Appeals Court rules for Wake sheriff in dispute involving Corum claim

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of Wake County Sheriff Willie Rowe in a case that involved the rules surrounding state Corum claims.

Appellate judges agreed Wednesday that plaintiff Vicki Britt should have brought her Corum claim when she originally filed suit against then-Sheriff Gerard Baker in 2021.

A Corum claim is a type of lawsuit in North Carolina courts that allows a person to seek an injunction or monetary damages based on violations of state constitutional rights.

Britt, a master deputy sheriff, had worked for the Wake County sheriff’s office for 14 years when she announced in July 2020 that she planned to retire on Dec. 1 that year, according to the Appeals Court opinion.

On Nov. 25, 2020, Britt sent an email to sheriff’s employees “expressing her gratitude for the opportunity to have worked with everyone and ‘stating there are good times to come,’” according to the court opinion.

Britt’s lawsuit contended that the statement addressed the “recent and ongoing plight” of law enforcement officers after George Floyd’s death and the COVID pandemic.

Baker had lost to Rowe in July 2020 in a Democratic primary runoff election. Rowe won the general election in November to become the new Wake County sheriff.

“According to Plaintiff, then-Sheriff Baker took offense to this email and took adverse actions towards Plaintiff, removing her from her scheduled overtime and off-duty assignments during her last week of service without any ‘given rationale,’” Judge Julee Flood wrote. “Plaintiff further alleged that Sheriff Baker asked that Plaintiff return her patrol vehicle and equipment early and that she was ‘excluded from a customary retiree honors ceremony with Sheriff Baker.’”

Britt sued Baker individually and the sheriff officially in June 2021. The complaint alleged that Baker “had discriminated and retaliated against her in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.” Baker had the case moved to federal court, where it was dismissed.

A second suit followed in September 2023. Britt sued the Wake sheriff’s office and Rowe in his official capacity. “Plaintiff brought two Corum claims — a violation of Section 1, Article 1 of the North Carolina Constitution, and a violation of Section 1, Article 19 of the North Carolina Constitution — and a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress,” Flood explained.

A trial judge dismissed the second suit based on “res judicata.” That’s the legal principle that a party cannot relitigate a claim that already has been resolved by a final court judgment.

“Plaintiff contends ‘res judicata cannot be applied to [the] Corum claims in this manner’ as this undermines the very purpose of a Corum claim, which Plaintiff asserts is ‘to be brought only in the alternative, after no other adequate remedy is available.’ We disagree,” Flood wrote.

“Here, Plaintiff’s Corum claims and IIED claim could have been ‘litigated and determined in the former action’ as these claims are formed from the very same factual allegations asserted in the First Action and were mostly stated verbatim,” Flood explained.

Britt “argues ‘[a] Corum claim is not a claim that should be tacked on to other causes of action. … Rather, it is available only when no other adequate remedy exists to redress the harm suffered by the plaintiff[,]’ and ‘[b]ecause a Corum claim represents an extraordinary exercise of constitutional power, it should be invoked solely in those limited circumstances where no alternative remedy is available,’” the Appeals Court opinion explained. “Plaintiff contends that, had she ‘attempted to assert a Corum claim in the prior federal action, Defendants would almost certainly have argued that Title VII provided an adequate alternative remedy, warranting dismissal of the Corum claim at the outset.’”

“Our courts, however, have recognized that Corum claims may be raised alongside other claims,” Flood wrote.

A state Supreme Court precedent, Craig v. New Hanover County Board of Education, “illustrates that even if a conventional claim is barred, a Corum claim in the same action may still survive,” Flood added. “Our Supreme Court’s intent is not that a Corum claim be brought as a collateral revival of a conventional claim that has already failed — not as an exception to the doctrine of res judicata — but as an alternative theory to the conventional claim in the same action.”

“Although Plaintiff sought to bring these Corum claims as a new legal ground for relief after losing her Title VII claim, her Corum claims could have been ‘litigated and determined in the former action,’ as they are formed from the very same factual allegations from the First Action filed in North Carolina state courts,” Flood explained. “We therefore conclude the trial court properly dismissed Plaintiff’s Second Action on the grounds of res judicata.”

Judges John Arrowood and Toby Hampson joined Flood’s decision.

“Appeals Court rules for Wake sheriff in dispute involving Corum claim” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.