370 N.C. 590
N.C.2018Background
- Officer Robert H. Frost, an Asheville police officer, was accused of using excessive force; an internal investigation led to his suspension and a unanimous recommendation for termination by supervisors, which the Police Chief implemented.
- Frost appealed his termination to the Asheville Civil Service Board; after a three-day hearing the Board reversed the termination, finding the City failed to prove excessive force and denied Frost adequate due process, and ordered reinstatement with back pay.
- The City filed a petition for a trial de novo in Buncombe County Superior Court under the Asheville Civil Service Law; Frost (the respondent) filed a timely response requesting a jury trial.
- The City moved to strike Frost’s jury demand arguing only the petitioner may demand a jury; the superior court denied the motion, ruling Rule 38 is incorporated and a respondent may request a jury.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding only the petitioner has a right to request a jury trial; a dissent prompted Frost’s appeal to the North Carolina Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court considered whether the statute grants a respondent the statutory right to a jury trial and ultimately reversed the Court of Appeals, holding respondents may demand a jury trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a respondent in an appeal from the Asheville Civil Service Board has a statutory right to a jury trial in superior court | City: statutory text ("If the petitioner desires a trial by jury, the petition shall so state") implies only the petitioner may demand a jury | Frost: statutory scheme and incorporation of civil procedure allow either party to demand a jury; Rule 38(b) permits any party to demand a jury on triable issues | The Court held a respondent has the statutory right to demand a jury trial; section 8(g) incorporates civil procedure and Rule 38(b), so any party may demand a jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Kiser v. Kiser, 325 N.C. 502 (1989) (describes that jury trial rights exist only by constitution or statute)
- In re Foreclosure of Vogler Realty, Inc., 365 N.C. 389 (2012) (establishes de novo review and standards for statutory interpretation)
- State v. Jones, 305 N.C. 520 (1982) (rules for reading statutes in context and giving words their ordinary meaning)