one whose state constitutional rights have been abridged has a direct claim against the State under our Constitution.”), cert. denied sub nom. Durham v. Corum, 506 U.S. 985, 121 L. Ed. 2d 431, 113 S. Ct. 493 (1992). The trial court pointed to a student’s right to appeal a suspension under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-391(e) (2007). Essentially, plaintiff’s claim is that she must be provided with alternative education opportunities even if she is removed from her high school as a result of a long-term suspension. I agree with the majority opinion that an administrative appeal of her long-term suspension would not provide plaintiff with an opportunity to present this claim or obtain the desired relief. See Craig v. New Hanover County Bd. of Educ., 363 N.C. 334, 340, 678 S.E.2d 351, 355 (2009) (<HOLDING>). Just as the majority opinion concludes that
holding that adequate alternative state remedy must provide the possibility of relief under the circumstances holding a claim for money damages is an adequate remedy at law and so it does not provide a sufficient basis for injunctive relief notwithstanding the possibility that a money judgment will be uncollectible recognizing that in some circumstances an afterthefact remedy under state law may be adequate holding that the state has no obligation to provide adequate housing holding that liquidated damages provision did not provide adequate remedy at law or prevent injunctive relief