Case law

VOTAW v. CARTHENS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 25, 2021

For non-prosecutorial conduct, such as conducting a child abuse investigation, social workers have qualified immunity. See Renn By & Through Renn v. Garrison, 100 F.3d 344, 349 (4th Cir. 1996); Evans v. … It applies here since the facts as alleged do not show the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. See Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009); Doe ex rel. Johnson v. S.C. Dep’t of Soc.

HINES v. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF NC

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 24, 2020

Plaintiff’s allegations in both her original complaint and proposed amended complaint therefore clearly satisfy the first two elements of a retaliation claim. … The ADA forbids employers from discharging qualified employees because of their disability. 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a).

ATKINSON v. FRICK

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 5, 2021

“Complaint”) at 2-10.)2 Each Defendant answered the Complaint, asserting various defenses (to include qualified immunity). (Docket Entries 23, 25.) … During each visit, Plaintiff requested treatment by a “qualified specialist.” (Id. at 6.)

PORTER v. BARR

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 6, 2021

“Where, as here, a case is at the pleading stage, [Plaintiffs] must ‘clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating’ each element.” Spokeo, 136 S. Ct. at 1547 (quoting Warth v. … Cabarrus County Defendants move to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against them arguing that they are entitled to qualified immunity and/or public official immunity and further that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim.

DEMOCRACY NORTH CAROLINA v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

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

The witness requirement statute in H.B. 1169 very clearly details the requirements for acceptance of an absentee ballot. … The Eleventh Amendment provides immunity to the states from suit subject to several exceptions.

Jadali v. Alamance Regional Medical Center

225 F.R.D. 181 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 16, 2004

Defendant requests that the Court deny plaintiffs motion to amend for being futile because none of his proposed changes are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss. 1 Section 1981, Section 1983, and HCQIA Claims Defendant is clearly … There is little to be said, however, because several courts have held that the HCQIA is intended only to encourage the establishment of peer review in the medical community and to provide some immunity from suit for entities

Fox v. City of Greensboro

807 F. Supp. 2d 476 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 27, 2011

The Amended Complaint clearly does not support a retaliation theory, which requires an allegation that Plaintiffs engaged in a "protected activity.” See Coleman v. Md. … It is therefore unnecessary to address the individual Defendants’ additional arguments that the individual-capacity claims against them are barred by qualified immunity and the official-capacity claims should be dismissed

NORTH CAROLINA A. PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE v. THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 4, 2020

Here, there is clearly a causal connection between Plaintiffs’ injury and the challenged actions of the NCSBE Defendants. … Amendment immunity.

Breeden v. Richmond Community College

171 F.R.D. 189 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 14, 1997

Ernst & Young, 880 F.Supp. 49, 57 (D.Mass.1995) (“[T]his district has ‘clearly held, that Rule 9(b) applies to claims of negligent misrepresentations’”). … Because plaintiff's negligent misrepresentation claim is dismissed with prejudice, the Court declines to address defendants’ immunity argument.

Clark v. Cameron-Brown Co.

72 F.R.D. 48 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 30, 1976

The plaintiffs seek to qualify this lawsuit for class action treatment under the provisions of Rule 23(b)(3). … It is the opinion of the Court that the common questions of law and fact clearly predominate. 2 E.

PRIME TV, LLC. v. Travelers Ins. Co.

223 F. Supp. 2d 744 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 7, 2002

Thus, judgment on the pleadings is appropriate if, taking the non-moving party’s allegations as true, the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that the movant is entitled to … “Even intentional acts, the consequences of which are unexpected, have been held to qualify as ‘occurrences’.”

United States v. Duke Energy Corp.

171 F. Supp. 2d 560 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 6, 2001

The Duke Energy plants at issue qualify as “major stationary sources.” … A conference before the magistrate judge will be *566 promptly scheduled to establish guidelines for Applicants’ participation.

Stiffel Co. v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

162 F. Supp. 637 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 28, 1958

It is alleged that the defendant maintains a regular and established place of business in this district and that an infringing sale took place here. The same act allegedly constitutes unfair competition. … Consequently, it seems to me that clearly this controversy can be more appropriately and conveniently settled in Chicago than in North Carolina.

STEPHENS v. BULLARD

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 15, 2022

Bullard may have similar defenses as Defendant Kerstetter such as qualified immunity and governmental immunity. “Such defenses, if successful, would inure to the benefit of the defaulting defendants.” … Apr. 6, 2011) (unpublished) (“Where liability is joint and several or closely interrelated and a defending party establishes that a plaintiff has no cause of action or present right of recovery, a defaulted defendant benefits

MANNING v. DVA WELL PATH CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 14, 2021

To overcome governmental immunity, a plaintiff must allege waiver of immunity in the complaint. Paquette v. Cnty. of Durham, 573 S.E.2d 715, 717 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). … Indeed, the Fourth Circuit has clearly stated that “the Constitution creates no entitlement to grievance procedures or access to any such procedure voluntarily established by a state.” Adams v.

Smith v. McDonald

713 F. Supp. 871 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 25, 1988

At trial McDonald testified that he was a college graduate and had held various executive positions before establishing his own business. … CONCLUSION The right to petition one’s government for redress of grievances, like other first amendment rights, does not confer immunity on the publication of malicious falsehoods.

THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY v. AMERICAN ALTERNATIVE INSURANCE CORPORATION

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 13, 2024

Lumbermens provides further guidance on what may qualify something as “an operation incidental to” something else.4 Id. at 13. … As the governmental immunity defense was pled, the claim against Surry County was indeed subject to the governmental immunity defense.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bojangles Restaurants, Inc.

284 F. Supp. 2d 320 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 22, 2003

However, either of these would qualify as an adverse employment action. … While there is no guarantee that the EEOC and Mickle will prevail, they have already made some progress toward establishing a prima facie case of retaliation.

Munchak Corporation v. Riko Enterprises, Inc.

368 F. Supp. 1366 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 21, 1973

Clearly, the plaintiff has carried his burden of showing the jurisdictional elements of G.S. § 1-75.4(4) to be met. … Within the construction established by this trilogy of cases, a multitude of lower court decisions have considered this issue.

KING

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 14, 2026

The Court’s decision denying qualified immunity to defendants Linster and Berry was affirmed on appeal in July 2026. Doc. 192 at 24–25. … While he was not “retained or specially employed,” arguably he should have been more clearly disclosed as an expert witness, not a hybrid witness. See Mayo, 2022 WL 1298742, at *2.