Case law

The Northern No. 30

24 F.2d 975 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 14, 1928

The findings of facts by the Circuit Court are conclusive, and cannot be added to or qualified by referring to the evidence taken in the cause, or to the opinion of that court, or of the District Court. * * * It is not found … I am clearly of the opinion that, in the circumstances of the instant case, if ever equity and policy should apply, it is here. Strip this case of its maritime character, and equity would cry aloud.

Paine v. Brunswick County Hospital Authority

470 F. Supp. 28 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Oct 13, 1978

Sections 1331 , 1341, and 2201, asserting that the rights to be secured by this action are rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution … All persons subject to hospital regulations. — When such hospital is established, the physicians, nurses, attendants, the persons sick therein, and all per *30 sons approaching or coming within the limits of same, and all

Aikens v. Ingram

513 F. Supp. 2d 586 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 13, 2007

Federal courts possess a “[traditional trepidation over interfering with the military establishment....” Guerra v. Scruggs, 942 F.2d 270, 276 (4th Cir.1991) (quoting Mindes v. Seaman, 453 F.2d 197, 199 (5th Cir.1971)). … Similarly, the court need not and does not address defendants’ qualified immunity argument.

Ortiz II v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 12, 2024

Section § 163-96(a)(2) sets the requirements for a group of voters to qualify as a new political party. … to this Court’s Art III jurisdiction: sovereign immunity.

West v. J.O. Stevenson, Inc.

164 F. Supp. 3d 751 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 24, 2016

Johnson, 798 F.3d 1096, 1103-04 (D.C.Cir.2015) (holding timely exhaustion of administrative remedies not a jurisdictional requirement where Congress has not clearly stated so); Cobb v. … An individual may establish his status as a “qualified individual with a disability” in one of three ways: 1) proof that the individual is “actually disabled,” and that such disability “substantially limits one or more major

Lynch v. The Citadel Elizabeth City, LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 12, 2022

Rule 12(6)(6) invites an inquiry into the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not an analysis of potential defenses to the claims set forth therein, dismissal nevertheless is appropriate when the face of the complaint clearly … Whether the Citadel can establish 6 / EDTPA immunity on amore fully developed record is an issue for another day.

Rodger v. Electronic Data Systems Corp.

160 F.R.D. 532 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 23, 1995

These prerequisites are mandatory and the failure to establish just one bars class certification. Id. … In the case at bar, common questions of law and fact clearly exist. Worthy of note, EDS has not taken issue with plaintiffs’ ability to satisfy this requirement.

Woodard v. Online Information Services

191 F.R.D. 502 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 19, 2000

If so, *505 the court must then decide whether the controversy in question qualifies under one or more of the three permissible class action categories defined by Rules 23(b)(1) 2 , (b)(2) 3 and (b)(3) 4 F.R.C.P. … This is understandable, as Rule 23(b)(1) is clearly inapplicable to Plaintiffs complaint.

Gregory v. Currituck County

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 5, 2021

Ide, 732 F.2d 1429, 1432-33 (9th Cir. 1984) (“To establish a continuing violation [under 42 U.S.C. § 1983], continued unlawful acts must be demonstrated. ... … Having established that the Eleventh Amendment can immunize the State Defendants, the court moves on to whether the amendment defeats the specific claims Plaintiffs brought against the State Defendants, and again addresses

Murray v. Richmond Steel & Welding Co. (In Re Hudson)

170 B.R. 868 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 2, 1994

“The [Bankruptcy Act of 1898] was silent as to who should conduct the [summary proceedings] jury trial in the two exceptional situations in which the statute established such a right.” Gibson at 974. … The common law standard of review is not the “clearly erroneous” standard in a trial before the court as provided in Fed. R.Civ.P. 52(a).

Marshall v. Frederick

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 14, 2019

Sch., 503 U.S. 60, 75 (1992) (sexual harassment that qualifies as sex discrimination under Title VII also qualifies under Title IX), “An institution can be held liable for a Title IX violation only if ‘an official who . … Castleberry must be dismissed because she enjoys official immunity given her position as principal of Wendell Middle School.

Sorensson v. Buck

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 7, 2022

The court has no reason to reconsider those rulings where “it has [not] been shown that the magistrate judge’s order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). 4 The magistrate judge also recommends … State Ports Auth., 535 U.S. 743, 753 (2002) (“[T]he Eleventh Amendment does not define the scope of the States’ sovereign immunity; it is but one particular exemplification of that immunity.”).

Sawyer v. Astrue

775 F. Supp. 2d 829 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Apr 4, 2011

The record establishes Ms. Sawyer’s limitations in the areas of walking, balance and manipulation. … The ALJ’s credibility assessment failed to credit these limitations which quite clearly flow from Ms. Sawyer’s medically determinable impairments — including her primary impairment of neuropathy.

Best v. United States

505 F. Supp. 48 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Nov 20, 1980

Qualified as an expert at trial, Mr. … Clearly, the same infirmity that afflicts the claims of negligence and trespass, i. e., inability to identify the Government as the source of the damage to the plaintiff’s crop, also vitiates the claim that a taking by the

Mathis Ex Rel. Mathis v. Shalala

890 F. Supp. 461 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 28, 1995

. § 416.924 establishes the regulations governing disability determinations for children. … This fact establishes the credibility of the medical evidence.

Taylor v. United States

89 F. Supp. 3d 766 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 19, 2014

Plaintiff asserts that “he was clearly an authorized provider” during this time period, suggesting that the Final Agency Determination confirms his status as an “authorized provider” until the effective date of the Final … TRICARE Management Activity is a Department of Defense agency tasked with administering the TRICARE program, see 32 C.F.R. § 199.2 , a federal "managed health care program that is established by the Department of Defense

Lee v. City of Fayetteville

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 20, 2024

Defendants contend public official immunity applies because plaintiffs’ complaint “clearly reveals that the [defendant] police officers lawfully detained [p]laintiff because she was driving a vehicle with a fictitious license … “Well-established North Carolina law holds that courts may not lightly infer a waiver of immunity.” Evans, 703 F.3d at 655.

North Carolina Right to Life, Inc. v. Leake

108 F. Supp. 2d 498 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 10, 2000

DISCUSSION “ ‘[A] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy, to be granted only if the moving party clearly establishes entitlement to the relief sought.” Hughes Network Sys., Inc. v. … North Carolina clearly has a sufficiently important interest in preventing such evasion.

Salter v. Alltel Communications, Inc.

407 F. Supp. 2d 730 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 8, 2005

Under this scheme, the plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … Defendant clearly perceived Plaintiffs performance as unacceptable. Plaintiff also argues that her previous promotions indicate that she was fired despite satisfactory performance.

Fox v. City of Greenville

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 21, 2024

The court agrees: governmental immunity, an affirmative defense, “is a complete immunity from being sued in court.” Ballard v. Shelley, 257 N.C. … Plaintiff offered no response to Defendants’ evidence, which establishes that the City has not waived its governmental immunity through the purchase of liability insurance.