Case law

JONES

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 10, 2026

Here, Jones has produced no evidence that the City has waived governmental immunity. … June 18, 2026) (finding that the firefighter plaintiff had a clearly established right to speak on “the ability of the fire department to carry out its mission effectively” without suffering

Tyndall v. Maynor

288 F.R.D. 103 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 7, 2013

[T]he district court could not modify or set aside any portion of the magistrate judge’s order unless the magistrate judge’s decision was 'clearly erroneous or contrary to law.’ … Any lack of familiarity with federal court or electronic orders on Attorney Holtkamp's part does not establish excusable neglect.

CHAFFINS v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 26, 2022

To qualify for CDB, Plaintiff must, at the time of application, demonstrate that he 1) remains unmarried, 2) qualified as a dependent of his father at the time of his death, and 3) either … CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established an error warranting relief.

STEVENS v. CABARRUS COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 30, 2022

Defendant does argue, however, that Plaintiff cannot establish the third element— that she was qualified for the position. … However, the Fourth Circuit has clearly stated that preselection, absent proof of racial animus, does not violate Title VII. See Anderson v.

GUILFORD COLLEGE v. MCALEENAN

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 6, 2020

That, in short, is enough to establish standing. … In other words, the August 2018 PM is not immunized by virtue of the fact that the prior policy went unchallenged.

DAVIS v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 6, 2021

The ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as disabled under the Act. (Tr. 14-27.) … Because “the record clearly establishes [Plaintiff]’s entitlement to benefits and another ALJ hearing on remand would 26 serve

JONES v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 5, 2023

at 16), because “[t]he VE clearly testified that off task behaviors and/or absenteeism at certain levels would preclude all competitive work” (id. (citing Tr. 267-68)}. … CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established an error warranting remand.

SCIACCA v. THE DURHAM COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 18, 2020

any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State . . . subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … “To the extent possible, . . . the ADA and Rehabilitation Act [are construed] to impose similar requirements” and, thus, “they require a plaintiff to demonstrate the same elements to establish liability.” Halpern v.

BARTELL v. GRIFOLS SHARED SERVICES NA, INC.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 31, 2023

On the record before this court, Plaintiff’s right to the new, broad, relief she requests has not been established, nor does it appear Plaintiff’s right to that relief could be established … Likewise, while Defendants claim a screen reader would “clearly” “take just as much time – if not longer – than a human reading the questionnaire,” they provide no evidence for their

GILLISPIE v. WATSON

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 12, 2020

More specifically, the Court may not grant relief unless a state court decision on the merits “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law … Such a rule qualifies as “adequate” if the state courts regularly or consistently apply the rule, see Johnson v.

MALDONANDO v. HOOKS

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 5, 2020

Respondent correctly contends that the Petition qualifies as untimely under subparagraph (A). … Indeed, what little caselaw exists suggests that structural errors are not immune to 20 the statute of limitations.”

BONE v. UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 13, 2019

In order to establish entitlement to injunctive relief under Title III, Plaintiffs, more specifically Plaintiff Bone, must establish “a real or immediate threat that [he] will be wronged again … Defendant UNCHCS has not disputed the fact that it qualifies as a public entity. (See Docket Entry 24 at 1-23; see also Docket Entry 27 at 1-15.)

WILLIAMS v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 14, 2023

The ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as disabled under the Act. (Tr. 13-27.) … CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established an error warranting relief.

BRANDE v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 24, 2022

that REC, the claimant can “perform past relevant work”; if so, the claimant does not qualify as disabled. Id. at 179-80. … Here, the AL] reviewed the evidence, explained her decision, and clearly explained the reasons for her determination. That determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

DUNN v. ENHANCED RECOVERY COMPANY, LLC

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 6, 2022

To establish standing, a party must first show that the plaintiff has suffered an “injury in fact.” Lujan, 504 U.S. at 560-61. … Intangible harms may also qualify as concrete injuries. Spokeo, 578 U.S. at 340.

SHOUSE

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

To the extent that Plaintiff argues that his multiple diagnoses require further limitations, the Social Security regulations clearly state that more than a mere diagnosis is required to establish the existence 7 To the … of an impairment, let alone to establish total disability.

HILL v. TOWN OF MOCKSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 21, 2021

The case was before the Fourth Circuit on the question of qualified immunity. … Having reached this result, the court need not consider Defendants’ alternative arguments, including that Defendants are protected from suit by qualified immunity.

ALLEN v. BENNETT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 24, 2021

pull[ing] in front of [Plaintiff’s or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution … Durham County Sheriff’s Department, Mebane Police Department, and the City of Mebane Next, neither the Durham County Sheriff’s Department nor Mebane Police Department qualify as legal entities

THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE BAR v. DANT

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jul 29, 2025

Regardless, the Court must remand this action “[b]ecause jurisdiction is established based on the allegations of [ P]laintiff’s complaint filed in state court . . . … For reasons just discussed, Defendant does not qualify as a federal officer for purposes of the removal statutes. See Shimek, 356 F. Supp. at 687- 88; see also Cammer, 350 U.S.

CRABTREE v. SAUL

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 21, 2019

The ALJ subsequently ruled that Plaintiff did not qualify as disabled under the Act. (Tr. 8-30.) … CONCLUSION Plaintiff has not established an error warranting relief.