Case law

S-1 & S-2 Ex Rel. P-1 & P-2 v. Spangler

650 F. Supp. 1427 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 31, 1986

Clearly, then, Plaintiffs maintain a private right of action through which to vindicate the loss of their procedural rights guaranteed by the EAHCA. … The question presented is whether that interpretation falls below the minimum level of protection established by the EAHCA.

LUFKIN v. O'MALLEY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 12, 2025

that REC, the claimant can “perform past relevant work”; if so, the claimant does not qualify as disabled. Id. at 179-80. … To assist in this inquiry, the regulations further establish earnings thresholds below which work generally does not qualify as SGA.

Ballard v. Colvin

90 F. Supp. 3d 470 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 27, 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 . … The ALJ also clearly states in her opinion that she "considered evidence in accordance with the requirements of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527 ,” which memorialize the Hines factors. (Tr. at 46.) .

WATSON v. ENGLAND

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

[Officer] Coleman is not entitled to qualified immunity because, as discussed, he acted outside of the procedural protections of due process. . . . … To qualify as plausible, a claim needs sufficient factual content to support a reasonable inference of the defendant’s liability for the alleged misconduct. Id.

WHITE v. THE CITY OF GREENSBORO

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 5, 2022

Further, the court has previously denied the Greensboro Defendants’ summary judgment motions on the basis of qualified immunity and public official immunity, as there is evidence that … their conduct “violated White’s clearly established Fourth Amendment right to privacy.”

Wheaton v. Hagan

435 F. Supp. 1134 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 11, 1977

Clearly, Terry v. … Clearly, the problem would be eased if patrons all had assigned seats.

Phillips v. Mabe

367 F. Supp. 2d 861 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 28, 2005

Plaintiff further alleges that Mabe and Whitt established a conspiracy to punish Plaintiff, who is white, for wanting to participate in an investigation of a racially hostile environment against black students at Chatham … or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities

WHATLEY

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

they go, them sons of a bitches, I’m going to put a pole down there.”).6 The plaintiff suggests there was no probable cause for an arrest because a “boundary dispute between neighbors is clearly … Governmental Immunity The parties appear to agree that Sheriff Kimbrough is entitled to governmental immunity beyond the amount of the surety bond.

Fulmore v. City of Greensboro

834 F. Supp. 2d 396 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 6, 2011

All claims arising before February 2, 2005, are clearly time barred and will be dismissed, b. … Failure to Promote A failure-to-promote claim comprises the following elements: (1) the plaintiff is a member of a protected group; (2) his employer had an open position for which he applied; (3) he was qualified for the

Alexander v. Carolina Fire Control Inc.

112 F. Supp. 3d 340 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 18, 2015

These communication diffi- - culties would not have occurred if she had been on a form of intermittent FMLA leave, under which her in-office working time would have been clearly demarcated from -her out-of-office leave time … In addition, Plaintiff has not established the third and fourth elements of her prima facie case, nor has she identified genuine issues -of material fact as to these elements. .Likewise, Plaintiff has not established or put

United States v. State of North Carolina

192 F. Supp. 3d 620 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 23, 2016

Connally, 472 F.2d 903, 906 (4th Cir.1973) (financial harm qualifies as irreparable harm when the defendant will be worse off even if the plaintiff is subsequently required to reimburse the defendant). … Generally, the normal standard for preliminary injunctions requires the moving party to clearly establish that (1) it is likely to succeed on the merits, (2) it is *629 likely to suffer, irreparable harm in the absence of

GADDY v. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 3, 2024

“The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing that service of process has been accomplished in a manner that complies with Rule 4.” Plant Genetic Sys., N.V. v. Ciba Seeds, 933 F. … It is barred by sovereign immunity. UNC Health is a state agency, Singh, 659 F.

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF SONS OF CONFEDERATE VETERANS, INC. v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 1, 2022

Although Plaintiff fails to clearly specify, this court assumes that this due process claim is a procedural due process claim. … Here, Plaintiff has failed to establish that it has been treated differently from others similarly situated.

RICHARDSON v. WELLPATH HEALTH CARE

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 10, 2021

The defendant bears the burden of establishing that a prisoner failed to exhaust administrative remedies. See Jones v. … Exhaustion provides an appropriate basis for dismissal only when “all facts necessary to the affirmative defense ‘clearly appear[] on the face of the complaint.’” Goodman v.

IHFC Properties, LLC v. APA Marketing, Inc.

850 F. Supp. 2d 604 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 24, 2012

Here, the Magistrate Judge’s decision to strike Whalen’s reply brief was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. … contract would clearly cause foreseeable injury in the forum state.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., Nuclear Turbine Plant

81 F.R.D. 528 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 30, 1979

The analysis clearly indicates the impropriety of class certification in this case. … Rather the Court ... is saying that . . . the plaintiffs have failed to establish for the purpose of class certification that blacks . . . as a class are treated differently. Garrett v. R. J.

Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Kearns

84 F. Supp. 3d 447 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 30, 2015

Under the plain terms of the carve-out, therefore, Kearns’ conduct in conducting PGD testing services does not qualify. … This covenant sweeps too broadly and, at this stage, LabCorp has not clearly justified this apparent overreach.

WILLIAMS v. THE ESTATES LLC

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

Corporate Immunity and Intracorporate Immunity Finally, defendant Carolyn Souther moves to dismiss all claims against her, asserting that she is shielded from liability by North Carolina’s corporate … immunity laws.

Dunn v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp.

275 F. Supp. 2d 672 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 4, 2003

Dunn to provide an epidemiological study in order to establish causation. 6 The Fourth Circuit has clearly held that epidemiological studies are not required to establish causation. See Benedi v. … “If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert ... may testify thereto in the form of an

Lassiter v. LabCorp Occupational Testing Services, Inc.

337 F. Supp. 2d 746 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 21, 2004

To qualify for protection under the opposition clause, an employee’s behavior need not rise to the level of filing a formal charge of discrimination against his employer. Armstrong v. … Here, Defendant clearly has a legitimate and substantial interest in preventing sexual harassment among its employees.