A common conundrum for law enforcement, judicial officials, and citizens is how to remove an occupant from residential property when the occupant is not a tenant. If the occupant is a tenant, even one holding over after the expiration of the lease, the law is clear that the property owner is required to evict the tenant, using the judicial procedure of summary ejectment if the tenant refuses to vacate the property. When it is not clear whether the occupant is a tenant or a trespasser, law enforcement may hesitate to arrest the occupant for trespass, especially if the occupant argues that the property is their residence. Sometimes, a law enforcement officer may instruct the property owner to file a criminal complaint with the magistrate for the issuance of criminal charges for trespass or other applicable crimes. Sometimes, the officer may instruct the property owner to file an action for summary ejectment, only for the property owner to learn in small claims court that this remedy is not available in situations where there is no landlord-tenant relationship.
While a property owner in this position could file an action in district court for civil trespass, there was until recently no expedited procedure for the removal of such unauthorized occupants. The legislature recently passed S.L. 2025-88, which creates a procedure for the expedited removal of unauthorized persons from residential rental property. The Act to Create an Alternative Remedy for the Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons from Private Property by a Law Enforcement Agency is effective as of December 1, 2025. This post explores some of the highlights of the new procedure. For a more in-depth exploration of the Act, I recently published a bulletin that is available for free and can be downloaded here.
Key Definitions in the Act
The Act defines residential property, law enforcement agency, tenant, real estate broker, authorized representative, unauthorized person, and contract for deed. The definition of an unauthorized person is critical for determining whether the defendant can be removed using this expedited procedure. An unauthorized person cannot have a legal claim to the property and cannot be a tenant or a tenant holding over after the lease term has ended. Also of note is the requirement that an authorized representative must have written legal authority to act on behalf of the property owner. There is no other requirement for the authorization other than it be in writing.
Requirements for the Expedited Removal of an Unauthorized Person
Commencement of the Process
The process begins when the owner (or authorized representative) files a complaint for the expedited removal of the unauthorized person either in the clerk’s office or in the magistrate’s office if the clerk’s office is closed. G.S. 14-159.52(a). The plaintiff can file AOC-CVM-407, Complaint in Action for Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons from Residential Property which contains the ten required allegations. The clerk or the magistrate issues a summons commencing the action. Id. The form Magistrate Summons Complaint in Action for Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons from Residential Property, AOC-CVM-408, should be used for these actions.
The statute is silent about the fees for this action. Since it does not expressly waive court costs, a fee should be collected. The Administrative Office of the Courts in a memorandum dated November 14, 2025 advises that the fee is the same charged for magistrates’ court in G.S. 7A-305(a5). Since the complaint will be served by law enforcement, the civil process fee in G.S. 7A-311(a)(1) should also be collected.
Service of the Process
The party seeking the removal takes the summons and complaint to the sheriff’s office for service. Service may be personally upon the unauthorized person or by posting a copy of the summons and complaint on the front door of the property. The sheriff is required to serve the summons and complaint within twenty-four hours of receipt. G.S. 14-159.52(a).
The Hearing
A hearing is scheduled before a magistrate as soon as practicable but no more than forty-eight hours after service by the sheriff. The proper venue for the hearing is the county where the residential property is located. G.S. 14-159.52(a). Scheduling the hearing can be tricky since it is based on an act in the future (service) carried out by a law enforcement officer. If the judicial official issuing the summons knows when the sheriff receives or is likely to receive the summons and complaint, the judicial official can set the hearing for forty-eight hours (or seventy-two hours to account for the time the sheriff has to complete service) from that time. Knowing when the sheriff receives the summons and complaint is complicated by the Act’s requiring the plaintiff to take the summons and complaint to the sheriff rather than requiring the sheriff to pick up the summons and complaint from the clerk’s or magistrate’s office.
The law requires the magistrate to enter an order for possession if the court finds for the property owner. G.S. 14-159.52(b). Thus, the owner or their authorized representative must establish the allegations in the complaint by providing prima facie evidence (evidence sufficient to establish a fact) in order for the court to make this finding. The burden of proof in a civil action is by a preponderance of the evidence (sometimes referred to as the greater weight of the evidence), meaning it is more probably true than not that the plaintiff is entitled to possession of the property. The magistrate will record the judgment on form AOC-CVM-409, Judgment in Action for Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons from Residential Property.
Service of the Order
If the magistrate finds in favor of the property owner, then the magistrate must enter a written order granting the owner or representative possession and stating the time when the unauthorized person shall vacate the property. Once the order is served, the unauthorized person will have no more than four hours to vacate. If the unauthorized person is present in court, then the order is considered served when it is announced and signed by the magistrate. If the unauthorized person is not served in court, then the owner or representative must provide the sheriff a copy of the order. The sheriff must serve the order within twenty-four hours of receiving it, either by delivering it to the unauthorized person or by posting it on the front door of the property.
Appeal
Either party may appeal the magistrate’s order to the district court for a new trial. G.S. 14-159.53. The minimum amount of the appeal bond is $10,000.00, but it is unclear from the statute whether the purpose of the bond is to allow the unauthorized person to remain on the property or is a condition required to have the appeal heard. The Act is also silent about the time to appeal the magistrate’s judgment. Guidance from the AOC indicates that the appeal costs in G.S. 7A-305(b) apply.
Other Provisions of the Expedited Removal of Unauthorized Persons Act
Violation of the Order
If the unauthorized person fails to remove personal property from the residential property within the time allowed by the magistrate’s order for possession, the property owner or their authorized representative is allowed to remove it and place it near the property line. In essence, the owner can place the personal property on the curb, a type of self-help eviction that would not be allowed in the landlord-tenant context. Further, the unauthorized person’s failure to vacate the property constitutes a criminal trespass under G.S. 14-159.13(a)(1). See G.S. 14-159.54.
Immunity from Liability
The Act protects law enforcement agencies, law enforcement officers, and magistrates from liability to an unauthorized person for actions taken in furtherance of the Act’s provisions, provided the actions are done in good faith and do not constitute gross negligence, willful or wanton misconduct, or intentional wrongdoing. The Act further shields owners and representatives from liability to an unauthorized person for any personal property that is lost, destroyed, or damaged in any way that is related to the removal of the person pursuant to the Act, unless the removal was wrongful. G.S. 14-159.55.
Remedy for Wrongful Removal
The Act creates a cause of action against the owner or representative for wrongful removal. “A person harmed by a wrongful removal under [the Act] may be entitled to recover possession of the property and may recover from the property owner or authorized representative damages limited to actual damages as in an action for trespass or conversion.” Punitive damages; treble (triple) damages, such as those for unfair or deceptive trade practices; and damages for emotional distress are explicitly disallowed. 14-159.56(a).
Final Thoughts
According to the bill summary, located on the General Assembly’s website, the legislature’s intent was to create an expedited civil law procedure as an alternative to a criminal trespass charge. This new expedited procedure is available to owners whether the unauthorized person is what we traditionally think of when we hear the word “squatter” or is a guest who has overstayed his or her welcome. It is not available when the occupant is a tenant or an owner of the residential property at issue.