Case law

Williams v. United States

558 F. Supp. 66 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 11, 1983

United States, 231 F.2d 328, 330 (2nd Cir.1956); Wallach v. Cannon, 357 F.2d 557, 559 (8th Cir.1966); Lemmon v. Social Security Administration, 20 F.R.D. 215, 217 (D.S.C.1957). See Hodge v. … Jordan v. United States, 694 F.2d 833, 836 (D.C.Cir.1982); Rollins v. United States, 286 F.2d 761, 765 (9th Cir.1961); Piendak v. Local Board No. 5, 318 F.Supp. 1393, 1396 (W.D.Pa.1970); Fugle v.

Brabo

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 17, 2026

In fact, the Board’s decision to grant or revoke a permit is not subject to review by any other municipal officials; the Board of Adjustment constitutes as its own Board of Appeals. See § 40-235, 236, 516. … v.

Saylon v. United States

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

Sturdivant (“Sturdivant”) and Chastina Brown (“Brown”), as two nurses involved in care of plaintiff’s husband. Plaintiff seeks damages, interest, fees, and costs. … Goines v. Valley Cmty. Servs. Bd., 822 F.3d 159, 167 (4th Cir. 2016).

The Tyler

103 F. 327 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 3, 1900

Newton v. The Rarge Carrie L. Tyler,” argued and decided at this term ( 103 Fed. 326 ). … This libel by the board was entered by virtue of sections 3480 and 3481, above cited; and the claim is for $240, because it is alleged that the barge lias on three occasions refused pilotage over the bar, and up' and down

Stott v. Martin

783 F. Supp. 970 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 12, 1992

Land Use, Physical Planning Program of Planning Board, Rosado v. … Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1969) [(political activities test)], and Connick v.

Parker v. Runyon

888 F. Supp. 50 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 13, 1995

Felly v. Graves-Humphreys Company, 818 F.2d 1126, 1128-29 (4th Cir.1987); Mercado-Garcia v. Ponce Federal Bank, 979 F.2d 890, 895 (1st Cir.1992) (equitable estoppel requires reasonable reliance); Wheeldon v. … Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 546 , 105 S.Ct. 1487, 1495 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985). Plaintiff was in no way deprived of due process of law. .

McBride v. West

940 F. Supp. 893 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 20, 1996

North Carolina State Ports Authority v. Dart Containerline Co., 592 F.2d 749, 750 (4th Cir.1979); Jones v. Board of Governors of University of North Carolina, 704 F.2d 713, 715 (4th Cir.1983). … In Guerra v. Scruggs, the Fourth Circuit, consistent with the Ninth Circuit’s holding in Hartikka v. United States, 754 F.2d 1516, 1518 (9th Cir.1985), and the First Circuit’s holding in Chilcott v.

Lambertus v. Nuvo Solutions, Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 10, 2024

On May 13, 2023, plaintiff sent an email to CEO Brown; David Brown, the President of Nuvo; and several other high-ranking professionals which detailed allegations of an emotionally unsafe working environment at Nuvo. … Here, plaintiffs alleged protected action is a series of internal complaints to CEO Brown and President Brown regarding state law violations by Nuvo. See, e.g., [DE 1 {J 34-37, 39-45, 83, 94].

The Protector

217 F. 117 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Oct 5, 1914

The lighters were lashed to the tug, on each side, lashed together, “formed, practically, a ‘V’ shape, with which, in the closed end of the ‘V’ the motor boat put her bow between them.” … C.) 92 Fed. 681 , Judge Brown (S. D. N.

Harris v. Marsh

123 F.R.D. 204 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 31, 1988

See Brown v. Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States, 830 F.2d 1429, 1438 (7th Cir.1987); Advisory Committee Note, 97 F.R.D. 198 , 200 (1983). … Notwithstanding this determination, because deterrence—not full compensation for defendant, see Brown v.

Fuller v. Dixon

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 11, 2022

“CT □□ prescription for the medication leading to his arrest was clearly visible in the front passenger’s side — it was sitting on the floor boards in plain view.” … Hansan v. Fairfax Cnty. School Bd., 405 F. App’x 793, 794 (4th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (unpublished) (emphasis added); see, □□□□□ Baldwin Cnty. Welcome Ctr. v. Brown, 466 U.S. 147, 149-52 (1984) (per curiam); Sys.

Bahsoon v. Pezetel, Ltd.

768 F. Supp. 507 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 23, 1991

Williams v. … In Vencedora Oceanica Navigacion v.

Wilmington Towing Co. v. Cape Fear Towing Co.

624 F. Supp. 1210 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 16, 1986

United States ex rel Weinberger v. Equifax, Inc., 557 F.2d 456, 463 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1035 , 98 S.Ct. 768 , 54 L.Ed.2d 782 (1978). … In particular, the court notes that Judge McMillan’s decision to recuse in Hoke v.

Wetherington v. Phillips

380 F. Supp. 426 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 12, 1974

Droysen v. Hansen, 59 F.R.D. 483 (E.D.Wis. 1973), citing Powell v. Workmen’s Compensation Board of State of New York, 327 F.2d 131 (2nd Cir. 1964); Thompson v. Heither, 235 F.2d 176 (6th Cir. 1956); Post v. … Random House, Inc., 261 F.Supp. 691 (S.D.N.Y.1966); Knoshaug v. Pollman, 18 F.R.D. 386 (D.N.D.1956); Shwab v. Doelz, 229 F.2d 749 (7th Cir. 1956); Carroll v.

KCHM, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co.

264 F. Supp. 3d 697 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 29, 2017

Brown, 564 U.S. 915 , 131 S.Ct. 2846 , 180 L.Ed.2d 796 (2011) (“Specific jurisdiction ... depends on an affiliation between the forum and the underlying controversy, principally, activity or an occurrence that takes places … ESAB Group v.

Hartford Fire Insurance v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

606 F. Supp. 2d 602 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 9, 2009

(citing McKinney v. Board of Trustees, 955 F.2d 924 , 928 (4th Cir.1992)). Further, all facts and inferences drawn from the facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Evans v. Techs. … Co. v. Am.

B & M Investments of North Carolina, LLC v. Camden County

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 26, 2026

Plaintiff attended the Camden County Board of Commissioners’ special meeting on January 28 and 29. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board voted to revoke the permit. … Plaintiff contends the Board must, pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 160D-406(j), reduce this decision to writing before it becomes effective. The Board has not yet reduced its decision to writing.

In re Duguid

100 F. 274 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 16, 1900

C.) 90 Fed. 475 -481; Blake v. Francis-Valentine Co. (D. C.) 89 Fed. 691 ; In re Brown (D. C.) 91 Fed. 358 ; Bankr. Act, § 67f.

Mitchell v. Dixon

862 F. Supp. 95 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 18, 1994

The Ninth Circuit has recognized such a right as a part of the right to meaningful access to the courts, Ching v. Lewis, 895 F.2d 608 (9th Cir.1990), but the Fourth Circuit has not. … The clerk has entered the default of the only other defendant, Lillie Mae Brown. . Plaintiff is a maximum custody inmate serving a fifty-year sentence for second degree murder.

PCS Phosphate Co., Inc. v. Norfolk Southern Corp.

520 F. Supp. 2d 705 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 28, 2007

,]” including separate articles of incorporation, bylaws, boards of directors, property, accounting records, and dividend distribution. Id. at 3-4. … See Booe v. Shadrick, 322 N.C. 567, 570 , 369 S.E.2d 554, 556 (1988); but see Broussard v.