Case law

Candillo v. North Carolina Department of Corrections

199 F. Supp. 2d 342 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 18, 2002

In addition to the burden-shifting scheme established in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … Defendant, however, established a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not promoting Plaintiff by producing evidence that Cox was better qualified for the judicial district manager position. See Amirmokri v.

HOLMAN

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 4, 2026

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … In evaluating qualified immunity, courts consider “(1) whether the plaintiff has established the violation of a constitutional right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the

Costello v. University of North Carolina

394 F. Supp. 2d 752 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 29, 2005

A motion to amend is futile, and thus should be denied, if the proposed amendment “is clearly insufficient because of substantive or procedural considerations.” Goewey v. … Thus, the Eleventh Amendment *757 bars Plaintiffs claim for violation of Title II of the ADA unless Congress clearly and validly abrogated the state’s immunity. In Wessel v.

Currie v. United States

644 F. Supp. 1074 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 3, 1986

See also Pangburn, 326 S.E.2d at 371 (chilling effect of liability mitigated by qualified immunity). 8 It is also reasonable to conclude that the federal government, when it subjected itself under the Federal Tort Claims … In Pangburn, the North Carolina Court of Appeals construed a previous immunity statute as providing only qualified immunity to persons deciding whether or not to release mental patients.

Efird v. Riley

342 F. Supp. 2d 413 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 1, 2004

immunity or otherwise consented to suit. … Here, Plaintiff has clearly alleged in the amended complaint that Defendant Sheriff Riley has waived his immunity from civil liability through a plan of insurance pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-435.

Howard v. Food Lion, Inc.

232 F. Supp. 2d 585 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 23, 2002

Illinois State Bd. of Elections, 268 F.3d 517 , 522 (7th Cir.2001) (concluding that members of the state board of elections qualified for absolute immunity); Jones v. … To qualify for injunctive relief, a plaintiff must establish that she has sustained “irreparable injury, a requirement that cannot be met where there is no showing of any real or immediate threat that the plaintiff will be

Davis v. Durham Mental Health Developmental Disabilities Substance Abuse Area Authority

320 F. Supp. 2d 378 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 1, 2004

Defendant Holliman contends that an amendment to allege liability against her in her individual capacity would be futile because she has qualified immunity as to any § 1983 claims brought against her in her individual capacity … The issue of qualified immunity is better left to be resolved at summary judgment or at trial. See, e.g., Oliver Schools, Inc. v. Foley, 930 F.2d 248, 253 (2nd Cir.1991).

RICHARDSON v. WELLPATH HEALTH CARE

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 10, 2023

immunity shields him from liability. … Johnson, 924 F.3d 104, 119 n.6 (4th Cir. 2019) (“recogniz[ing] the ‘special problem’ raised when the objective qualified immunity standard is applied to an Eighth Amendment violation that

BUTLER v. KIMBROUGH

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 11, 2023

immunity shields him from liability. … Johnson, 924 F.3d 104, 119 n.6 (4th Cir. 2019) (“recogniz[ing] the ‘special problem’ raised when the objective qualified immunity standard is applied to an Eighth Amendment violation that

KING v. BLACKWOOD

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 13, 2025

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless the official violated a “clearly established statutory or constitutional right[] of which a reasonable person would have known.” King v. … Linster are not entitled to qualified immunity. Even if the Court were required to determine that the right violated on these facts was clearly established, the conclusion is the same.

Doe v. Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc.

440 F. Supp. 2d 465 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 6, 2006

Where a “plaintiff is not able to establish general causation, it is unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiff can establish specific causation.” Id.; see also Raynor v. … RhoGAM is used to suppress the immune response of Rh negative women to Rh positive red blood cells.

Turner v. Randolph County, NC

912 F. Supp. 182 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 11, 1995

However, this court is bound to apply the current law as established by the Fourth Circuit. … Applying the law as established by Paroline, the individual defendants can be held individually and personally *186 liable for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq.

HOLMAN v. WIGGS

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

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … In evaluating qualified immunity, courts consider “(1) whether the plaintiff has established the violation of a constitutional right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the

Food Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.

951 F. Supp. 1211 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 8, 1996

Furthermore, the Supreme Court “has emphasized that ‘[t]he publisher of a newspaper has no special immunity from the application of general laws. … The three part test established by the Fourth Circuit in LaRouche is satisfied in this case.

HOELZER v. THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 13, 2023

“Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from personal-capacity liability for civil damages under § 1983, ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … For the following reasons, the Court finds that such right was not clearly established, and that Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. The Supreme Court in Hope v.

Edwards v. City of Concord

827 F. Supp. 2d 517 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 7, 2011

Indeed, in finding the existence of a constitutional remedy, the Court specifically distinguished situations where a plaintiff could not establish his common law remedy because of the expiration of a statute of limitations … (Doc. 18 ¶3 (admitting insurance policy and that immunity has not been waived), Second Defense (qualified immunity), Third Defense (governmental immunity), and Fourth Defense (public officer immunity).) .

Geiger v. Guilford College Community Volunteer Firemen's Ass'n

668 F. Supp. 492 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 25, 1987

Defendant is thus entitled to sovereign immunity. A county’s sovereign immunity is absolute unless a statute modifies the immunity. … And as the court has already stated, the facts of this case do not establish any party’s negligence as a matter of law.

Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina v. Helpingstine

714 F. Supp. 167 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 9, 1989

If both of these questions are answered in the affirmative, then trademark infringement has been established. … Such activity clearly falls within the prohibitions of the Lanham Act. See L.L. Bean, Inc. v.

MARTIN

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 12, 2026

“Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions from personal-capacity liability for civil damages under § 1983, insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … posted signs in a non-public forum was a violation of clearly established rights.

BLANKS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 24, 2026

constitutional right, or (2) the constitutional right was not clearly “The doctrine of qualified immunity established.” Id. … June 27, clearly established that a corrections 2024)).