Case Title: State v. Phillips

Citation: 

Docket Number: 531PA13

State: north-carolina

Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

Date: 2014-12-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute 
controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance 
with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
 
 
NO. COA13-223 
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS 
Filed:  5 November 2013 
 
 
 
IN RE: JERRY’S SHELL, LLC 
NC DMV ACTION NO. 27867  
 
 
 
 
 
Rowan County 
No. 12 CVS 660 
 
 
 
 
 
Appeal by petitioner from order entered 19 November 2012 by 
Judge Richard L. Doughton in Rowan County Superior Court.  Heard 
in the Court of Appeals 15 August 2013. 
 
Ralph E. Stevenson, III, for petitioner. 
 
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Christopher W. Brooks, 
Assistant Attorney General, for respondent. 
 
 
DAVIS, Judge. 
 
 
Petitioner Jerry’s Shell, LLC (“Jerry’s Shell”) appeals 
from the trial court’s order affirming the final agency decision 
of the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles (the “DMV”) 
suspending its emissions inspection station license for a period 
of ninety days and imposing a civil penalty assessment of $250.  
The primary issue raised on appeal is whether a limited 
-2- 
 
liability company must be represented by legal counsel in 
hearings before the DMV.  Because we hold that such companies 
cannot appear pro se in DMV hearings, we reverse the trial 
court’s order and remand. 
Factual Background 
 
On 6 October 2011, Inspector George Bryan Hunt (“Inspector 
Hunt”) of the License and Theft Bureau of the DMV was assigned 
to conduct a covert audit of Jerry’s Shell.  He disabled the 
Malfunction Indicator Light (“MIL”) bulb on a 2003 Dodge Caravan 
and then presented the vehicle for a safety inspection at 
Jerry’s Shell.  Inspector Hunt observed Donald St. Charles (“St. 
Charles”), a licensed mechanic who was authorized to perform 
state emissions and safety inspections, take the car keys and 
begin the inspection.  St. Charles returned the car after he 
completed the inspection and informed Inspector Hunt that the 
vehicle had passed the inspection.  Inspector Hunt was given a 
“Receipt/Statement” that indicated the MIL bulb was functional 
and had received a “Pass.”  Inspector Hunt examined the Dodge 
Caravan immediately after St. Charles returned the vehicle and 
determined that the MIL bulb was still nonfunctional. 
 
Based on this audit, Inspector Hunt served Jerry’s Shell 
with a Notice of Charge alleging that it had violated N.C. Gen. 
Stat. § 20-183.8C(d) by “issu[ing] an emissions electronic 
inspection authorization to a vehicle after performing an 
-3- 
 
emission inspection with the MIL . . . bulb functioning 
improperly or MIL bulb remaining on.”  St. Charles was also 
charged criminally for a violation of vehicle inspection law. 
 
Todd Alligood (“Alligood”), the owner and operator of 
Jerry’s Shell, requested an administrative hearing before the 
DMV upon receipt of the Notice of Charge.  A hearing was held on 
22 November 2011.  Jerry’s Shell was not represented by an 
attorney at this hearing.  Instead, Alligood appeared on Jerry’s 
Shell’s behalf, and the hearing officer allowed him to represent 
Jerry’s Shell on a pro se basis. 
On 10 January 2012, Hearing Officer A. G. Cody entered an 
Official Hearing Decision and Order determining that Jerry’s 
Shell had committed a Type II violation and had committed two 
other Type II violations within the past three years.  The order 
directed that Jerry’s Shell’s emissions inspection license be 
suspended for 90 days and imposed a civil penalty assessment of 
$250. 
Jerry’s Shell requested review by the Commissioner of the 
DMV.  The Commissioner subsequently issued a final agency 
decision affirming the decision of the hearing officer.  Jerry’s 
Shell sought judicial review of the final agency decision in 
Rowan County Superior Court pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-
183.8G(g) and Article 4 of Chapter 150B.  The trial court 
entered an order 19 November 2012 affirming the final agency 
-4- 
 
decision.  Jerry’s Shell filed a timely appeal to this Court. 
Analysis 
 
The primary contention by Jerry’s Shell on appeal is that 
the trial court erred in allowing Alligood to represent it at 
the DMV hearing because Alligood is not a licensed attorney and 
a limited liability company is precluded under North Carolina 
law from appearing pro se in a DMV hearing.  For the reasons set 
forth by this Court in In re Twin County Motorsports, No. COA13-
21, ___ N.C. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (filed Nov. 5, 2013), we 
agree and reverse the order of the trial court. 
 
Twin 
County 
Motorsports 
raised 
the 
identical 
issue 
presented here — that is, whether a corporate entity must be 
represented by legal counsel in hearings before the DMV.  In our 
decision in that case, we determined that corporations cannot 
appear pro se in DMV hearings based on this Court’s decision in 
Lexis-Nexis, Div. of Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Travishan Corp., 155 
N.C. App. 205, 573 S.E.2d 547 (2002).1 
                     
1 The rule articulated in Lexis-Nexis requiring corporations to 
be represented by legal counsel has been applied to limited 
liability companies as well.  See Bodie Island Beach Club Ass’n, 
Inc. v. Wray, ___ N.C. App. ___, ___, 716 S.E.2d 67, 74 (2011) 
(holding that trial court properly denied defendant limited 
liability company’s motion for leave to amend answer because Dr. 
Smith, a non-attorney, could not file answer on behalf of 
defendant SRS North Carolina Properties, LLC).  Therefore, our 
analysis in Twin County Motorsports — which was based on Lexis-
Nexis — applies equally to both corporations and limited 
liability companies who are parties in DMV hearings. 
  
-5- 
 
Consequently, North Carolina law did not permit Alligood to 
appear on behalf of Jerry’s Shell at the hearing before the DMV 
hearing officer.  For this reason, we reverse the trial court’s 
decision and remand for further proceedings.2 
Conclusion  
For the reasons stated above, we reverse the trial court’s 
order affirming the final agency decision and remand to the 
trial court for further remand to the DMV to conduct a new 
hearing where Jerry’s Shell shall be represented by legal 
counsel. 
REVERSED AND REMANDED. 
Judges CALABRIA and STROUD concur. 
Report per Rule 30(e). 
 
                     
2 Because we are reversing and remanding for a new hearing, we 
decline to address Jerry’s Shell’s remaining arguments regarding 
the merits of the agency’s decision.