But let me explain something to you. Judge Hargrove has been on the bench for 23 years. I've been practicing in this jurisdiction for 15. We have a relationship.
We understand each other. We know how to make the system work efficiently. Efficiently for whom? For everyone, but especially for people who know how to work within the system instead of fighting against it.
He straightened. You're a bright student, good instincts, solid research skills, but you're young and you don't understand how quickly you can burn bridges in a small legal community like this. Are you threatening me, Mr. Chandler? I'm offering friendly advice.
This case, Hughes v. Greenfield Properties, it's not the hill you want to die on. Your client is 3 months behind on rent. The landlord has a legitimate business interest in removing a non-paying tenant. You can dress it up with statutory arguments all you want, but at the end of the day, she owes money she can't pay.
Fighting that isn't going to help her. It's just going to make enemies for you. Camille zipped her binder closed, stood to face him directly. Mr. Chandler, my client has rights under North Carolina law.
Those rights don't disappear because she can't afford her rent. The statute requires 30 days notice. The landlord provided three. That's a violation, and I'm going to keep fighting until either the law is enforced or I exhaust every possible appeal.
Elliot's smile faded. Then you're going to learn a hard lesson about what happens when idealism meets reality. He walked away. Camille watched him go, then pulled out her phone and added to her notes.
Post-hearing conversation with Elliot Chandler. Suggested I'm making enemies. Implied system works better for those who don't challenge it. Warned me I'm burning bridges.
Possible intimidation attempt. She saved the note and left the courtroom.
The clerk's office was busy when Camille arrived 15 minutes later. Lunch hour rush. People filing documents, requesting copies, asking questions. The line snaked back from the counter almost to the door.
Camille got in line, waited, watched the clerk's work. Sharon Puit was at the far end of the counter processing a stack of files. When she glanced up and saw Camille in line, her expressions soured. 20 minutes later, Camille reached the counter.
Different clerk this time, younger man, early 30s. Name tag read Mitchell Foster. I need to file a notice of appeal and motion for stay. Mitchell took the documents, scanned the first page.
These are for Judge Hargrove's case this morning. Yes. He just ruled on this an hour ago. Yes, and I'm exercising my right to immediate appeal under Rule 2.
Mitchell looked uncertain, glanced toward the back of the office where Sharon was working. I'll need to check if Mitchell. Sharon appeared from the back office, saw Camille, her jaw tightened. You again?
I'm filing a notice of appeal and motion for stay. Sharon took the documents from Mitchell, flipped through them slowly, reading each page. 30 seconds, 45, a full minute. The people behind Camille in line shifted impatiently.
Sharon set the documents on the counter. These need to be reviewed before acceptance. Rule three of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure states that the clerk shall accept all notices of appeal. There's no discretionary review process.
The clerk's duty is ministerial. Are you telling me how to do my job again? I'm citing the rule. Sharon's voice rose slightly.
Mitchell, get the supervisor. Mitchell hesitated, looked at Camille, looked at Sharon, then disappeared into the back office. 3 minutes passed. The line behind Camille grew longer.
People muttered. Someone said, "Can we get another clerk over here?" Finally, a man in a tie emerged from the back. 50some years old, graying hair, reading glasses on a chain, name tag.
Robert Hayes, clerk supervisor. What's the issue? Sharon gestured at the documents. This person is trying to file an appeal without proper authorization.
Claims we have to accept it without review. Hayes picked up the notice of appeal, read the caption, glanced at the motion for stay, set them down. Looks standard. What's the problem?
She's claiming Rule 3 requires immediate acceptance. It does. Hayes looked at Sharon. That's literally what rule 3 says.
The clerk shall accept notices of appeal, not may. Shall. Sharon's face flushed. But we need to verify.
There's nothing to verify. It's a notice of appeal. You stamp it, log it, and move on. Hayes turned to Camille.
I apologize for the delay. These should have been accepted immediately. He took the documents, stamped them himself, the sound sharp in the busy office, and handed them back to Camille. Your copies original goes in the file.
Court of Appeals will receive notice within 24 hours. Thank you. Sharon had turned away, her back rigid with anger.
Outside, Camille called Professor Washington. I filed the appeal and got the stay. Tell me about the hearing. She walked him through it.
Judge Hargrove's dismissive comments about her experience, Elliot's motion to dismiss over service, her citation of Brown v. Kenir, the continued hearing date after the eviction, her request for findings that was denied, the immediate appeal that forced Hargrove to grant the stay. Professor Washington listened without interrupting. When she finished, he was quiet for a moment. You made an enemy today.
I know. Judge Hargrove doesn't like being challenged in his courtroom. And he especially doesn't like being forced to grant stays because someone threatens to appeal. He forced my hand by scheduling the hearing after the eviction.
I know. And you did exactly the right thing legally. But Camille, you need to understand this is going to have consequences. Hargrove talks to other judges.
Elliot talks to other city attorneys. Word gets around in the legal community that you're difficult, that you don't play by the unwritten rules. I'm okay with that. Are you?