Hardy v. Beaufort Cty. Bd. of Educ.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 481A09 FILED: 8 OCTOBER 2010 JESSICA HARDY, a minor, by and through her parent, GAIL HARDY v. BEAUFORT COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION; JEFFREY MOSS, Superintendent, Beaufort County Schools, in his official capacity Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. ยง 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 685 S.E.2d 550 (2009), affirming an order entered 16 May 2008 by Judge William C. Griffin, Jr. in Superior Court, Beaufort County. Heard in the Supreme Court 22 March 2010. Children s Law Clinic, Duke Law School, by Jane Wettach; and Advocates for Children s Services, Legal Aid of North Carolina, Inc., by Erwin Byrd and Lewis Pitts, for plaintiff-appellant. Tharrington Smith, L.L.P., by Curtis H. ( Trey ) Allen III, for defendant-appellee Beaufort County Board of Education. Jack Holtzman for North Carolina Justice Center; Concerned Citizens for the Betterment of Beaufort County Schools; Parents Supporting Parents; Tamar Birckhead; Southern Coalition for Social Justice; Center for Death Penalty Litigation, Inc.; Office of the Juvenile Defender; North Carolina Black Leadership Caucus; and NC Conference of NAACP Branches, amici curiae. Campbell Shatley, PLLC, by Christopher Z. Campbell; and Allison B. Schafer, General Counsel, for North Carolina School Boards Association, amicus curiae. PER CURIAM. For the reasons stated in King v. Beaufort Cty. Bd. of Educ., ___ N.C. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (Oct. 8, 2010) (No. 480A09), the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and this case -2is remanded to that court for further remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with King. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Justices TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUDSON concur in part and dissent in part for the reasons stated in Justice TIMMONSGOODSON s concurring and dissenting opinion in King v. Beaufort Cty. Bd. of Educ., ___ N.C. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (Oct. 8, 2010) (No. 480A09). Justice NEWBY dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in King.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
