Alamance County Court Facilities, Matter of, No. 191A89

• Decision Date: 12 June 1991
• Docket Number: No. 191A89
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: . Supreme Court of North Carolina

Page 125

405 S.E.2d 125

329 N.C. 84

In the Matter of the ALAMANCE COUNTY COURT FACILITIES.

No. 191A89.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 12, 1991.

On certiorari pursuant to N.C.R.App.P. 21, to review the 5 May 1989 order entered by Hight, J., at the 24-25 April Civil Session of Alamance County, the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division. Heard in the Supreme Court 11 December 1989.

S.C. Kitchen, Alamance County Atty., Graham, for petitioner-appellants.

Lacy H. Thornburg, Atty. Gen. by Henry T. Rosser, Sp. Deputy Atty. Gen., Raleigh, for the State, respondent-appellee.

EXUM, Chief Justice.

Initiated by a hearing ordered by a superior court judge to inquire into the adequacy of the Alamance County court facilities, this case probes the scope of the court's inherent power to direct county commissioners to ameliorate such facilities and the proper means of effecting that end. We hold that such power exists, but that the order invoking it here is procedurally and substantively flawed: the commissioners against whom the order was directed were not made parties to the action, the order was ex parte, and it intruded on discretion that properly belonged to the commissioners.

I.

On 2 March 1989, the Honorable Henry W. Hight, Jr., Superior Court Judge Presiding in the County of Alamance, issued an order directing the Grand Jury to inspect the Alamance County jail and court facilities. The Grand Jury responded with a report finding numerous courthouse and jail defects and recommending that the 1924 courthouse be remodeled and converted to other uses, that a new courthouse be built, and that an existing courthouse annex be renovated and jail space expanded.

On 17 March 1989, Judge Hight issued an order reiterating the Grand Jury's conclusions and scheduling a hearing for 24 April 1989 "to make inquiry as to the adequacy of the Court facilities" in Alamance County. The judge appointed an attorney to represent the court and to present evidence at the hearing. The sheriff was directed to serve the five members of the Alamance County Board of County Commissioners with copies of the order and notice of the hearing. The notice informed the commissioners of their entitlement to be present, along with their attorneys, and to offer evidence or contentions regarding the adequacy of court facilities "to provide for the proper administration of justice in Alamance County."

Four commissioners filed motions to dismiss for insufficiency of process, for failure to join a necessary party and to name a real party in interest, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; a motion for recusal; and a demand for a jury trial. In an order filed 4 April 1989, Judge Hight struck these motions, stating that the movants were not parties to the action and thus were without standing.

Notice of the hearing was succeeded by subpoenas issued by Judge Hight to each of the five commissioners before the hearing, ordering that they appear and testify on 24 April 1989.

Following the hearing, at which the commissioners were present but did not participate, Judge Hight issued an order based upon copious findings of fact enumerating the inadequacies of the physical facilities provided by Alamance County to the court system. The findings included citation to the statutory duties of the Clerk of Court to secure and preserve court documents, N.C.G.S. § 7A-109(a)(3), to statutory provisions requiring secrecy of grand jury proceedings, N.C.G.S. § 15A-623(e), to statutory requisites that counties in which a district court has been established provide courtrooms and judicial facilities, N.C.G.S. § 7A-302, and to the open courts provision, Art. I, § 18 of the North Carolina Constitution--all of which were potentially violated by the condition of pertinent facilities in Alamance County. In addition, the findings stated that the right to a jury trial assured in Article I, §§ 24 and 25 of the N.C. Constitution was jeopardized where jury and grand jury deliberations were not dependably private and secure and that litigants' due process rights were similarly at risk for lack of areas where they could confer confidentially with their attorneys. The findings included an assessment of the volume and increase of court business over more than a decade; an accounting of total county revenues and fund balance at the close of the 1987-88 fiscal year, plus undesignated unreserved funds remaining in the fund as of April 1989; and stated minimum square footage requisites for Alamance County's various judicial facilities.

Finally, the findings stated that the failure of the county to provide adequate court facilities violated the constitutional limitation under Article IV, § 1, that the General Assembly "(and Alamance County as part of the State government which has been delegated the responsibility to provide court facilities)" was powerless to deprive the judicial department of any power or jurisdiction rightfully pertaining to it as a coordinate department of government.

The order asserted that the court's jurisdiction over the question of adequate court facilities was authorized not only in Article IV, § 12 of the N.C. Constitution, but through its inherent power "necessary for the existence of the Court, necessary to the orderly and efficient exercise of its jurisdiction, and necessary for this Court to do justice."

Based upon its findings of fact, the order concluded that the courtrooms and related judicial offices for Alamance County were "grossly inadequate, being in the large either obsolete, poorly designed, or nonexistent." The effects of such inadequacies included denying access to the handicapped and physically disabled, thwarting the effective assistance of counsel to litigants in violation of the law of the land, jeopardizing the right to trial by jury in civil and criminal cases, and causing delays in the prosecution and defense of civil cases. In addition, the lack of detention rooms constituted a clear and present danger to persons present at criminal judicial proceedings as well as to the public at large.

The order also resolved that the county was financially able to provide adequate judicial facilities and that it was the duty of the county acting through its commissioners to make these provisions.

The order's conclusions were followed by a "Recommendation" which took particular notice of the fact of "undesignated unreserved funds of $15,655,778.00 as of June 30, 1988," with which the commissioners could begin construction of a new courthouse. This recommendation recognized, however, that "[t]he decision of whether or not to construct a new Courthouse, as opposed to providing the courtrooms and related judicial facilities as required by law, is within the sound discretion of the County Commissioners."

Despite the precatory nature of its recommendations, the order culminated with the directive that the county, acting through its commissioners, immediately take steps to provide adequate facilities, first by providing adjacent additional facilities, for which minimum square footage was stated, and, second, by modifying the existing courthouse and annex for access to the handicapped. The order specified, inter alia,

2. That as a minimum, in addition to the present facilities in Alamance County, Alamance County must provide in close proximity to and adjacent to the present facilities the following:

(a) One (1) Superior Court Courtroom of 1600 square feet, minimum, with two restrooms of 35 square feet, minimum;

(b) One (1) Superior Court Jury Deliberation Room of 300 square feet, minimum;

(c) One (1) Superior Court Court Reporter Room of 80 square feet, minimum;

(d) One (1) Superior Court Judge's Chambers, consisting of conference area of 160 square feet, minimum, and toilet of 40 square feet, minimum;

(e) One (1) Superior Court Detention Room of 140 square feet, minimum;

(f) Two (2) Superior Court Attorney-Client Rooms of 100 square feet each, minimum;

(g) One (1) Grand Jury Hearing Room of 450 square feet, minimum;

(h) One (1) Jury Pool Room of 1,000 square feet, minimum;

(i) One (1) public waiting room of 800 square feet, minimum;

(j) One (1) District Court Courtroom of 1300 square feet, minimum;

(k) One (1) District Court Jury Deliberation Room of 330 square feet, minimum, with two rest rooms of 35 square feet each, minimum;

(l ) One (1) District Court Reporter Room of 80 square feet, minimum;

(m) One (1) District Court Judge's Chambers, consisting of conference area of 160 square feet, minimum, and toilet of 40 square feet, minimum;

(n) One (1) District Court Detention Room of 140 square feet, minimum;

(o) Two (2) District Court Attorney-Client Rooms of 100 square feet each, minimum;

(p) Hearing Room of 600 square feet, minimum, and anteroom of 175 square feet, minimum;

(q) Such additional space for the Clerk of Superior Court as is necessary to bring the total office space up to 6,840 square feet, minimum and located such that security of records can be provided;

(r) Adequate furniture for the appropriate use of the above.

3. That Alamance County acting by and through the Board of Commissioners for Alamance County must modify the existing Courthouse and Courthouse Annex facilities in order that the handicapped and physically disadvantaged have free and open access to court proceedings and the Clerk of Court's office.

The order required the Board of County Commissioners to file written response within thirty days, setting forth the actions the county intended to take in compliance with its mandate.

On 11 May 1989 this Court issued writs of supersedeas and certiorari upon petition by the members of the Board of Commissioners for Alamance County. We review the order in the exercise of our general supervisory authority over the proceedings of the superior courts. N.C. Const. art. IV, § 12.

In their briefs appellants raise issues regarding the jurisdiction and the power of the trial court to initiate this...