Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,026 results
1.03s
District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 1, 2022
The ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as disabled under the Act. (Tr. 8-23.) … CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established errors warranting remand.
Cited 0 timesUnknown905 F. Supp. 295 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 22, 1995
In the case at bar, it is undisputed that Defendant qualifies as a “private motor carrier” subject to regulation by the Secretary of Transportation.' … Travel away from home is clearly work-time when it cuts across the employee’s workday. The employee is simply substituting travel for other duties.
Cited 9 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 31, 2023
Thus, the moving patty can bear his burden either by presenting affirmative evidence ot by demonstrating that the non-moving patty’s evidence is insufficient to establish his claim. … review any evidence indicating Grossman failed to exercise that professional judgment in good faith. 19 A review of the transcript from the trial proceedings in this matter clearly
Cited 0 timesUnknownFood Lion, Inc. v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.
984 F. Supp. 923 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 29, 1997
Furthermore, the Supreme Court “has emphasized that ‘[t]he publisher of a newspaper has no special immunity from the application of general laws. … Clearly, Capital Cities is a very large corporation and can afford to pay the full amount of the punitive damage award. ABC is also a large company and would not have difficulty paying the award.
Cited 3 timesPublishedTAEKMAN v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 26, 2023
The district court should exercise its discretion, however, only when circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is necessary to conduct an adequate de novo review of … Moreover, any such motion should clearly address why permitting such discovery, including any requested deposition, qualifies as proportional given the “significant restraints on the district
Cited 0 timesUnknownPacific Furniture Manufacturing Co. v. Preview Furniture Corp.
626 F. Supp. 667 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 27, 1985
The law permits inequitable conduct to be established by direct or circumstantial evidence. … Ehrlich’s intransigence in refusing to acknowledge what the evidence in this case clearly establishes, namely that Ehrlich not only had direct access to the 120 and 150 chairs but also copied them, and the acts of Preview
Cited 11 timesPublishedHarris v. Blue Ridge Health Servs., Inc.
388 F. Supp. 3d 633 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 21, 2019
Plaintiffs clearly suffered an adverse employment action when they were fired. ( Id. ¶ 64.) … As for what constitutes protected activity under the FLSA retaliation provision, *642 the Fourth Circuit has held that mere "intracompany complaints" qualify. Minor v.
Cited 30 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 4, 2022
The [VE], as an impartial [VE], is qualified for the purposes of the testimony at the hearing and is qualified to provide an estimate of jobs by referencing data that has … was established and maintained.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 25, 2023
Hines, 453 F.3d at 562-63. 5 A claimant thus can qualify as disabled via two paths through the SEP. … I note that you are not represented by an attorney or other qualified individual.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGOLDEN v. NORTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL STATE UNIVERSITY
District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 29, 2024
(Docket Entry 6 at 16; see also Docket Entry 7-1 at 5 (describing said co-worker as “qualified for that particular permanent position”).) … The record does not establish diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction over such claims.
Cited 0 timesUnknown88 F. Supp. 2d 461 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 28, 2000
establish that Miller had a disability as defined by the Rehabilitation Act. … Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 , provides in pertinent part: No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded
Cited 2 timesPublishedScott v. Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Board of Education
317 F. Supp. 453 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 25, 1970
An attendance zone has been established for each school in the system. … Hanes, Kennedy, Anderson, and Paisley Junior High Schools qualify for this program.
Cited 2 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 10, 2026
At most, it might establish mere negligence, which is not sufficient. See California v. … Switzer, 562 U.S. 521 (2011) (“[P]arties asserting Brady violations postconviction generally do seek a judgment qualifying them for immediate or speedier release from imprisonment....
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 21, 2020
Defendant Hockenberry has presented facts which are not disputed and which establish that the elements of qualified privilege are all present here. … Generally, “‘non-outsiders’ often enjoy qualified immunity from liability for inducing their corporation or other entity to breach its contract with an employee.” Lenzer v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownAllen v. International Business MacHines Corp.
308 F. Supp. 2d 638 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 1, 2004
After the flooding, Plaintiffs allege that they “began to suffer from constant vertigo, extreme sensitivity to motion and visual stimuli, chronic fatigue, muscle spasms, suppressed immune systems, and significant cognitive … The Court notes that a preliminary injunction is “an extraordinary remedy ... to be applied only in [the] limited circumstances which clearly demand it.” Direx Israel, Ltd. v. Breakthrough Med.
Cited 3 timesPublishedDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 22, 2021
In other words, the Complaint does not allege factual matter establishing state action. … CONCLUSION In sum, Defendants do not qualify as “state actors” subject to suit under Section 1983, and Plaintiff’s allegations do not state a viable claim under Title VII
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 30, 2024
Jan. 22, 2013), such that the instant Petition qualifies as successive, see Wright, 826 F.3d at 784 (“The claims raised in [the petitioner]’s proposed petition were clearly available … Oct. 16, 2006) (unpublished) (concluding that the petitioner bears burden of establishing applicability of Section 2244(d)(1)(D), including his due diligence, and that conclusory statements do not satisfy burden).
Cited 0 timesUnknownNAPCO, INC. v. LANDMARK TECHNOLOGY A, LLC
District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 19, 2021
Noerr-Pennington immunity Landmark next contends that the communications within its demand letter are protected by Noerr-Pennington immunity. … To overcome this presumptive immunity, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant's instigation of litigation was merely a “sham.” Prof'l Real Estate Invs., Inc. v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownTAEKMAN v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 4, 2023
Moreover, any such motion should clearly address why permitting such discovery, including any requested deposition, qualifies as proportional given the “significant restraints … The district court should exercise its discretion, however, only when circumstances clearly establish that additional evidence is necessary to conduct an adequate de novo review of the benefit
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 22, 2021
In other words, the Complaint does not allege factual matter establishing state action. … -10- CONCLUSION In sum, Defendants do not qualify as “state
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna