skip to content
Elizabeth Brooks Scherer

Elizabeth Brooks Scherer

Of Counsel

T (919) 755-8790
F (919) 755-8800

Beth Brooks Scherer is a North Carolina State Bar Board Certified Specialist in Appellate Practice.  She is member of the firm's appellate and litigation practice groups. Her primary emphasis is appellate litigation in North Carolina state and federal courts. Beth has briefed and argued cases in both the North Carolina appellate courts and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and has represented clients before the United States Supreme Court.

In addition, Beth assists and counsels attorneys throughout the State in preparing their appeals, complying with rules of appellate procedure, and correcting appellate rules violations.

Beth is a current member, and a past Chair of the North Carolina Bar Association's Appellate Rules Committee. The Committee recommends changes to the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure to the Supreme Court, publishes appellate advocacy practice guides, and seeks to improve the quality of appellate advocacy in North Carolina.

Beth is also a contributor to the North Carolina Appellate Practice Blog,, which provides news, information, tips, and resources for practicing law in North Carolina's state and federal appellate courts.

Beth is a past Chair, and an inaugural member, of North Carolina’s Appellate Practice Specialization Committee. The Committee creates standards and administers exams to determine board-certified specialists in appellate practice. The seven-member committee is comprised of attorneys and judges with extensive experience in appellate practice.

Listed in North Carolina Super Lawyers
  • Board Certified Specialist in Appellate Practice, North Carolina State Bar
  • Past Chair, North Carolina Bar Association's Appellate Rules Committee, 2012-2014
  • Appellate Practice Specialty Committee of the Board of Legal Specialization, 2010-2017 (served as both Chair or Vice-Chair during entire term)
  • Recipient of the 2012 Howard L. Gum Service Award -Presented by North Carolina State Bar's Board of Legal Specialization to a specialty committee member who consistently excels in completing committee tasks
  • North Carolina Super Lawyers, Listed Appellate (2014-2018), Rising Stars Edition, Appellate (2010, 2011, 2013), and as one of the "Top 50 Women" attorneys in North Carolina (2015)
  • Business North Carolina's Legal Elite, Appellate (2018)
  • Selected to Super Lawyers Business Edition list, Appellate (2014, 2015)
  • Martindale-Hubbell's top ("AV") Peer Review Rating *

* CV, BV, and AV are registered certification marks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedure's standards and policies.


Representative Work

  • 42 East LLC v. D.R. Horton, 722 S.E.2d 1 (N.C. Ct. App. 2012) (reversal of bench trial judgment involving contract dispute)

  • Albright v. Nash County and Morgan v. Nash County – COA No. 11-1530 and 11-1544 (appeals involving rezoning dispute and standing issues) (N.C. Ct. App. 2011 to present)

  • Idol v. Idol, COA No. 12-503 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011 to present) (Appellate defense of partition of land)

  • Tradewinds Airlines, Inc., v. C-S Aviation Services – COA No. 11-739 (2011 to present)

  • Hest Technologies, Inc. v. State (N.C. 2011 to present) (challenge to constitutionality of North Carolina sweepstakes law)

  • Pittsburg Corning v. McCormick, No. COA11-349 (N.C. 2011) (appellate defense of preliminary injunction order)

  • Vanwijk v. Professional Nursing Servs., 713 S.E.2d 766 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011) (defense of drug testing procedures, which included issues of exhaustion of administrative remedies)

  • Pope v. Johns Manville (N.C. Ct. App. & N.C. Supreme Court) (amicus curie in worker’s compensation appeal)

  • Hatley v. Cont’l Gen. Tire, No. COA10-1527 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011) (worker’s compensation appeal)

  • Bogovich v. Embassy Club of Sedgefield, Inc., 712 S.E.2d 257 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011) (defense of constructive fraud and unfair and deceptive trade practices judgment)

  • Betts v. Lowes Foods, Inc., -– S.E.2d – (N.C. Ct. App. 2010) (appellate defense of summary judgment order involving claims of negligence in store’s apprehension of shoplifter)
  • Huber Engineered Woods, LLC v. Canal Ins. Co., 700 S.E.2d 220 (N.C. Ct. App. & N.C. Sup. Ct. 2009-2010) (appeal of declaratory judgment order that had required trucking company’s commercial automobile liability insurer to defend and indemnify plant owner in wrongful death action)
  • United States v. Rucker (4th Cir. 2010) (appeal vacating and remanding criminal case for resentencing)
  • United States v. Lomas (4th Cir. 2010) (challenge to criminal restitution order)
  • Pope v. Manville (N.C. Ct. App. & N.C. Sup. Ct. 2010 to present) (represented amicus curiae in worker’s compensation appeal)
  • Thermal Design, Inc. v. M & M Builders, Inc., 698 S.E.2d 516 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010) (appellate defense of summary judgment order involving sale of construction goods under the UCC)
  • Mugno v. Mugno, 695 S.E.2d 495 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010) (challenged on appeal equitable distribution order that had required husband’s corporation to pay ex-wife for personal loan used by husband to pay corporation’s debts)
  • Boykin v. Wilson Medical Center (N.C. Ct. App. 2009) (appellate challenge to trial court’s granting of discretionary motion for new trial)
  • Professional Vending Services, Inc. v. Michael D. Sifen, Inc. (N.C. Ct. App. 2009) (appeal of default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction)
  • Fletcher v. Bowser (N.C. Ct. App. 2009) (defense of jury verdict in construction case)
  • Mangum v. Raleigh Bd. of Adjustment, 362 N.C. 640 (N.C. Sup. Ct. 2008) (appeal challenging zoning board decision)
  • Pottle v. Link (N.C. Ct. App. & N.C. Sup. Ct. 2007 to 2008) (appeal involving defense of easements rights)
    NLRB v. BA Mullican Lumber, Co., 535 F. 3d 271 (4th Cir. 2008) (appellate challenge to National Labor Relations Board Order requiring company to collectively bargain with union)
  • White Oak v. Dogwood; Jones v. Harrelson & Smith Contractors, and Selwyn Village Home Owners Association v. Cline & Company, Inc. (N.C. Sup. Ct. & N.C. Ct. App. 2007-2008) (defense of cases where appeals were dismissed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals for appellate rules violations)
  • Southeastern Shelter Corp. v. Gilfillan, (4th Cir. 2008) (defense of bankruptcy appeal)
  • United States v. Newbold (4th Cir. and U.S. Sup. Ct. 2006-2007) (criminal sentencing appeal)
  • United States v. Woods (4th Cir. 2005-2006)- (appeal of bank robbery conviction and sentence)
  • Mann v. American Community Bank (N.C. Ct. App. 2005) (appellate defense of local community bank)
  • ARS v. Stuttle (N.C. Ct. App. 2004) (appeal involving alleged violations of employee non-compete clause)
  • Bouygues v. Tekelec (EDNC, 2006-2007) (prosecution of international telecommunication claims)
  • J.D. v. Masonic Home for Children (N.C. Ct. App. 2005-2006) (appeal of trial court’s venue determination)


  • Law Clerk, Honorable Malcolm J. Howard, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, 2000-2002
  • Law Clerk, Honorable H. Emory Widener, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2002-2003

* Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in any future legal representation.

Thought Leadership

Published Works

  • Posts on the North Carolina Appellate Practice Blog
  • "Legislation and Appellate Rules Amendments Bring Sweeping Changes to Appellate Practice in 2017," Lawyers Mutual Put Into Practice Newsletter, January 2017
  • Co-author, "Planning to Pursue An Appeal From A Business Court Decision? It's A Jungle Out There," appears in The Litigator, NCBA's Litigation Section Newsletter, and North Carolina Appellate Practice Blog,  2016
  • "Helpful Resources for Appeals," (Article discussing appellate resources used most often by seasoned North Carolina attorneys - publication in Lawyers Mutual Newsletter, Lawyers Mutual Put into Practice, April 2012)
  • Co-author, "Know your Audience(s):  How to Write Appellate Briefs for Both Judges and Clerks", The Litigator, Vol. 29, No. 2, February 2009
  • "Understanding and Avoiding Appellate Rules – Violations in Light of Dogwood", The Litigator, Vol. 29, No. 1, September 2008
  • "Dogwood v. White Oak, Are We Out of the Woods Yet?" (Article discussing recent developments of appellate rule violation cases in North Carolina appellate courts – publication in Lawyers Mutual Liability Today, Vol. 30, Issue 2, Summer 2008)
  • "Thou Shalt Not Quote the Bible:  Determining the Propriety of Attorney Use of Religious Philosophy and Themes in Oral Argument," 33 GA. L. Rev. 1113 (1999)




  • University of Georgia, B.S., summa cum laude, 1997
  • Gainesville College, A.S., 1995
  • University of Georgia School of Law, J.D., magna cum laude, 2000
  • United States District Court, Middle District of North Carolina, 2003
  • North Carolina, 2001
  • United States District Court, Western District of North Carolina, 2005
  • United States District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina, 2001
  • Georgia, 2000
  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 2001
  • United States Supreme Court, 2007
  • Wake County Bar Association
  • North Carolina Bar Association
  • Appellate Rules Committee, North Carolina Bar Association
Academic Honors
  • Order of the Coif
  • Executive Notes Editor, Georgia Law Review
  • Editorial Board, Georgia Law Review
  • Presidential Scholar
  • University Roundtable Leadership Discussion Forum

Each of our lawyer's e-mail address is provided with his or her biography. If you are not a current client of our firm, you should not e-mail our lawyers with any confidential information or any information about a specific legal matter, given that our firm may presently represent persons or companies who have interests that are adverse to you. If you are not a current client and you e-mail any lawyer in our firm, you do so without any expectation of confidentiality. We will not establish a professional relationship with you via e-mail. Instead, you should contact our firm by telephone so that we can determine whether we are in a position to consult with you about any legal matters before you share any confidential or sensitive information with us.