Case law

Meyer v. Qualex, Inc.

388 F. Supp. 2d 630 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 7, 2005

Taking the facts established by defendant Kodak’s affidavit as uncontested, plaintiff Meyer has failed to show any basis for liability as regards Kodak. … First, in contrast with Rowles , this court does not find that the text of Qualex’s drug policy clearly excludes the use or possession of legally prescribed substances.

Saylon v. United States

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 26, 2021

Plaintiff alleges that the photographs show injuries “which were caused by the negligence on the part of [Brown] and [Sturdivant] . . . who clearly [weren’t] acting within the scope of their standard care.” … The FTCA, however, “preserves the Government’s immunity from suit on any claim arising out of battery” or other intentional torts falling within the “intentional tort exception” in the statute. Levin v.

Shoen v. United States

885 F. Supp. 827 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 23, 1995

With the promulgation of the expansive FTCA, the sovereign immunity once afforded the United States against actions for its wrongful conduct was abrogated. … Clearly, the fact that Mr. Shaw was on the post and on his way to work was directly connected to Mr. Shaw’s military service and the circumstances of the accident. As the district court stated, “[Mr.

Pellegrin v. National Union Fire Insurance

598 F. Supp. 2d 724 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 18, 2009

The Canon, however, qualifies the right with the proviso that they are subject to the ‘supervision of the courts, as to (their) reasonableness.’” Allen v. United States, 606 F.2d 432, 435 (4th Cir.1979). … This initial inquiry by the Court in no way established that a thousand hours of work had been performed.

Rogers v. Cumberland County Department of Social Services

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 10, 2021

Finding no other specific objections to the findings of the M&R, the Court considers whether the M&R is “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). … “Proof of an attorney-client relationship is essential to establishing a claim for legal malpractice.” Umphreyville v. Gittins, 662 F. Supp. 2d 501, 510 (W.D. Va. 2009).

Allen v. City of Raleigh

140 F. Supp. 3d 470 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 23, 2015

II In considering the City’s motion for summaiy judgment, the court views the evidence in the light most favorable to Allen and applies well-established principles under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. … However, before addressing these two questions, especially in a case involving an alleged physical disability, the employer and the employee need to understand clearly the employee’s specific, physical limitations in order

Jackson v. Leake

476 F. Supp. 2d 515 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Oct 26, 2006

In those circumstances if the ultimate use of the revenue benefits the general public then the charge will qualify as a “tax,” while if the benefits are more narrowly circumscribed then the charge will more likely qualify … establishes entitlement to the relief sought.”

Dunn Jr. v. Holden

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 23, 2024

The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction rests on the party invoking jurisdiction, here, the plaintiff. Adams v. … Plaintiff fails to name parties that are citizens of different states, and therefore has not established diversity jurisdiction.

Collins v. Cottrell Contracting Corp.

733 F. Supp. 2d 690 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 5, 2010

The facts so specified must be treated as established in the action. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d)(1). … Harned, particularly in his Supplemental Report, clearly sets out the reasoning and methodology behind his weather and wave opinions.

Duke v. Uniroyal, Inc.

777 F. Supp. 428 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 24, 1991

The agreement entered into by Fox and Uniroyal on December 15, 1986, clearly states that Fox is an independent contractor. Exhibit B, ¶ 5. … The purpose of the presumption of irreparable injury in civil rights cases is to afford plaintiffs relief in areas where injury is difficult to establish.

Cioffi v. Ingram

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 11, 2021

Where defendant Ingram’s res judicata defense is not clearly meritorious on the face of plaintiff’s amended complaint, his motion to dismiss is denied in this part. See Brockington v. … Eleventh Amendment immunity extends to “arm[s] of the State,” Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v.

Morris v. United States

122 F. Supp. 155 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 25, 1954

Specific statutory provisions were relied on to establish jurisdiction in two cases: United States v. Roberts, 5 Cir., 192 F.2d 893 ; Gamez v. … The decisión of the Administrator should not be disturbed unless it is clearly shown to be arbitrary or capricious, not supported by substantial evidence, or based on an error of law.

Teel v. Pitt County Board of Education

272 F. Supp. 703 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 4, 1967

As an alternative to the foregoing “modified freedom of choice plan,” the Board may assign pupils to geographical attendance zones established without regard to race. … To do so would clearly be nothing more than racial assignments for racial purposes; *710 such would indeed be inimical to a rational concept of equal protection of all persons under the law without regard to their race.

Williams v. AT&T Mobility, LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 25, 2020

In short. plaintiff's complaint clearly enumerates the time, place. and contents of the AT&T's representations to him. … Computer Fraud and Abuse Act AT&T argues plaintiff's CFAA claim should be dismissed for failure to plead a qualifying loss.

House v. Bisignano

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 23, 2025

While not styled as a jurisdictional challenge under Rule 12(b)(1), the motion invokes sovereign immunity principles, arguing that the statutory deadline is a condition on the government’s waiver of immunity and must be … City of New York, 476 U.S. 467, 478 (1986) (“Section 405(g) establishes a statute of limitations . . . not a jurisdictional requirement.”); see also Harrell v. Freedom Mortg.

American Petroleum Institute v. Cooper

835 F. Supp. 2d 63 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 16, 2011

No. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (establishing renewable fuel program); Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Pub.L. No. 110-140, 121 Stat. 1492 (amending renewable fuel program). … Title IV established a “cap and trade” system whereby utilities were allocated a certain number of emission allowances per year. Id.

Barfield v. Harris

540 F. Supp. 451 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 21, 1982

In Sandstrom a jury was instructed to presume the existence of a fact clearly necessary under state law to prove the crime charged. Id. at 520 , 99 S.Ct. at 2457. … An extensive evidentiary presentation is being made in that court in an attempt to establish certain of the factual premises underlying the attack on the validity of the death-qualified jury.

Allen v. Allen

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 31, 2025

Although the court recognizes that pro se pleadings must be liberally construed, a court is not expected to assume the role of advocate for a pro se plaintiff and develop statutory and constitutional claims not clearly … Plaintiff's motion does not “establish a cognizable basis for the Court to grant either a motion for required or permissive joinder.” Sanford v. City of Franklin, Virginia, 2022 WL 4451332, at *6 (E.D. Va. 2022).

Crain v. Butler

419 F. Supp. 2d 785 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 9, 2005

Turning to the “personal staff’ exclusion in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(f), the Fourth Circuit has established criteria to evaluate whether an individual falls within this particular exclusion. … City of Charlotte, 306 N.C. 187 , 293 S.E.2d 101 (1982), the Supreme Court of North Carolina held that absent “statutory provisions to the contrary, municipal corporations are immune from punitive damages.”

Granville Lumber Co. v. Atkinson

234 F. 424 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 25, 1916

These authorities also establish that, on the expiration of the time stated in such a contract within which the timber may be removed, all right in the vendee shall cease and determine, and the estate in so much of the standing … parties are bound, and the vendor may compel the vendee tp pay the purchase price and take the property, and a unilateral or optional privilege is given, the exercise of which is dependent upon compliance with its terms, is clearly