Case law

PORTER

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 16, 2025

Qualified Immunity Yates asserts qualified immunity from Porter’s claims against him in his individual capacity. … Deciding whether qualified immunity bars a claim 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 of its violation

NC RSOL v. NODALSKI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 26, 2019

Defendants’ sovereign immunity argument overlaps substantially with the standing analysis. … Plaintiffs have failed to establish standing to challenge N.C. Gen.

Oxford Orphanage, Inc. v. United States

587 F. Supp. 1231 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 2, 1984

Section 6601(a), I.R.C., provides that if a tax “imposed by this title ... is not paid on or before the last date prescribed for payment, interest on such amount at an annual rate established under section 6621 shall be paid … Until the will was reformed, the government clearly had the right to use the money.

Campbell v. Kannapolis City Schools Board of Education

55 F. Supp. 3d 821 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 23, 2014

The court concluded that the plaintiffs “own testimony and the prelitigation documents before the Court clearly establish that he falls within § 213(a)(17)’s computer employee exemption.” Id. at *21. … Because Plaintiff qualifies as an exempt computer employee, there is no need to address whether Plaintiff would also qualify as exempt under the administrative or combination exemptions.

MONTGOMERY v. HUNT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 28, 2025

Qualified Immunity Defendants also assert the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages where theit conduct does not violate a “statutory ot constitutional right” that was “clearly established” at the time of the conduct.”

Doe v. Bayer Corp.

367 F. Supp. 2d 904 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 25, 2005

It does not list Rh-immune globulin products, such as HypRho-D. … Bayer asserts that the Does’ complaint omits information necessary to establish threshold defenses. (Bayer’s Mot. Dismiss at 17-18.)

North Carolina State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory

182 F. Supp. 3d 320 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 25, 2016

Stewart’s no-match results do not establish how many North Carolin-ians lack qualifying photo ID. … A document establishing only the voter’s name and address, such as a HAVA document, does not qualify. (Id.)

Johnson v. Outlaw

659 F. Supp. 2d 732 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 1, 2009

Habeas relief cannot be granted unless the state court’s conclusion was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court, or was based … The state court’s decision was neither contrary to, nor involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court precedent, nor was it based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.

Love v. Alamance County Board of Education

581 F. Supp. 1079 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 29, 1984

She may establish a prima facie case of discrimination by proof that she belonged to a racial minority or sex, that she applied for a position for which she was qualified, that she was rejected, and that a person of the white … Establishing the initial prima facie case is not a difficult hurdle.

Luna-Reyes v. RFI Construction, LLC

57 F. Supp. 3d 495 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 3, 2014

As a general rule, when subject-matter jurisdiction is challenged, the party asserting jurisdiction, Luna-Reyes, bears the burden of establishing it. Adams, 697 F.2d at 1219 . … And “unless the jurisdictional allegations are clearly immaterial or wholly unsubstantial and frivolous,” resolution of factual disputes should occur “only after appropriate discovery.” Kerns v.

French v. Blackburn

428 F. Supp. 1351 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 31, 1977

The facts, having been established by the pleadings and stipulations, are without material dispute, and the parties have filed cross motions for summary judgment under Rule 56, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. … Privilege Against Self-Incrimination Although the fifth amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination by its own terms applies only to “criminal cases,” case law clearly establishes that the privilege applies to any type

JEFFRIES

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 27, 2026

The latter ground applies in situations where doctrines established by the United States Constitution or at common law immunize government entities and/or government personnel from liability … Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-54 (1967) (“Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction

Delaney v. Bartlett

370 F. Supp. 2d 373 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 26, 2004

Gen.Stat. § 163-82.11 (establishing a statewide computerized voter registration system). … Though some candidates may in fact call the Board for clarification, others may believe that the website’s “latest voter registration statistics” clearly fall within the statutory provisions.

Does 1-5 v. Cooper

40 F. Supp. 3d 657 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 22, 2014

There is no indication how often such programming must occur in order to be “regularly scheduled” or how many minors must gather to qualify. … Although by its terms, the Eleventh Amendment applies to suits brought against a State by "Citizens of another State,” it is well established that "an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by her

WATSON v. MCPHATTER

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 23, 2020

However, “[i]lf a plaintiff has alleged a clearly established right, summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds is improper as long as there remains any material factual dispute regarding … Accordingly, Detective Altizer has not established her entitlement to qualified immunity.

BENGE v. RANDOLPH COUNTY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 10, 2020

“Qualified immunity from [Section] 1983 claims ‘protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Determining whether qualified immunity applies involves a two-prong inquiry: ‘whether the facts make out a violation of a constitutional right’ and ‘whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established

PRIESTER v. CAROLINA COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES, INC.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 8, 2021

However, Defendants argue that as agents of CCSS, Defendants Locklear and Robinson cannot be liable because they “enjoy a qualified immunity to interfere [with Plaintiff’s employment contract] as ‘ … Defendants argue that “Plaintiff has not alleged that Locklear and Robinson acted with the malice necessary to overcome the qualified immunity they enjoy as a non-outsiders.”

Doe v. United States

381 F. Supp. 3d 573 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 27, 2019

The FTCA As a sovereign, the United States and its agencies are immune from suit, absent a waiver of that immunity. F.D.I.C. v. Meyer , 510 U.S. 471 , 475, 114 S.Ct. 996 , 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994). … THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS The Individual Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiffs' Bivens claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), arguing that they are entitled to qualified immunity. ( See Doc. 43 at 1, 12.)

SHIELDS v. GODFREY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 11, 2021

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for their conduct, provided “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a teasonable petson would have … Therefore, Defendant Moote is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

Covington v. Randolph Hospital, Inc.

147 F. Supp. 3d 399 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 1, 2015

Thus, even if the complaint clearly stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, its failure to request relief weighs in favor of dismissal. See, e.g., Collins v. Great Plains Oilfield Rental, L.L.C., No. … In order to establish such a claim, a plaintiff must plead facts to establish (1) unwelcome conduct; (2) based on the plaintiffs race; (3) that is sufficiently severe to alter the plaintiffs conditions of employment; and