petition for writ of certiorari, the superior court was sitting as a court of appellate review[.]” Batch v. Town of Chapel Hill, 326 N.C. 1, 11, 387 S.E.2d 655, 662 (1990). The Supreme Court has reasoned that, since the superior court is acting in such proceedings as an appellate court rather than a trial court, motions brought pursuant to the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, such as motions for summary judgment, cannot be properly granted since they are “properly heard in the trial courts.” Batch, 326 N.C. at 11, 387 S.E.2d at 662 (citing Britt v. Allen, 12 N.C. App. 399, 183 S.E.2d 303 (1971)). Instead, “[r]eview pursuant to writ of certiorari of an administrative decision is based solely upon the record as certified.” Id.; See also Godfrey, 317 N.C. at 63, 344 S.E.2d at 279 (<HOLDING>). Since Intervenors did not seek relief from
holding that an argument not raised before the bankruptcy court will not be considered for the first time on appeal holding that a claim not raised before the trial court will not be considered for the first time on appeal holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court holding that supreme court need not consider issue not raised in petition for certiorari holding that an issue not raised before a board of aldermen could not be considered on certiorari