Durham County as it failed to comply with the statutory requirements in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 159-28(a). Data General may not recover under an equitable theory such as estoppel for breach of contract where Durham County has not expressly entered a valid contract. See id. Furthermore, parties dealing with governmental organizations are charged with notice of all limitations upon the organizations’ authority, as the scope of such authority is a matter of public record. L & S Leasing, 122 N.C. App. at 622, 471 S.E.2d at 120. Likewise, the preaudit certificate requirement is a matter of public record, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 159-28(a), and parties contracting with a county within this state are presumed to be aware of, and may not rely upon estop-pel to circumvent, such requirements. See, e.g., id. (<HOLDING>); Nello L. Teer Co. v. N.C. State Highway
holding that a breach of contract claim against one defendant related back to interference with contract claim against that defendant and breach of contract claim against second defendant because it was based on same set of operative facts holding that a party may not rely upon an estoppel defense against a governmental entity to support a breach of contract claim based upon an assertion of apparent authority of the agent signing the alleged contract on behalf of the entity holding that breach of contract claim related back to misrepresentation claim because operative facts upon which the breach of contract claim was based were contained in the misrepresentation counts of the original complaint recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract holding that a fundamental breach bars assertion of any further rights under the contract by the party guilty of the breach