{
  "id": 11793878,
  "name": "PEARLY VEREEN, Plaintiff v. KELLY HOLDEN, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DONALD SHAW, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; JERRY JONES, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; WAYLAND VEREEN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DON WARREN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; TOM RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; GENE PINKERTON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; FRANKIE RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DAVID CLEGG, Individually and In his official capacity as Interim Manager; and BRUNSWICK COUNTY, Defendants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Vereen v. Holden",
  "decision_date": "1997-08-05",
  "docket_number": "No. COA94-1150",
  "first_page": "205",
  "last_page": "207",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "127 N.C. App. 205"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "480 S.E.2d 685",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1997,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "345 N.C. 443",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        54084
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1997,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/345/0443-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "477 S.E.2d 171",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "344 N.C. 729",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        867594
      ],
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/344/0729-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "466 S.E.2d 281",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1996,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "283"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "121 N.C. App. 466",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11917864
      ],
      "year": 1996,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "468"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/121/0466-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "468 S.E.2d 471",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "121 N.C. App. 779",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11920344
      ],
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/121/0779-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "480 S.E.2d 685",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1997,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "687-88"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "345 N.C. 443",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        54084
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1997,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "447"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/345/0443-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 276,
    "char_count": 4478,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.762,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.516292008609782e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8110567450071413
    },
    "sha256": "92f9ccbf7bd228a1981ac8a298a3a53f8a853f635606abce5fdaabb3d98ba45d",
    "simhash": "1:0748d5263cfa3e40",
    "word_count": 718
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:16.540119+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges EAGLES and JOHN concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "PEARLY VEREEN, Plaintiff v. KELLY HOLDEN, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DONALD SHAW, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; JERRY JONES, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; WAYLAND VEREEN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DON WARREN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; TOM RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; GENE PINKERTON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; FRANKIE RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DAVID CLEGG, Individually and In his official capacity as Interim Manager; and BRUNSWICK COUNTY, Defendants"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "LEWIS, Judge.\nThe Supreme Court has remanded this matter to us for consideration of one issue: whether our decision that judgment on the pleadings was improper on plaintiff\u2019s procedural due process claim is correct in light of its decision in Soles v. City of Raleigh Civil Service Comm., 345 N.C. 443, 480 S.E.2d 685 (1997). We do not set forth the facts of this case as they are reported in our earlier decision, Vereen v. Holden, 121 N.C. App. 779, 468 S.E.2d 471 (1996).\nInitially, we recognize the standard in cases involving judgments on the pleadings: the movant must show that there is no material issue of fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Hedrick v. Rains, 121 N.C. App. 466, 468, 466 S.E.2d 281, 283, aff\u2019d per curiam, 344 N.C. 729, 477 S.E.2d 171 (1996). Therefore, if any issues of material fact remain despite the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Soles, our initial decision must stand.\nIn Soles, the Supreme Court ruled that absent incorporation into an employment contract, a city\u2019s personnel policy does not bestow a property interest in continued employment unless it is passed by legislative adoption. Soles, 345 N.C. at 447, 480 S.E.2d at 687-88. In that case, since the policy was not a city ordinance passed into law, the petitioner had no constitutionally protected property interest. Id.\nThe present case is factually dissimilar. The policy at issue here was passed at a meeting of the Brunswick County Board of Commissioners and was designated an \u201cordinance.\u201d We find no merit in defendants\u2019 suggestion that we look beyond the legislative enactment and label \u201cordinance\u201d to find that, in substance, the policy was not an ordinance. Clearly, the dispositive factor considered by the Soles Court was whether the personnel policy was adopted as law or something less by a legislative body. Here, the record clearly suggests enactment as an ordinance, therefore law. Nevertheless, the record does not state in detail whether or not the statutory procedures for the adoption of an ordinance were followed completely. See N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7\u00a7 153A-45, 48 (1991). If plaintiff cannot show compliance with the statutes, the policy cannot be considered an ordinance.\nAt this stage in the proceedings, we hold that it is too early to rule as a matter of law that the personnel policy did not confer a property interest on plaintiff. Given that some issues of material fact remain, this portion of the case must be allowed to proceed.\nFor the foregoing reasons, we conclude that our initial decision is unchanged in light of Soles. We therefore reverse the trial court\u2019s grant of judgment on the pleadings on plaintiffs procedural due process claim.\nReversed.\nJudges EAGLES and JOHN concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "LEWIS, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Sheila K. McLamb and Laura E. Thompson for plaintiff-appellant.",
      "Faison & Gillespie, by Reginald B. Gillespie, Jr., Michael R. Ortiz and Keith D. Bums, for defendants-appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "PEARLY VEREEN, Plaintiff v. KELLY HOLDEN, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DONALD SHAW, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; JERRY JONES, Individually and In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; WAYLAND VEREEN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DON WARREN, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; TOM RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; GENE PINKERTON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; FRANKIE RABON, In his official capacity as Brunswick County Commissioner; DAVID CLEGG, Individually and In his official capacity as Interim Manager; and BRUNSWICK COUNTY, Defendants\nNo. COA94-1150\n(Filed 5 August 1997)\nLabor and Employment \u00a7 69 (NCI4th)\u2014 ordinance \u2014 property interest \u2014 procedural due process \u2014 issue of fact \u2014 judgment on the pleadings\nOn remand from the Supreme Court in light of Soles v. City of Raleigh Civil Service Comm., 345 N.C. 443, 480 S.E.2d 685 (1997), the prior Court of Appeals decision that the trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings for defendant on plaintiff\u2019s procedural due process employment claim is unchanged since, unlike Soles, there was a material issue of fact as to whether the policy in question was an ordinance and conferred a property interest in plaintiffs continued employment.\nOn remand from the Supreme Court in light of its decision in Soles v. City of Raleigh Civil Service Comm., 345 N.C. 443, 480 S.E.2d 685 (1997).\nSheila K. McLamb and Laura E. Thompson for plaintiff-appellant.\nFaison & Gillespie, by Reginald B. Gillespie, Jr., Michael R. Ortiz and Keith D. Bums, for defendants-appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0205-01",
  "first_page_order": 241,
  "last_page_order": 243
}