AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
What began as a potential romance and a shared dream of completing a mountain-top castle became a bitter legal fight that consumed two years and left both sides claiming significant losses.
Read more Heavy rain shuts down I-40/85 morning commute, causes crashes in Orange County
When the trial ended this week, neither Robert Mihaly nor Julie Seel walked away a winner.
After two days of testimony and before even reaching the jury, Durham County Superior Court Judge Josephine Kerr Davis dismissed Seel’s claims that Mihaly, 59, had committed fraud, negligent misrepresentation and unfair and deceptive trade practices.
She also dismissed Mihaly’s counterclaims that Seel had fraudulently induced him into a business agreement, systematically impoverished him, laundered money, hacked into his laptop and stolen his trade secrets.
Davis ruled after each side presented its case, offering little explanation beyond finding that neither had produced enough evidence for the claims to reach the jury.
“I won’t go into much detail. But upon the hearing of the various motions, the court has dismissed this case at this time,” she told the jurors Wednesday afternoon.
The dismissals resolved the legal claims but did little to settle the larger fight over Castle Mont Rouge.
Seel says she lost hundreds of thousands of dollars, her career as a clinical psychologist and her reputation after relying on Mihaly’s alleged misrepresentations about his skills and the condition of the castle. She invested in his dream, only to face retaliation after ending their romance and cutting off the money, she testified, and now lives in fear of what he might do next.
“I’ve lost my entire life just trying to stand up to this person,” she testified.
Mihaly, a sculptor, says Seel took over his nearly finished castle, which is just north of Durham County, with promises of making it bigger and grander, then left him further behind than when they started. He said the lawsuit also consumed two years he could have spent raising money for a construction loan payment due early next year.
“I am coming up on the balloon payment in January, and I’m honestly afraid I will lose it,” Mihaly told the jury.
The dismissals concluded an unusual trial in which Mihaly represented himself and cross-examined his former girlfriend about their relationship.
Mihaly, who graduated from law school but never sat for the bar, struggled at times with courtroom procedure. He often forgot to stand when addressing the judge, despite repeated reminders, and had difficulty phrasing his questions in the proper form.
Davis repeatedly reminded both sides to stay focused on the claims before the court rather than revisiting disputes and prior relationships described in their filings. In those filings, Mihaly claimed Seel had a history of entering into partnerships with people she was dating and then taking their property. Seel claimed that Mihaly had a history of relying on his partners to pay for work on the castle.
“I would encourage everyone to ask questions that are appropriate and to respond to the questions appropriately. So that way, we are not hearing ancillary matters that are not before this court,” Davis said.
Read more $7.4K at Panera Bread, tens of thousands on fine-dining: Cary’s pattern of food spending
As Mihaly questioned Seel, the former couple revisited a relationship they characterized very differently, using texts drawn from roughly 600 pages of their communications.
Seel testified that they moved in together shortly after meeting, primarily to work on the castle and create a stable home for their children.
Mihaly alleged that Seel used the romance to manipulate him into giving her a stake in the property.
He pointed to messages exchanged four days after their first date in which the two discussed marriage and having their daughters serve as bridesmaids.
“So on July 6 at 9:55 a.m. you received a text message from me that both our daughters — this would be the fourth day after our meeting — that both our daughters could be bridesmaids and that we should model true love for our children,” Mihaly said in court. “Do you recall receiving that text message from me?”
“You frequently mentioned marriage, yes,” Seel testified.
“And so at 9:56 a.m. on the fourth day after our first date, you recall texting me back, ‘Totally agree,’” Mihaly asked.
“I was joking, Robert,” Seel responded.
Seel argued that Mihaly presented himself as a financially stable artist and experienced contractor who was close to completing the castle.
She testified that she reduced her psychology practice to work at the castle six days a week and spent at least $233,000 on workers, tools and materials. She said she initially offered Mihaly a secured loan but later agreed to a partnership after he promised her an ownership interest in the castle and surrounding property.
That ownership interest never materialized, she said. Instead, Mihaly barred her from the property after their relationship collapsed, leaving her without a stake in the castle and still paying to store materials purchased for it.
Mihaly presented Seel as the one who arrived with grand promises. He said the castle was nearing completion when they met and that Seel persuaded him to expand the project into a far more elaborate wedding venue that could earn $100,000 a month.
Seel promised to finance additions that included a gatehouse, fountain, gazebo, drawbridge, moat, carriage house and dungeon, he said. She showed him bank records indicating that she earned $24,000 a month, discussed her experience with construction projects and assured him that she could manage the work, he said.
Relying on those promises, Mihaly said, he stopped taking other jobs, accepted a salary from Seel and allowed her to direct workers, demolish structures and remove trees. Rather than bringing the castle closer to completion, he contended, her plans left the project further behind and saddled him with unfinished work.
After the trial concluded, The News & Observer sent Mihaly a question asking what the next step with the castle will be.
Read more Wake County man charged with raping wife, gets prison time in plea deal. Here’s why.
He didn’t respond
This story was originally published July 23, 2026 at 11:00 AM.