Case law

Harris v. Marsh

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

Nevertheless, plaintiff’s request to withdraw her earlier Rule 59(e) motion clearly represents a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision made with the advice of counsel. … Counsel’s actions may well be characterized as ones of youthful ignorance, but that hardly qualifies as a defense to Rule 11. See Harris v. Marsh, 679 F.Supp. at 1384-87 .

Colorado Bankers Life Insurance Company v. GBIG Holdings, LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 23, 2023

In support, plaintiffs note that the “word ‘person’ shall extend and be applied to bodies politic and corporate, as well as to individuals, unless the context clearly shows to the contrary.” [D.E. 16] 8 (quoting N.C. … “A practice is unfair when it offends established public policy as well as when the practice is immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious to consumers. A practice .

Popper v. Hartford Financial Services Group Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Apr 18, 2023

Popper contends that the public parking lot area where the truck struck and killed Fox qualifies as an “open public street” under the policy, thus qualifying Fox for death benefits as a “pedestrian.” … Where a policy does not define a term, a court gives “nontechnical words . . . their meaning in ordinary speech, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning was intended.”

Strickland v. Ecohealth Alliance

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Nov 18, 2024

Here, the Court clearly lacks general personal jurisdiction over EcoHealth. EcoHealth is incorporated in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and maintains its principal place of business in Manhattan. … Plaintiff claims that gain-of-function research qualifies as ultrahazardous because it is impossible to eliminate the dangers that such research poses. This assertion is flatly incorrect.

Stocks v. Sullivan

717 F. Supp. 397 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 5, 1989

The market rate for similar services may be established by a number of methods. … Although these figures are not clearly limited to cases which would be covered by § 406(b), they nevertheless indicate that there is some risk present in social security litigation.

Corolla Pool and Spa Inc. v. Corolla Brad LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 17, 2025

Yet a mark must be distinctive to qualify for protection. Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 769, 112 S. Ct. 2753, 2757, 120 L. Ed. 2d 615 (1992). 1. … The presence of trademark registration and a finding that the Patent and Trademark Office did not require proof of secondary meaning is clearly missing in the instant case. See generally [DE-15].

Fullard v. City of Raleigh

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 22, 2024

“But any invocation of equity to relieve the strict application of a statute of limitations must be guarded and infrequent, lest circumstances of individualized hardship supplant the rules of clearly drafted statutes.” … Moreover, any ongoing settlement discussions with the City of Raleigh do not qualify as an “extraordinary” circumstance “beyond plaintiff's control” that “made it impossible to file” an EEOC charge within 180 days of any

Vaitkueviene v. Syneos Health Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 30, 2021

“A factual finding is clearly erroneous when [the court is] ‘left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’” TFWS, Inc. v. … Mortg. & Equity, LLC, 744 F.3d 874 (4th Cir. 2014) (“Joseph established his Rule 10b5–1 plan in March 2005, see Apr. 28, 2005 Form 4, Holland Ex. 11, and Falcone established his plan in September 2003, see Oct. 4, 2004

Faulkner v. Kaplon

203 F. 114 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 3, 1913

It is riot practicable to set out all of the telegrams in full, but a reference to them clearly indicates that.they relate to negotiations between these parties in regard to the business of M. … Her husband was during the time intervening, between March, 1910, and December, 1911, traveling about, endeavoring to establish branch stores at Zebulon, Hillsboro, and Rutherf ordton..

Cromartie v. Hunt

133 F. Supp. 2d 407 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 7, 2000

Application of this mandate clearly prohibits purposeful discrimination between individuals on the basis of race. Shaw v. … Race, while the predominant factor in its composition, was not impermissibly used in establishing its borders.

Lopez v. JC Penney

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 4, 2025

. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court shall dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks money damages from a defendant immune from such recovery. 28 U.S.C … Yet they are insufficient to assert a claim for national origin or race discrimination where Lopez has not alleged that the employee who mocked her accent played any role in terminating her position or clearly attributed

Lightfoot v. Georgia-Pacific Wood Products LLC

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 21, 2020

The 1987 NIOSH report states: The association between nasal cancer and occupations involving exposure to wood dust has been clearly established in the literature. . . … Here, plaintiff fails to establish a genuine issue of fact on the element of proximate cause for two independent reasons.

Musselman v. eCast Settlement Corp. (In Re Musselman)

394 B.R. 801 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 30, 2008

Further, they are “clearly at odds with the overarching policy that debtors who are eligible for bankruptcy relief be afforded an opportunity for a ‘fresh start.’ ” In re Jass, 340 B.R. at 418 . … As one court has noted “it is a rare occasion when a legislature’s effort to establish specific guidelines is so refined that its application is guaranteed to be uniformly fair.

Red Hat, Inc. v. Competitive Access Systems, Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 12, 2025

Red Hat qualifies under this provision. See Schaefer Sys. Int’l, Inc. v. Aloft Media, LLC, No. 322-CV-513, 2023 WL 4055712, at *4-6 (W.D.N.C. June 16, 2023) (unpublished). … “An entity that repeatedly sends communications into a forum state clearly has fair warning that its activity may subject it to the jurisdiction of a foreign sovereign.” Trimble, 997 F.3d at 1155 (cleaned up).

Carteret Investment Associates, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 29, 2023

To be admissible, both the documents containing the statements, and the statements themselves, must qualify for at least one hearsay exemption or exception. Fed. R. Evid. 805. … Further, Dees testified clearly at his deposition that he had not been retained to opine on causation, and had no opinions on that issue. (See Opp’n Notice of Filing Ex. C (DE 75-3) 57:24–58:6).

Wagner v. Norcold, Inc.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 24, 2024

Interrogatory No. 3 clearly falls within this category as it seeks information from Norcold regarding, infer alia, negligence that contributed to the fire that forms the basis of this action, Pls.’ Mot. … A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of a matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify

United States v. MacDonald

640 F. Supp. 286 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 1, 1985

While the court does not believe this seriously ill man to be lying, medical records introduced by the prosecution clearly show that he cannot consistently distinguish fact from fiction. … Stoeckley also appears to have been offered immunity on several occasions in return for her statements.

Sampson County Board of Education v. Torres

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 14, 2022

“E.T. qualifies for special education services under [IDEA] as a student with an Other Health Impairment (OHI).” … “This principle only applies, however, if all facts necessary to the affirmative defense clearly appear on the face of the complaint.” Id.

Childress v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jul 2, 2019

He has been qualified as an expert a number of times in United States District Court. Jd. ¥ 4. … Damages discovery was ordered to commence after a status conference and joint status report to establish a damages discovery plan, which is to take place after the close of liability and class certification discovery.

United States v. $115,413.00 In US Currency

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 12, 2025

Alternatively, Lyon argues that ambiguities in North Carolina state law indicate “that sweepstakes operations were not clearly illegal under state law, which is a prerequisite for federal prosecution under … Merrell, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that an individual who served coffee to gambling patrons and performed janitorial services qualified as a participant in the gambling operation because