Case law

Wagstaff v. City of Durham

233 F. Supp. 2d 739 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 25, 2002

Under the scheme established by McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 5 a Title VII plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination. Id., 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. at 1824. … Plaintiff argues that the City’s action “could clearly have an adverse effect on the terms of Plaintiffs employment.” (Pl.’s Mem. Law Opp’n Def.’s Mot. Summ. J. at 17) (emphasis added).

Smith v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

409 F. Supp. 1211 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 3, 1976

The court dismissed the employer from the suit on the basis of the immunity provided by § 97-10. … Such an interpretation is clearly consistent with the language of the opinion. In the case of Long v. Coble, 11 N.C.

WONG v. GUILFORD COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 29, 2025

The Recommendation then concluded that “qualified immunity shields Deputy Jenkins from Plaintiffs’ claim that he arrested [Plaintiff] without probable cause.” (Id. at 39.) … immunity shields Deputy Jenkins from Plaintiffs’ claim that he arrested [Plaintiff] without probable cause.”

Emrich v. Colvin

90 F. Supp. 3d 480 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 2, 2015

Step four then requires the ALJ to assess whether, based on that RFC, the claimant can “perform past relevant work”; if so, the claimant does not qualify as disabled. Id. at 179-80 . … And again unlike in Bird , the ALJ did consider some retrospective evidence and found that it did not establish any post-DLI disability.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. J.P. Stevens & Co.

740 F. Supp. 1135 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 5, 1990

The evidence clearly shows that plaintiffs McQueen, Bryant, and Carter are able to cross this initial hurdle having established all three elements of a prima facie case. … As in the present case, the company offered employees the opportunity to trade shifts with other qualified co-workers if they objected to working on Sundays themselves.

MARTIN v. SEABOLT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 25, 2024

Remaining Defendants base this interlocutory appeal upon their alleged entitlement to qualified and public official immunity as to those claims. See, e.g., Martin v. … Given that the Motion involves matters analytically distinct from the appropriateness of qualified and public official immunity for Remaining Defendants on Plaintiff’s Section 1983 excessive

GREEN v. JOHNSON

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 11, 2024

The defendants also contend they are entitled to qualified immunity on the wrongful arrest claim because there was probable cause to arrest, which is essentially the same argument. … Alston contends he is entitled to qualified immunity because the facts alleged show that Mr. Green was resisting arrest.

Stout v. Kimberly Clark Corp.

201 F. Supp. 2d 593 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 8, 2002

Under McDonnell Douglas, the plaintiff first bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case by demonstrating that (1) he is a member of a protected class, (2) he suffered an adverse employment action, (3) he was qualified … The boundaries of the public policy exception are not clearly defined, but “[a]t the very least public policy is violated when an employee is fired in contravention of express public policy declarations contained in the North

Miller v. Northwest Region Library Board

348 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 8, 2004

Therefore, granting Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment would clearly be premature. … Defendants also do not address the potential immunity of any of the Defendants. Therefore, the Court will not address these issues at this time.

Gaither v. Wake Forest University

129 F. Supp. 2d 863 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 21, 2000

discharged in spite of his qualifications and performance; and (4) following his termination, the position remained open to similarly qualified applicants. … The handbook clearly states that it is not a contract, and Plaintiff himself has acknowledged that the handbook was not a contract.

Early & Daniel Co. v. Wedgefield, Inc.

164 F. Supp. 414 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 15, 1958

Further, it should be borne in mind that both the plaintiff and the defendant operate business establishments in the Eastern District of South Carolina, the plaintiff’s establishment being about 75 miles from Charleston and … the defendant’s establishment being about 60 miles from Charleston.

ALLEN v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 6, 2019

The Court may also anticipate affirmative defenses that clearly appear on the face of the complaint. Nasim, 64 F.3d at 955. … Thus, the Complaint fails to establish a Section 1983 claim against Defendant Goins, Defendant Williams, Defendant Boulden, and Defendant Troy due to the lack of factual matter suggesting

Stout v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance Company

201 F. Supp. 647 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 16, 1962

This occurrence, though tragic, clearly does not fall within the category of an unavoidable accident. … However that may be, it seems clear that the tenor of the allegations is clearly one of intentionally inflicted injuries resulting in death.

Rowe v. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University

630 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 10, 2009

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination,” Rowe must show by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) she is a member of a protected group; (2) she applied for promotion and tenure; (3) she was qualified for promotion … Qualification Rowe must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she was qualified for promotion and tenure. Alvarado, 928 F.2d at 121.

Williams v. Aluminum Co. of America

457 F. Supp. 2d 596 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 29, 2006

Johnson has not established that (1) he was qualified for a position in the program or that (2) he was rejected under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. … He has also failed to establish that he was qualified for admission to Alcoa’s Accelerated Apprenticeship Program or that he was denied admission to the Program under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination

Pendergraph v. Celebrezze

255 F. Supp. 313 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 20, 1966

The objective medical findings may show more or less clearly the existence of certain clinically determinable physical * * * impairments. … In trying to analyze the work situation in the kinds of occupations that he could be qualified for, I consulted two basic works.

Harrell v. A. Purcell

236 F. Supp. 2d 526 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 19, 2002

Because Plaintiff has failed to establish that the officers violated his constitutional rights when they used force against him, the court must resolve this case as a matter of law in favor of the defendants. … Because this court finds that Deputy Carrier, Corporal Purcell, and Officer Ford did not commit any constitutional violations in their individual or official capacities, the defenses of qualified or per *535 sonal immunities

ALLEN v. COOPER

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 22, 2019

.* The Court may also anticipate affirmative defenses that clearly appear on the face of the complaint. Nasim, 64 F.3d at 955. … Thus, even considered collectively, the Complaint and its attached document fail to establish a Section 1983 claim against Governor Cooper, Defendant Guy, and Defendant Loewe due to the lack

DUNCAN v. SCHATZMAN

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 16, 2021

First, regarding Plaintiff’s efforts to allege waiver of immunity and add John Doe Surety, Defendants K. … Adams and Carter point out that they raised the affirmative defenses of public officer immunity, qualified immunity, and governmental immunity in their answer to Plaintiff’s original complaint, which they filed on June

McBroom v. Western Elec. Co., Inc.

429 F. Supp. 909 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 4, 1977

Clearly, if no member of an alleged class has properly invoked the jurisdiction of the court, then the court is powerless to act. … With respect to the relief which an individual claimant may receive, the Congress has established cut-off limits.