## Facts

- Kevin J. Tully, a Wilmington police corporal, sought promotion to sergeant through a multi-phase process requiring a written examination governed by the department’s Policy Manual.
- The Policy Manual set uniform promotion standards and stated candidates could appeal any portion of the selection process they believed was administered unfairly through the City’s grievance procedures.
- Tully failed the written exam and alleged the official answers relied on outdated law while his answers reflected current law.
- Tully filed a grievance challenging the exam answers and requested review under the stated appeal process.
- The City Manager informed Tully that the test answers were “not a grievable item,” effectively barring any appeal.
- Tully sued alleging the City’s refusal to follow its written policies arbitrarily interfered with his right to enjoy the fruits of his labor under Article I, Section 1 of the North Carolina Constitution, and also violated Article I, Section 19.

## Issues

1. Whether a municipal employee states a claim under Article I, Section 1 when the employer, contrary to its own binding promotion and grievance policies, refuses to consider an appeal challenging an examination required for promotion.
2. Whether the same alleged conduct states a claim under Article I, Section 19 (law of the land/due process and equal protection), despite the general rule that public employees lack a protected property interest in promotion.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Court of Appeals and remanded.
- The court held Tully adequately pleaded an Article I, Section 1 claim by alleging the City arbitrarily and irrationally refused to follow its own established appeal and grievance procedures in the promotion process.
- The court held Tully failed to state an Article I, Section 19 claim because he lacked a protected property interest in promotion and his allegations did not otherwise establish a law-of-the-land violation.

## Legal Principles

- Article I, Section 1 protects the right to earn a livelihood and pursue one’s chosen profession free from arbitrary or irrational governmental interference.
- A public employer’s alleged refusal to follow its own written, binding promotion and grievance rules may constitute arbitrary governmental interference sufficient to state an Article I, Section 1 claim at the pleadings stage.
- Article I, Section 19 due process protections generally require a protected liberty or property interest; a public employee ordinarily has no property interest in promotion absent a specific entitlement.
- Conduct that may be actionable under Article I, Section 1 does not necessarily establish a due process or equal protection claim under Article I, Section 19.

## Conclusion

The court allowed the fruits-of-labor claim to proceed where the City allegedly blocked an appeal promised by its own promotion policies, but dismissed the law-of-the-land claim because the employee lacked a protected property interest in promotion.


Tully v. City of Wilmington, 370 N.C. 527, 810 S.E.2d 208 (2018)