Case law

Murray v. City of Winston-Salem, North Carolina

203 F. Supp. 2d 493 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 26, 2002

See Brown v. … See Becerra v.

Taylor v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

86 F. Supp. 3d 448 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 6, 2015

Stat. § 28A-18-2(a); Brown v. S. Ry. Co., 202 N.C. 256 , 162 S.E. 613, 617 (1932). … .”); Brown v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas.

Summerville v. LOCAL 77

369 F. Supp. 2d 648 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 24, 2005

See generally Campbell v. Railroad Trainmen, 4 Ohio App.2d 81 , 212 N.E.2d 650 (1965); Allander v. Carpenters Dist. … See Washington v. Laborer’s, 792 F.2d 94 (8th Cir.1985); Brown v. Sombrotto, 523 F.Supp. 127, 133 (S.D.N.Y.1981)(where a constitution is silent, court may look to past practices).

Yarborough v. Burger King Corp.

406 F. Supp. 2d 605 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 22, 2005

Baldwin County Welcome Ctr. v. Brown, 466 U.S. 147, 152 , 104 S.Ct. 1723 , 80 L.Ed.2d 196 (1984). … Gayle v.

Rouse v. Duke University

869 F. Supp. 2d 674 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 5, 2012

See Stanley v. Trs. of the Cal. State Univ., 433 F.3d 1129, 1136 (9th Cir.2006); Brown v. Castleton State Coll., 663 F.Supp.2d 392 , 397 n. 3 (D.Vt.2009). Ms. … Brown, 663 F.Supp.2d at 399-402 ; Walter v. Hamburg Cent. Sch. Dist., No. 04-CV-996S, 2007 WL 1480965 , at *6-7, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36611 , at *20-22 (W.D.N.Y. May 18, 2007); AB v. Rhinebeck Cent. Sch.

Price v. Cannon Mills Co.

607 F. Supp. 1146 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 23, 1985

United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711 , 103 S.Ct. 1478 , 75 L.Ed.2d 403 (1983). … United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens, 460 U.S. 711, 716 , 103 S.Ct. 1478, 482-83 , 75 L.Ed.2d 1478 (1983). Plaintiff has sustained her burden by the preponderance of the evidence.

WELLS v. LYNCH

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 8, 2025

Lynch “appear to overlap substantially” with the federal law claims against the Board. (Id. at 4-5 (citing Shaughnessy v. Duke Univ., No. 1:18-CV-461, 2018 WL 6047277, at *6 (M.D.N.C. … See Raub v.

Aghnides v. SH Kress and Company

140 F. Supp. 582 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 4, 1956

In addition to the above, we cannot ignore that these patents did not emerge from the Patent Office until full consideration by the Board of Appeal. … The improvement patent ’832 was allowed over the basic patent ’846 by the Board of Appeals in the Patent Office.

LAMBETH v. CITY OF HIGH POINT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 7, 2024

Clapper v. … Ctr. v.

Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

444 F. Supp. 2d 435 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 8, 2006

Board of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 571-72 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … See Skubel, 113 F.3d at 334 (explaining that previous activities suggest that requiring plaintiff to exhaust remedies would be futile) (citing, Brown v.

Ihekwu v. City of Durham, NC

129 F. Supp. 2d 870 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 27, 2000

Board of County Comm’rs of Bryan County, Oklahoma v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 , 117 S.Ct. 1382 , 137 L.Ed.2d 626 (1997) (citing Monell v. … Board of County Comm’rs, 520 U.S. at 404 , 117 S.Ct. at 1388 (1997); see also Spell v. McDaniel, 824 F.2d 1380, 1385 (4th Cir.1987), cer t. denied, 484 U.S. 1027 , 108 S.Ct. 752 , 98 L.Ed.2d 765 (1988); Clipper v.

Coyne Beahm, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration

966 F. Supp. 1374 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 25, 1997

.”); ASH v. … Board of Medical Specialties or has not been certified by such a Board.

HACKWORTH v. PACCAR INC.

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

Supp. at 87, and then quoting Brown v. Brown, No. 3:23CV230, 2023 WL 6367669, at *5 (W.D.N.C. … Brown, 2023 WL 6367669, at *4.

Vesture Corporation v. Thermal Solutions, Inc.

284 F. Supp. 2d 290 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 16, 2003

Intel Corp. v. Broadcom Corp., 172 F.Supp.2d 478, 486 (D.Del.2001). In Texas Digital Sys., Inc. v. … (Brown Decl. in Supp. Defs.’ Mot. Summ. J., Ex. 1, Joines Rep. at 24, 26.)

WILLIAMSON v. PRIME SPORTS MARKETING, LLC

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

Energy Co., Inc. v. … See United States v.

Joyner v. Lancaster

553 F. Supp. 809 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 23, 1982

Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972); Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968); Barrett v. … Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. at 568 , 88 S.Ct. at 1735 , 20 L.Ed.2d at 817 . The trial court’s duty is to balance these competing interests.

THE OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. AMERICAN TEC ELECTRIC COMPANY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 25, 2023

Beach, LLC v. Hull, No. 11 CVS 5883, 2011 WL 4501912 (N.C. Super. Ct. Sept. 29, 2011), and United States v. Browne & Assocs., Inc., 751 F. … This court agrees with the Browne court that Stillwell suggests a “broad” construction of “evidence of indebtedness.” Browne, 751 F. Supp. 2d at 817.

Knight v. Vernon

23 F. Supp. 2d 634 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 8, 1998

liabilities and the Board was not subject to State’s direction or control) (citing Hess). … Finkel, 445 U.S. 507 , 100 S.Ct. 1287 , 63 L.Ed.2d 574 (1980), or the free speech cases of Pickering v. Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968), and Connick v.

Douglas v. Wirtz

232 F. Supp. 348 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 6, 1964

In Brotherhood of Local Firemen and Enginemen v. … United States v. Resnick, 299 U.S. 207 , 57 S.Ct. 126 , 81 L.Ed. 127 (1936); Kordel v. U. S. of America, 335 U.S. 345 , 69 S.Ct. 106 , 93 L.Ed. 52 (1948).

Drum v. Scott

337 F. Supp. 588 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 3, 1972

CRAVEN, Circuit Judge: This is a class action brought against members of the North Carolina State Board of Elections and the Secretary of State of North Carolina to have N.C.G. … Were it not for Kirkpatrick v. Preisler, supra, and Wells v.