Case law

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.

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.

CHAMBERS v. RUSSELL

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 26, 2020

Respondent stated he was able to do so because he got Z.R. re-immunized. When asked why he didn’t have Z.R. re-immunized in Jamaica, Respondent stated he did not have time. … Courts do find the exception applies in situations where the evidence clearly establishes grave psychological and physical harm that the courts in the country of habitual

Rice's Toyota World, Inc. v. Southeast Toyota Distributors, Inc.

114 F.R.D. 647 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 24, 1987

Rather, the more practical concern will be to establish procedures in the event plaintiff moves to use the depositions at trial. … The deposition shall be concurrently recorded by a stenographer qualified pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Buzz Off Insect Shield, LLC v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

606 F. Supp. 2d 571 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 6, 2009

Absent reverse confusion, ‘a company with a well established trade name and with the economic power to advertise extensively [would be immunized from suit] for a product name taken from a competitor.’ ” A & H Sportswear, … A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of a matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest

Wall v. AT & T TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

754 F. Supp. 1084 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 11, 1990

She suggested that less qualified whites received PAE positions while she and other blacks were passed over. … Under Section 1981 Wall’s racial harassment claim under Section 1981 is clearly non-actionable. Patterson , 491 U.S. at-, 109 S.Ct. at 2363.

CREECH v. LANE AND ASSOCIATES

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 30, 2024

Drawing reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor, it appears that she is an ADA- qualified individual with at least one underlying disability, IBS, thus establishing the first … communicated, legitimate expectations.5 Plaintiff has failed to establish that she was meeting her employer’s clearly communicated, legitimate expectations because she violated Defendant

COOK v. FARMERS MUTUAL HAIL INSURANCE COMPANY OF IOWA

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 23, 2024

To qualify as plausible, a claim needs sufficient factual content to support a reasonable inference of the defendant’s liability for the alleged misconduct. See id. … or which should have been established under the policy, except for interest awarded in accordance with [Paragraph] 26.” 7 C.F.R. § 457.8, ¶ 20(h).

Chandler v. French

252 F. Supp. 2d 219 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 3, 2003

That statute states that habeas relief cannot be granted in cases where a state court has considered a claim on its merits unless the decision was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established … The state court’s denial of relief based on petitioner’s claims of Brady and Giglio violations was neither contrary to federal law nor did it involve an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined

High v. R & R Transportation, Inc.

242 F. Supp. 3d 433 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 16, 2017

Here, the parties’ dispute is related to the third and fourth elements necessary to establish the claim. … was performing her job duties at a level that met her employer’s *446 legitimate expectations at .the time of the adverse employment action; and (4) the position remained open or, was filled by similarly qualified applicants

SACKS HOLDINGS, INC. v. GRIN NATURAL USA LIMITED

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 6, 2025

And clearly [Defendants] have a dispute. By bringing in another brand with an identical — almost identical mark. … that the failure to provide an expert report from Levit qualifies as substantially justified.

SIMPSON v. SAUL

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 30, 2019

In support of this the listings for immune system disorders, “[s]evete means medical severity as used in the medical community.” 20 C.E.R., Part 404, Subpt. P, Appx. 1, § 14.00(C)(12). . … Nevertheless, there is no indication in Listing 14.06(A) that in order to qualify under that listing, the impairment involving a second body system must be severe.

ALLEN v. CAMPBELL

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 19, 2019

subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Quillen, 631 F.2d 1154, 1155 (4th Cir. 1980), and the Complaint does not establish that any of these defendants qualify as state actors (see Docket Entry 2 at 1-9).

GROOMS v. THOMAS

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

In this case, Petitioner has not shown that the protective Section 2254 petition and the motion to stay proceedings (along with their supporting memoranda) qualify as “appropriate” under … pendency in state court of Petitioner’s Motion for Appropriate Relief (“MAR”) under the Racial Justice Act, (see Doc. 3-8 at 2); and (2) the order from the North Carolina Supreme Court establishing

B.E.E. International, Ltd. v. Hawes

267 F. Supp. 2d 477 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 11, 2003

The court placed the range of electronic contacts on a “sliding scale”: At one end of the spectrum are situations where á defendant clearly does business over the Internet. … To establish general jurisdiction, the defendant's contacts with the forum must be "continuous and systematic,” a more demanding standard than is required to establish specific jurisdiction.

City of Concord v. Robinson

914 F. Supp. 2d 696 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 28, 2012

The record does not establish exactly when the FBI received the money or deposited it and the case law does not clearly establish exactly what event comprises the exercise of federal jurisdiction over seized funds. … If the Superior Court at any time had clearly stated that it had in rem jurisdiction, this might be a more difficult issue.

North Carolina Alliance for Transportation Reform, Inc. v. United States Department of Transportation

713 F. Supp. 2d 491 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 19, 2010

To date, no national standards have been established regarding greenhouse gases, nor has EPA established criteria or thresholds for greenhouse gas emissions. … State Defendants further argue that the Eleventh Amendment immunizes them from suit as to Plaintiffs' NCEPA claims.

BRISSON v. SALISBURY HOUSING AUTHORITY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 30, 2024

Failure to Accommodate The ADA “prohibits employers from ‘discriminat[ing]’ against ‘qualified individual[s] on the basis of disability.’ … However, SHA’s argument overlooks Plaintiff’s contention that she experiences physical “immune system reactions such as mild to severe breathing difficulty” as well as “foggy

Stuart v. Loomis

992 F. Supp. 2d 585 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 17, 2014

Despite its brevity, the First Amendment analysis is clearly a traditional one, couched by its reference to Wooley in terms of compelled speech and by its reference to the state’s ability to regulate the practice of medicine … Gen.Stat. § 90-21.81(8), (9) (defining "qualified professional” and "qualified technician”). .The Court has granted Plaintiffs’ motion to strike declarations of experts not properly identified during discovery on which Defendants

EMERSON v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 4, 2022

The ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as disabled under the Act. (Tr. 56-71.) … In light of that definition, which does not depend on the “availability” of the evidence, the FCE, created on August 7, 2020 (see Tr. 10-12), clearly qualifies as “new.”