# Steward v. Green

> Court of Appeals of North Carolina · March 4, 2008 · 189 N.C. App. 131

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9607742

## Case

- **Full name:** ANGELA D. STEWARD, Plaintiff v. MERLE C. GREEN, in Her Official Capacity as Director of the Guilford County Department of Public Health, THE BOARD OF THE GUILFORD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH, GUILFORD COUNTY, THOMAS H. WRIGHT, in His Official Capacity as Director of the Office of State Personnel and the STATE PERSONNEL COMMISSION, Defendants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of North Carolina
- **Decided:** March 4, 2008
- **Citations:** 189 N.C. App. 131; 657 S.E.2d 719; 2008 N.C. App. LEXIS 423
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Jackson
- **Judges:** Arrowood, Jackson, Tyson
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9607742

## Opinion text

Judge JACKSON
concurs in result only with separate opinion.
Although I concur with the result reached by the majority opinion, I write separately as I believe we should not address the merits of plaintiffs appeal.
Our “review is solely upon the record on appeal, the verbatim transcript of proceedings, . . . and any items filed with the record on appeal pursuant to Rule 9(c) and 9(d).” N.C. R. App. P. 9(a) (2007). “It is the duty of the appellant to ensure that the record is complete. ‘An appellate court is not required to, and should not, assume error by the trial judge when none appears on the record before the appellate court.’ ” Hicks v. Alford, 156 N.C. App. 384, 389-90 , 576 S.E.2d 410, 414 (2003) (internal citations omitted) (quoting State v. Williams, 274 N.C. 328, 333 , 163 S.E.2d 353, 357 (1968)).
Here, the record before this Court only includes Guilford County Personnel Regulations 1, 2, and 28. Regulation 28, governing “Disciplinary Action,” states in Subsection H that for complaints or grievances unrelated to pending disciplinary actions, employees should refer to and follow Regulation 31 governing “Grievance/ Complaint Resolution.” Plaintiff’s complaint or grievance is unrelated to a pending disciplinary action as her dismissal necessarily was a fait accompli at the time she filed this action. Regulation 31 appears to be controlling in this matter; however, we have no way to ascertain the scope of Regulation 31 as it is not a part of the record on appeal. Because the record does not include this regulation, we cannot, and should not, assess the merits of plaintiff’s arguments. Therefore, I must concur only in the result reached by the majority opinion. •

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9607742. Public record. Not legal advice.