Case law

Edwards v. High Point Police Department

559 F. Supp. 2d 653 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 3, 2008

If the answer is yes, the Court must consider whether the constitutional right was clearly established and whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that the officer’s conduct was unlawful. … Qualified immunity protects law enforcement officers from “bad guesses in gray areas” and ensures that they are liable only “for transgressing bright lines.” Maciariello v.

Barbier v. Durham County Board of Education

225 F. Supp. 2d 617 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 30, 2002

Moreover, the Court notes that anxiety is clearly a recognized medical condition. See generally Fox v. Gen. … In the same case, the Fourth Circuit declined to state an opinion regarding whether attorney contact would qualify as an affirmative act. Id. 4 .

WASALAAM v. WELLMAN

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 30, 2020

Even liberally construed, however, Plaintiff’s claims qualify as frivolous, fail as a matter of law, and/or run afoul of immunity doctrines. I. … Quillen, 631 F.2d 1154, 1155 (4th Cir. 1980), and the Complaint does not establish that Attorney Johnson qualifies as a state actor (see Docket Entry 1 at 1-8).

North Carolina Alliance for Transportation Reform, Inc. v. United States Department of Transportation

168 F. Supp. 2d 569 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 23, 2001

Eleventh Amendment immunity, however, is not absolute. … A waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity must be clearly declared by the state. See id. at 676 , 119 S.Ct. 2219 .

BYRD v. NC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH and HUMAN SERVICES

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 14, 2024

Congress, acting under powers granted to it in [S]ection [F]ive of the Fourteenth Amendment, has clearly abrogated [their] immunity.” Id.; see also Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. … “In order to establish a violation of Title II [of the ADA], [Plaintiff] must allege that,” id., “(1) he has a disability, (2) he is otherwise qualified to participate in the [public

Gower v. Wrenn Handling, Inc.

892 F. Supp. 724 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 17, 1995

Here, Gower has established sufficient evidence that with “reasonable accommodation” he may have been “qualified” for the CSR position. … However, the Court cannot find that the evidence proffered by Wrenn clearly establishes that it met the threshold requirement of providing “reasonable accommodation” to Gower by at least considering him for the vacant CSR

LEARY v. BULLARD

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 5, 2025

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. Alternatively, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Docket Entry 18 at 15-16.) … Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

CONNELL v. RUSSELL, PA-C

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 12, 2023

Finally, the Brief in Support references qualified immunity. (Docket Entry 17 at 4.) … This explanation of qualified immunity demonstrates its inapplicability in this case: “an official sued in his personal capacity may raise personal immunity defenses such as absolute or qualified

KING v. BLACKWOOD

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 23, 2023

“[P]ublic officers’ immunity, at the least, is unavailable to 30 officers who violate clearly established rights because an officer acts with malice when he “does that which a man … clearly established tights” (quotations omitted)).

BLAKELY v. WESTERN SURETY COMPANY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 5, 2025

immunity as to this § 1983 supervisory liability claim on account of his not having violated any “clearly established” constitutional right but he does not flesh out this argument. … Thus, it is premature to award qualified immunity at this stage. iii.

MCCLARY v. BULLOCK

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 13, 2021

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Thus, the traditional two-step qualified immunity inquiry requires a court to determine: “(1) whether the official violated a constitutional right; and if so, (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time

BERMAN v. PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION ASSISTANCE AGENCY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 16, 2023

It is well-established that the United States is immune from private civil actions absent a waiver of its sovereign immunity. In re KBR, Inc., Burn Pit Litig., 744 F.3d 326, 341 (4th Cir. 2014). … “It is well-established that parties cannot amend their complaints through briefing or sovereign immunity is a merits issue rather than jurisdictional, see, e.g., Adkisson v.

Smith v. McDonald

767 F. Supp. 732 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 26, 1991

The only first amendment issue Defendant sought to vindicate was his contention that the petition clause of the first amendment provided absolute immunity to a defendant charged with expressing libelous and damaging falsehoods … Regardless, this case clearly does not fall into the category of cases which have allowed the assessment of counsel fees where the court has found the action to be frivolous or in bad faith.

Starnes v. General Electric Co.

201 F. Supp. 2d 549 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 25, 2002

The Court also notes that “[i]n mandating only those modifications that qualify as reasonable, Congress clearly meant to avoid placing employers in an untenable *560 business position.” Id. … The first two identified incidents clearly relate to the Disability Plan, as they are directly tied to Plaintiffs ability to qualify for coverage under the plan.

Stephenson v. Pfizer Inc.

49 F. Supp. 3d 434 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 8, 2014

The moving party bears the burden of establishing that no genuine dispute of material fact remains. … Pfizer’s employees clearly testified that driving is essential. (See, e.g., Doc. 25-5 at 79-80; Doc. 25-6 at 53.)

Lemons v. US Air Group, Inc.

43 F. Supp. 2d 571 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 19, 1999

Moreover, he alleges that he received notes and letters from doctor's which "spelled out clearly the mental and physical problems such as high blood pressure, migraines, cramps, depression, and overwhelming feeling of fatigue … Second, in several paragraphs he at least alleges that he is otherwise qualified for his employment. (Eg., id. at ¶¶ 8, 28, 32, 36, 38.)

NANCE v. SEABOLT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 1, 2023

Qualified Immunity Finally, to the extent that there could be a constitutional violation, Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … [Qualified immunity operates ‘to ensure that before they are subjected to suit, officers ate on notice their conduct is unlawful.’ Saucier v.

CHAMBERS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 23, 2026

entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Nazario v. … When she assessed adequate medical treatment, she is him on May 2 for an unrelated earlier entitled to qualified immunity.

EWING v. VIGUS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 30, 2025

Congress has lawfully abrogated said immunity. … Appx. 174, 176 (4th Cir. 2014) (“[o]ur precedent establishes that the use of pepper spray on a docile prisoner could qualify as excessive force”); see also Williams v.

SCOTT v. THE CITY OF DURHAM

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 27, 2021

Qualified Immunity Mr. … Richards contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established at the time that reliance on information from another police officer without further investigation was inappropriate.