure to meet a residency requirement, to offer evidence

sufficient to prove to the Court by a preponderance of the evidence that the

residency requirement has been met.

9. Petitioner asserts that exigent circumstances are present that require quick

resolution of this significant constitutional question; otherwise, a cloud of

uncertainty, that being whether or not the Respondent truly meets the

residency requirements, will taint the Tribal elections and possibly the

Office of the Tribal Chairman if Respondent is elected without resolution.

10. This Court recognizes that time is of the essence; thus, Petitioner seeks a

waiver from the Court, and such waiver is totally within the Court’s

discretion, of any other time constraints that would delay this hearing, given

the scheduled November 9, 2021 Tribal election,

11.All members of the Lumbee Tribe are entitled to quick, if not immediate,

resolution of this matter; thus, on behalf of all members of the Lumbee

Tribe, Petitioner urges an expedited hearing within seven (7) days or sooner

from filing this challenge.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays, in the interest of election integrity and in the

best interest of the people who are the Lumbee Tribe, that the Court grant the

following relief:

1. In the Court’s inherent discretion, waive the time constraints in Section

Five-3 of the Court’s Judicial Code and Item 9 of the General Instructions

for Filing a Petition, and set this matter for an immediate and/or expedited

hearing within seven (7) days or sooner so that it can be quickly resolved in

order to not interfere with Tribal elections scheduled for November 9, 2021.

2. Enter an immediate Order upon receipt of this Petition that directs the

Lumbee Tribal Elections Board to withhold the printing of ballots until this

matter is resolved.

3. Follow the accepted legal practice when a voter or candidate is challenged

by requiring the candidate, the Respondent herein, to show by a

preponderance of the evidence on the record as a whole that he has satisfied

the residency requirement in the Lumbee Constitution to be a candidate for

Tribal Chairperson in this election cycle.

4. After considering the totality of the circumstances presented at the hearing

of this matter, enter an order that the Respondent, Ron Oxendine, is not

eligible to be a candidate for Tribal Chairperson in this election cycle.

5. For such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

This the 6" day of October, 2021.

) )

David Locklear

2822 Saddletree Road

Lumberton. N.C. 28360

Tribal Enrollment #116049

Note: Attorney Gary Locklear will be representing me at the hearing of this

matter. He will prepare additional paperwork in support of this challenge/protest

for your consideration at the hearing. You may contact him at 910-618-4327 and at

locklearlaw@gmail.com . Thank you.

10/12/21, 3:02 PM

RONNIE OXENDINE

1837 HEZEKIAH RD

MAXTON, NC 28364

Voter Search

RAL APES

ex

Collapse all sections | Expand all sections

ee et Sections

YOUR VOTER DETAILS

County:

Status:

Voter Reg Num:

NCID:

Party:

Race:

Ethnicity:

Gender:

Registration Date:

NCDMV Customer:

YOUR JURISDICTIONS

Precinct:

Congress:

NC Senate:

NC House:

Superior Court:

Judicial:

Prosecutorial:

County Commissioner:

School:

YOUR VOTING LOCATIONS

https://vt.nesbe.gow/RegLkup/VoterInfo/

ROBESON

ACTIVE

000000537252

DR152655

DEM

AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKAN NATIVE

NOT HISPANIC or NOT LATINO

MALE

Yes

PROSPECT

CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 9

NC SENATE DISTRICT 13

NC HOUSE DISTRICT 46

16B SUPERIOR COURT

16B JUDICIAL

20TH PROSECUTORIAL

COUNTY COMMISSIONER #4

BOARD OF EDUCATION #4

1/3

10/12/51, 12:42 PM — Crystal Gateway Condominium - Google Maps

Google Maps Crystal Gateway Condominium

Map data ©2021 1000 ft kemmmnnimnmmanenmeaad

Crystal Gateway Condominium

1300 Crystal Dr

Arlington, VA 22202

09 ® © ©

Directions Save Nearby Sendtoyour Share

phone

Photos

htlps:/www.google.com/maps/place/Crystalt Gateway+Condominium,+4 300+Crystal+Dr,+Arlington,+VA+22202/@38.86 16369,-77.058275,15z/data=|... 1 2

+

10/12/21 , 12:42 PM _ Crystal Gateway Condominium - Google Maps

psi google comimaps/place/Crystl¥ Gateway Condominium, +1300+Cryetal+Dr, tington+VA‘222021@)38 8616980,

7.058275, 15z/datast...

2/2

Pel

Le,

1012/21, 3:12 PM

Moore Co

Register of Deeds

Judy D. Martin, Registrar

j Search Real Estate Index - Moore Public Access

Welcome Visitor,

Login | wil View Basket

Welcome Links Birth Death Marriage | Real Estate

UCC FAQ

Real Estate Document Access

Criterla: Grantor Begins with OXENDINE RONNIE;

Glick here for

Showing Records 1 through 4 (4 records found as of 10/12/2021 03:12:16 PM count agaln ) Search Instructions

Gat a Free Copy Other Options o ns mney stan

Results List NewSearch Back toGrentortist (63 KB (Pago 4 a) Sort 6,

Selected Detailis) tet in rch

Selected Images) (Clean)

instrument # ‘ Party Nane

ca Image! ©) Rook-Page Date Filed | Decuient Type Reverse Party Name Lagat Dascription Status

rs . 1010971 Rh] OXENDINE RONNIE +

1 Qvew C9 2opsanos7i 05/11/2021 DEED OF TRUST mI LOT 1331 S7 MID SOUTH CLUB MCNEILL TP

| Viaw,

5612-283 [E] FIRST BANK

Get a Free Copy Other Options ne a or

Results List New Search Back to Grantor List 9 €3 (Pa Sort By;) vi

Selected Detailis)

Refine Search

Selected Image(s) (Clean)

Please read important information regarding North Carolina SS 192-4,10 (9)

Aumentum Recorder - Public Access Web Ul, Version 2020.2.0

Copyright © 2001 - 2021 Aumentum Technologies, Alt Rights Reserved

QaQionsr

ee Cc

htlps://rod.moorecountync.gov/RealEstate/SearchResults.aspx

Ww

10/12/21, 3:02 PM Voter Search

During the early voting period, voters may cast a ballot at any one-stop site in their county, and eligible individuals

may register and vote at the same time. Find one-stop sites and schedules in your county with the One-Stop Early

Voting Site Search. Voting sites change for each election and become available when finalized.

Election Day voters must cast a ballot at their assigned polling place. Click the name of your Election Day polling

place below for location details, your county board of elections contact information, and sample ballots when

available.

35 PROSPECT - PROSPECT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

4024 MISSOURI RD

MAXTON, NC 28364

se a aN A RI

YOUR SAMPLE BALLOT (0) a

If this section is blank, you do not have any upcoming elections in your jurisdiction for the current year.

“Ballots not assigned yet” means a sample ballot is not yet available. Return to this site closer to the election date to

view your sample ballot(s).

practice making your selections with the accessible sample ballot by choosing “Option 4" on the absentee ballot

portal.

Election

ee ‘Your Sample Ballot(s)

41/02/2021 MUNICIPAL

No eligible ballots.

YOUR ABSENTEE BALLOT: BY MAIL OR EARLY VOTING (0) a

By North Carolina law, in-person early voting and by-mail voting are “absentee” voting, as you vote “absent”

of Election Day.

Note: County boards of elections will post ballot acceptance information, but ballot requests are no longer public

record until the ballot is returned, or until Election Day, whichever is earlier. If you have not received your ballot

within two weeks of your request, contact your county board of elections

To track your by-mail absentee ballot from request to acceptance, sign up for status notifications through BallotTrax,

YOUR VOTER HISTORY (0) a

If this section is blank, we do not have a record that you voted in a past election in North Carolina.

For more information, please contact the Robeson County Board of Elections,

IMA N71 AIP State Baal “Blactinne \ ‘

wat!

whe ps: -{nesbe.gov/RegLkup/VoterInfo/ 2/3

oy

LOAN #; 2600038578

CONSTRUCTION/PERMANENT LOAN

RIDER TO SECURITY INSTRUMENT

(INCLUDING SECURITY AGREEMENT)

{To be attached to and secorded with this Security Instrurnent)

THIS CONSTRUCTION LOAN RIDER TO SECURITY INSTRUMENT (this ‘Rider’| is made on May 10, 2024

and shail be deemed to amend and supplement the Mortgage, Deed of Trust or Security Deed of the same date, to which

this Rider is attached (“thls Security Instrument’), given by the undersigned (‘Borrower’) for the benefit of .

First dank, a Chartered Bank

(‘Lender’) to secure Borrower's Note to Lender and the Constiyction Loan Addendum to Note. both of the same date (col

lectively, the “Note”) and covering the property desoribed in this Seourity Instrument (the “Property"), All terms defined In

the Note and elsewhera in this Security instrument shall have the same meaning In this Rider.

IN ADDITION TO THE COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS MADE IN THIS SECURITY INSTRUMENT, Borrower and

Lender further covenant and agree as follows:

1, Gonstruction Loan Agreement, The Note evidences Borrower's promise to pay Lender the aggregate amount of all

advances made and distributed by Lender under the terms.and conditions ofa Consiuction LoanAgreement between Lender

and Borrower dated the same date as the Note (the “Loan Agreement’). The Loan Agreement provides for construction of

certain improvements (the “Improvements") on the Property. Borrewer agrees to comply with the cavenants and conditions

of the Loan Agreement. This Sacurity Instrument secures to Lender (a) the repayment of the debt evidenced by the Note,

including the aggregate amount of all advances made by Lender fram time to time under (he terms of the Loan Agreement,

with interest as provided in the Note, and all renewals, extensions, and madifications of the Note, (b) the performance of

all Of Borrawer's cavenants and agresmerits linder the Note, this Security Instrument, the Loan Agraement and afl other

documents pertaining 1o the Laan (the “Loan Dacuments’), and (c) the payment of ail other sums, wilh interost at the Note

Rate, advanced by Lendev to protect the security of this Security lastrument. or to perform any of Borrower's obligations

under the Loan Documents, Upon the failure of Borrower to Keep and perform atl the covenants, conditions and agreements of the Loan Agreement, the Principal and alll interest arid ether charges provided for in the Loan Documents and

secured hereby shall, at the option of the Lender, and subject to any right of Borrower to cure Borrower's default, become

immediately due and payzble in full, This Security Instrument is a constuetion mortgage as such term is defined in North

Carolina General Statutes §25-9-334(h) to the extent it secures an obligation Incurred for the construction of improvements

upon the Properties, including the acquisition cost of the real property,

2, Future Advances, Quring the Constrction Loan Phase, interest will accrue on the outstanding Principal according

to the ferms sai forth in the Note. Provided thers has been no default as defined in the Note, the Loan Agreement, or this

Securily Instrument, and provided Borrower has satisfied all conditions precedent required for an advance under the Loan

Documents, Lender is iegally ghligated to make advances of principal upon application therefor by Borrower In accordance

with the provisions of the Note and the Loan Agreement up to 4 maximum principal amount (including present and future

Gbiigations), which is equat to the amount of the Note as sel forth in this Security Instrument, Such advances shail be evidenced by the Note, made under the terms of the Loan Agreament and secured by this Security Instrument and may occur

tor @ period up to the end of the Construction Loan Phase. but inno event after 18 months from the date of this Rider.

3. Assignment of Rights or Claims. From time to time as Lender deams hecessary to protect Lender's interest, Borrower shall, upon request of Lender, execute, acknowledge before a notary public, and deliver to Lender, assignments of

any and all rights or claims which refate to the consuuction on the Property,

4, Breach by Borrower. In case of breach by Borrower of the covenants and conditions of the Loan Agreement,

subject to any fight of Borrower to cure Borrower's default, Lender, at Lender's option, witly ar without entry upan the

Property (2) may invoke any of the rights or remedies provided in the Loan Agreement, (b) may accelerate the sums

Secured by this Sacurily Instrument and invoke any of the remedies provided in this Security Instrument, or (c) may do

both. Lender's failure to exercisa any of Its rights and cemadias at any one time shall not constitute a waiver by Lender

of its right to exercise (Ital right or remedy, of any ather right or remedy. in the fuyure.

5, Permanent Mortgage Date. On the day the Construction Loan Phase ends, the loan evidericed by the Note will became

@ permanent mortgage loan (the “Permanent Mortgage Date”). Beginning on the Permanent Morigage Date, interest shall

accrue as stated in the Note and monthly payments of principal and interest shall be due and payable as set forth in the Note,

6, Occupancy, Segtion 6 of this Security instrument Is amended and restated to read as follows: Borrower shall occupy,

establish, and use the Property ’S Borrower's principal residence within 60 days after the Permanent Mortgage Date and

shall continue lo occupy the Property as Borrower's principal tesidence Tarot lsust one year alter ihe date of occupancy,

unless Lender otherwise agrees In wring, whiclt consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, or unless extenuating circumstances exist which are beyond Borrower's control.

North Carolina ~ Conatruction’Permanent Loan Rider to Securily Instrument NOONSTPROU o716

Ellie Mao, I

simone. Page 1of3 GCNSTARLU (CLs)

05'06/2021 12:19 PM PST

ee

LOAN #: 2600038578

7. Security Agreement and Financing Statement,

a. The proparty covered by this Security Instrument inctudes the Property previously describad or referred to In this

Security Instrument, together with the folowing, all of which are referred to as the “Property.” The portion of the Property

that constitutes real property is sometimes referred to as the Real Propeity.” The portion af the Properly which constitutes

personal property is sametimes referred to as the "Personal Property,” and Is described as follows: (i) Borrower's right to

possession af the Property; {ii) any and all fixtures, machinery, equipment, building materials, appliances, and goods of

every nature whatsoever now or hareafter located in, or on, or used, oF intended to be used in connection with the Property or the Improvements, and all replacements of and accessions to those goods; and (lil) pracaeds and products of the

Personal Property. Despite any other provision of this Rider or aty other Loan Document, however, Lender is nol granted,

and wil nol have, a non-purchase money Security interest in household goods, to the extent that such a security interest

would be prohibited by applicabte law,

b. This Seourity Instrument is and shail be a security agreement granting Lender a first and prior security interest in all of

Borrower's right, titfe and interest in and to the Personal Property, under and within the meaning of applicable state taws,

a5 well as a document granting a lien upon and against the Real Property. In the event of any foreclosure sale, whether

made by Trustee, of under judgment of a court, or otherwise, all of the Real Property and Personal Property may, at the

option of Lender, be sold as a whole or in parcels. It shall net be hecessary to have present at the place of such sala the

Personal Properly or any part thereof. Lender, as well. as Trustee oni Lender's behelf, shall have all the rights, remedies and

fecourse with respect to the Personal Property afforded to a “Secured Pa ty" by applicable state laws in addition to and not

In limitation of the other rights and remedies afforded Lencier and/or Trustee Under this Security Instrument, To the extent

permitted by applicable law, Borrower shall, upon demand, pay to Lender the amount of any and all expanses, Including

the fees and disbursements of Lender's legal counsel and of any experts and agents, which Lender may Incur In conneclon with: (i) the making and/or administration of this Security instrument; (ii) tha custody, preservation, use or operation

of, or the sale of. collection front, or other realization upon any Property, real and/or personal. described in this Security

Instrument: (iil) the exercise or enforcement of any of the rights of Lender under this Security Instrument; or (iv) the fallura

by Borrower to perform or observe any of the provisions or covenants in this Security Instrument,

¢ Lander may, at Its election. at any ume after the delivery of this Security Instrument, sign one of more coples of

this. Security instrument in order that such caples may be used as a financing staternent under applicable state laws,

Lender's signature need not be acknowledged, and is not necessary to ihe olfactiveness hereol as a deed of trust. a

seourlty agreement, or (unless otherwise required by appiicabte state laws) a financing statement.

4, Borrower also quthorizes Lender to sign and file, without Borrower's signature, such financing and continuation state:

ments, amendments, and supplements thereto, and olher documents that Lender May from tine to time deem necessary

0 perfett, preserve and protect Lender's security interest in the Property. If any other documents are necessary to pratect

Lender's interest in the Property, Borrower agreas to sign these documents whenaver Lender asks, Borrower also gives

Lender permission to sign these documents for Borrower,

8, Invalid Provisions. If any one oF more of the Provisions of this Security Instrument, or the applicability of any such

provision to a specific situation, shal! be held invalid or unenferceable, such provision shalt be modified to the minimum

extent necessary to make It or its application valid and enforceable, and the validity ard enforceabitly of all other provistons

of this Securily Instrument and all other applications of any such provision shall not be affected thereby.

5, Addresses,

The name and address of the Borrower Is:

Rontiie Oxendine

1837 Hezekiah Road

Maxton, NC 28364

The name and address of the Lender/Securad Party is:

First Bank, a Chartered Bank

101 N. Spring Street

Greensboro, NG 27401

10, Additional Praviston Regarding Future Advances (North Carolina Future Advances Statute, North Caralina

General Statutes §48-67, et seq,). This Security Instrument Is given to secure both (i) existing obligations identified in this

Security instrument and alt advances made al or prior to the registration of this Security Instrument, and ((t} future advances

andéor future obligations that may be made or incurred under this Security instrument and/or under the Instruments or

obligations secured by this Security Instrument (including without limitation under the Note andlor the Loan Agreement),

The maximum principat amount that may be secured by this Deed of Trust at any one time is $816,500.00,

The patiod In which future advances may be made and future obligations may be incurred and secured by this Security

Instrument is the period between the dale of this Securlty instrument and that dote which Is thirty (30) years from the date

of this Security Instrument. If the maximum amount secured by this Security Instument has not been advanced ar if any

North Carolina - Construction/Permanent Loan Rider to Security Instrument Initials:

Bila Mae, Ino, Page 2 of 3 NocNeTRXOU 4716

GCNSTPRLU (CLS)

May "30%, 06/08/2021 12:18 PM PST

&

LOAN #: 2600028678

obligation secured hereby is pald or is reduced by partial payment, future advances may be made and additional obligations

secured by this Security Instrument may be incurred from tlme to time within the time Kmit and maximum amount fixed by

this Security Instrument as set forth above and such further advances and obligations shall be secured by this Security

Instrument, Any additional amounts not otherwise described above and advanced by the Lender or the holder of the Note

or any indebtedness secured hereby shall be deemed to be necessary expenditures for the preservalion of the security.

The provisions of this Section sre intended to comply with the North Carolina Future Advances Slawte, North Carolina

General Statutes §45-67, et seq.

BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contalned in this Rider.

Lee: Ola. Lotti 2 / (Seal)

RONNIE OXENDINE / DATE

Soot. Lwncliue LE Sleep Ef _ ious

TINA OXENDINE DATE

ATTENTION GOUNTY CLERK, This instrument covers goods that are or are to become fixtures on the

Property described herein and is to be tiled for record In the records where Security Instruments on reat

estate are recorded, Additionally, this instrument should be appropriately indexed, not only as a Security

Instrument but also as a financing statement covering qoods that are or are ta become fixtures on the

Property described herein. The mailing address of the Sorrower (Debtor) and Lender (Secured Party) are set

forth In this Security Instrument,

North Caralina - Construction/Permanent Loan Rider to Security Instrument (nitials: MeL Ze

Ellie Maa, Ino, Page 3of3 NCCNSTPROU 0716

GONSTPRLU (CLS)

LS ed 95/06/2021 12:10 FM PST

s

o]

<

é

LOAN #: 2600098878

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RIDER

THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RIDER Is mada this 10th day of

May, 2021 and is incorporated into and shall be deemed to amend and

Supplement the Mortgage, Deed of Trust ar Securlty Deed (tha “Security Insttument’}

of the same date, given by the undersigned (the “Borrower') to secure Borrower's Note

to First Bank, a Chartered Bank

(the “Lender")

of the same date and covering the Property described in the Security Instrument and

located-at: 100 Eagle Point Ln, Southern Pines, NC 28387-2988,

The Property includes, but {s not limited ta, a parcel of land improved with a dwelling,

together with other such parcels and cerlain comman areas ani facilities, as described

in “COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

(the Declaration’).

The Property is a part of a planned unit development known as Mid South Club

(the “PUD"). The Property also includes Borrower’sinterestin the homeowners association

or equivalent entity owning or managing the common areas and facilities of the PUD

(the ‘Owners Agsoclation’yand the uses, benefits and proceeds of Borrower's interest.

PUD COVENANTS. In addition to the covenants and agreements made in the

Security lnstrument, Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree 8S follows:

A. PUD Obligations. Borrower shall perform all of Borrower's 0 ligations under the

PUD‘s Constituent Documents. The ‘Constituent Documents” are the (I) Daclaration;

(1) articles of incorporation, trust instrument or any equivatent document which creates

the Owners Association: and (iii) any by-laws or other rules or regulations of the Owners

Association. Borrower shall promptly pay, when due, all dues and assessments

imposed pursuant to tie Constituent Documents.

B, Property Insurance. So long as the Owners Association maintains, with a

generally accepted insurance carrier, a “master” or "blanket" policy insuring the Property

which is ‘satisfactory to Lender and vinch provides insurance eek in the antounts

(including deductible levels}, for the periods, and against loss by fire, hazards included

within the term “extended coverage," and any other hazards, including, but not limited

to, earthquakes and floods, farwhich Lender Tequires insurance, then: * Lender waives

the provision in Section 3 for the Periodic Payment to Lender of the yearly premium

installments for praperty insurance on the Property, and (ii) Borrower's Obligation under

Section 5 to maintain property insurance Coverage on the Property Is deemed satisfied

to the extern that the required coverage is provided by the Owners Association policy.

What Lender requires aga condition of this waiver can change during the term of the loan.

Borrower shall give Lender prompt natice of any lapse in required property

insurance coverage provided by the master or blanket policy.

In the event of a disvibution af property insurance proceeds in lieu of restoration or

repair following a loss to the Property, or to common areas. and facilities of the PUD, any

proceeds payable to Barrower are hereby assigned and shail be paid to Lender, Lender

shall apply the proceeds to the sums secured by the Security Instrument, whether or

not then due, with the excess, if any, paid to Borrower.

C. Public Liability Insurance, Borrower shail take such actions as may be

reasonable ta ensure that the Owners Association maintains a public liability insurance

policy acceptable in form, amount, and extent of coverage to Lender, oh

Initials: &

MULTISTATE PUD RIDER-Single Family--Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT Form 3480 4/91.

Ellie Maa, Ine, Page fof2 FSIBORDU O115

F3150RLU (28

05/06/2021 12:19 PM PS

oF

LOAN #; 2600038578

D, Condemnation. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages, direct or

consequential, payable to Borrower In cormection with any condemnation or other

taking of all or any’ part of the Property or the common areas and facilities of the PUD,

or for any conveyance in lieu of condemnation, are hereby assigned and shall be paid

to Lendér. Such proceeds shall be applied by Lender to the sums sacurad by the

Security Instrument as provided in Section 11,

E. Lender's Prior Consent, Borrower shall not, &xcept after notice to Lender and

with Lender's prior written consent, either Partition or subdivide the Property or consent

to; (i) the abandonment or termination of the PUD, except for abandonment or termination

required by law in the case of substantial destruction by fire or other casualty or in the case

Of a taking by condemnation or eminent domain: (li) any amendmentio any provision of the

“Constituent Documents’ if the provision is for the express benefit of Lender; (ii) termination

ofprofessional managementand assumption of sell- managerentof the OwnersAssociation;

or (iv) any action which would hava the effect of rendering the public lability insurance

coverage maintained by the Owners Association unacceptable to Lender.

F, Remedies. If Borrower does not pay PUD dues and assessments when due,

then Lender may pay them. Any amounts disbursed t Lender under this paragraph

F shall become additional debt af Borrower secured by the Security Instrument. Uniess

Borrower and Lender agree to other terms of payment, these ‘amounts shall bear

interest from the date of disbursement at the Note fate and shall be payable, with

Interest, Upon natice from Lender to Borrower requesting paymant,

BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants

contained in this PUD Riga.

wells: mh Liffipy 2p tee

RONNIE OXENDINE i / BATE

a LE LE sft EF (Seal

TINA OXENDINE DATE

Initials; 24

MULTISTATE PUD RIDER--Single Family--Fannie Mae/Fredaie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT Form 3150 1/01

Edle Mae, Inc. Page 2of2 F81508Du O115,

F3150RLU (CLS)

08/06/2021 12:18 PM PST

For Registration Register of Deeds

Judy D. Martin

Moore County, NC

Electronically Recorded

12:26:53 PM

Book: 5612 Page: 283 - 297 #Pages: 15

Fee: $64.00 NC Rev Stamp: $0.00

; Instrument# 2021010971

-——_— oo —— [Space Above This Line For Recording Dataj— =» __ —_ -—

DEED OF TRUST

When recorded, return to:

First Bank

Attn: Post Closing Department

101 N. Spring Street

Greensboro, NC 27401

800-303-7592

This document was prepared by: H*. Craig Phifer, IIT

First Bank

101 N. Spring Street

Greensboro, NC 27401

800-303-7592

LOAN #: 2600038578

DEFINITIONS

Words used in multiple sections of this document are defined below and other words are defined in Sections 3, 11, 13,

18, 20 and 21. Certain cules regarding the usage of words used in this document are also provided in Section 16.

(A) “Security Instrument” means this document, which is dated May 10, 2021, logether with

all Riders to this document. “

{B) “Borrower” is » RONNIE OXENDINE AND WIFE, TINA OXENDINE re

Borrower is the trustor under this Security Instrument.

(C) “Lender” Is First Bank.

Lender is a Chartered Bank, organized and existing under the laws of

North Carolina. Lender's address is 101 N. Spring Street,

Greensboro, NC 27401,

Lender is the beneficiary under this Security Instrument.

(D) “Trustee” is Kirsten Eltefson Foyles, Esq..

(E) "Note” means the Promissory note signed by Borrower and dated Ma The Note

states that Borrower owes Lender EIGH’ UI

ARRORHREAM ERT AR EREN RRO TRA RAR ER OME

Dollars (U.

Plus interesi. Borrower has promised to pay this debt in regular Periodic Payments and to pa

than September 1, 2052,

(F) “Property” means the property that is described below under the heading “Transfer of Rights in the Property."

Initials: a

)

@ debt in full not later

NORTH CAROLINA-Single Family-Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT Form 3034-1/01

Ellie Mae, Inc. Page 1 of 9 NCUDEED 0315

3 NCUDEED (CLS)

08/06/2021 12:19 PM PST

d electronically by “clarke, Phifer, Vaughn, Brenner & McNei11, PLLC”

invconpi janes wigh North Carolina statutes governing recordable documents r

and the terms of the submitter agreement with the Moore County Register of Deeds.

[OCR skipped on page(s) 31-58]

[Read from a scan; the first 30 pages.]