The City of Asheville v. FrostÂ, 253 N.C. App. 258

Officer Robert H. Frost, an Asheville police officer, was terminated after an excessive-force incident on Feb. 2, 2014; the Asheville Civil Service Board found the termination improper and ordered reinstatement with back pay.
Both the City of Asheville and Frost appealed the Board’s decision to Buncombe County Superior Court by filing petitions for a trial de novo in October 2014; Frost’s petition expressly requested a jury trial under the Asheville Civil Service Law § 7(g).
The City moved to strike Frost’s jury demand, arguing the session law allows only the petitioner to request a jury; the trial court denied the City’s motion, reasoning the statute’s direction that the matter proceed “as any other civil action” incorporated Rule 38’s right allowing any party to demand a jury.
The City appealed the trial court’s interlocutory order denying its motion to strike the jury demand; this Court treated the denial as appealable because orders denying jury-trial motions affect a substantial right.
The Court of Appeals reviewed statutory interpretation de novo and determined the 2009 amendment to Asheville’s Civil Service Law specifically grants the right to request a jury trial to the petitioner only, controlling over the general Rule 38 right of any party.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a respondent (non-petitioner) may demand a jury trial in a de novo appeal from the Asheville Civil Service Board	City: Session Law 2009-401 grants only the petitioner the right to request a jury trial	Frost: The statute’s phrase “proceed to trial as any other civil action” imports Rule 38, so any party may demand a jury	The statute’s specific grant to the petitioner controls; only the petitioner may request a jury trial (reversed trial court)
Whether the trial court’s denial of the City’s motion to strike is immediately appealable	City: Denial affects a substantial right and is appealable	Frost: (implicitly) order should stand; procedural	Denial of a jury-trial motion is appealable; Court reviews and decides the statutory issue on appeal

Faircloth v. Beard, 320 N.C. 505 (1987) (order denying jury trial is appealable)
Kiser v. Kiser, 325 N.C. 502 (1989) (statutory or constitutional text required to create a civil jury right)
Westminster Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 354 N.C. 298 (2001) (specific statutory provision controls over general provisions)
Quality Built Homes Inc. v. Town of Carthage, 369 N.C. 15 (2016) (clear enabling statute must be enforced as written)
Veazey v. Durham, 231 N.C. 357 (1950) (definition and appealability principles for interlocutory orders)