Case law

Mumford v. CSX Transportation

878 F. Supp. 827 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 12, 1994

The National Railway Adjustment Board has exclusive jurisdiction over “disputes growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions.” § 151a … Mary’s Honor Center v. Hicks, — U.S.-,-n. 1, 113 S.Ct. 2742 , 2746 n. 1, 125 L.Ed.2d 407 (1993) (citing Patterson v.

SAMUEL CLEMENT WENDT v. WARDEN BENJAMIN ANDERSON, et al.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 5, 2026

Grande, Grievance Review Board member Angela Dellaripa, and Grievance Review Board member Wakenda Greene. … See Docket Entry 1 at 3–7, Wendt v. Bullard, No. 5:23-ct-03275 (E.D.N.C.). Like the instant suit, these initially included grievance review board member Wakenda Greene and NCDAC Secretary Ishee. Id. at 3, 5.

NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONFERENCE OF THE NAACP v. COOPER

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 31, 2019

Palmer v. … V.

Parker v. Johnny Tart Enterprises, Inc.

104 F. Supp. 2d 581 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 4, 1999

See Freeman v. Bechtel, 936 F.Supp. 320, 324-25 (M.D.N.C.1996) (citing Gableman v. Peoria, Decatur & Evansville Ry. Co., 179 U.S. 335 , 21 S.Ct. 171 , 45 L.Ed. 220 (1900) and Perpetual Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. … See McKinney v. Board of Trustees of Maryland Community College, 955 F.2d 924 , 928 (4th Cir.1992). If the summons and the complaint are served simultaneously, the thirty-day period for removal begins to run at once.

MR. DEE'S INC.,et al v. INMAR, INC.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 30, 2021

Neuberger Berman Real Estate Income Fund, Inc. v. Lola Brown Tr. No. 1B, 230 F.R.D. 398, 406 n.14 (D. Md. 2005) (internal quotations marks omitted). … Anderson v. Murphy-Brown, LLC (In re NC Swine Farm Nuisance Litig.), No. 5:15-CV-13, 2017 WL 2313470, at *5 (E.D.N.C.

Colin v. MARCONI COMMERCE SYS. EMPLOY. RETIREMENT

335 F. Supp. 2d 590 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 1, 2004

Alexander, Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw, Charlotte, NC, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER OSTEEN, District Judge. Plaintiffs David S. Colin, Arthur C. … Under ordinary corporate law principles, only the board of directors or authorized officers would have the authority to make decisions or representations that were binding on the corporation.

Crawford v. University of North Carolina

440 F. Supp. 1047 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 1, 1977

In Duran v. … In Rosado v.

M.G.M v. KEURIG GREEN MOUNTAIN, INC.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Oct 7, 2022

See Jeter Est. of Patterson v. Correct Care Sols., LLC, No. 19-CV-152, 2020 WL 13551437, at *3 (M.D.N.C. July 16, 2020); Browne v. Pantry, Inc., No. 11-CV-587, 2011 WL 5119263, at *1 (M.D.N.C. … See, e.g., Martin v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 940 F. Supp. 2d 277, 280 (D.S.C. 2013); Browne, 2011 WL 5119263, at *2; White v. Bonner, No. 10-CV-105, 2010 WL 4625770, at *2 (E.D.N.C. Nov. 4, 2010).

Oleyar v. County of Durham

336 F. Supp. 2d 512 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 1, 2004

Brown v. … Fox v.

Nat'l Quarry Servs., Inc. v. First Mercury Ins. Co.

372 F. Supp. 3d 296 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 11, 2019

Id. ; see also Brown v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. … Co. v.

R. B. Brunemann & Sons, Inc. v. Duke University

533 F. Supp. 365 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 23, 1982

In Louisiana Power and Light Co. v. … See Cox v. Planning District I Community Mental Health and Mental Retardation Services Board, 669 F.2d 940 at 943 (4th Cir. 1982).

Mason C. Day Excavating, Inc. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.

143 F.R.D. 601 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 24, 1992

Liggett Group v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 116 F.R.D. 205, 210 (M.D.N.C.1986). Therefore, the Court will also consult federal law to the extent it is not inconsistent with state law. … Duplan Corp. v.

Trexler v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

957 F. Supp. 772 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 4, 1997

Section 153 of the RLA provides for a National Railroad Adjustment Board (NRAB) which is vested with exclusive jurisdiction over “minor disputes” under the Act. 45 U.S.C.A. § 153 ; see also Andrews v. … (citing Cook v. Georgetown Steel Corp., 770 F.2d 1272 (4th Cir.1985)).

PEGRAM v. WILLIAMSON

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

Brown v. Virginia Beach Sheriff’s Office, No. 1:17cv48, 2017 WL 6402987, at *3 (E.D. Va. Mar. 28, 2017) (unpublished) (citing Adams v. … Brown v. Graham, 2010 WL 6428251, at *10 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2010) (unpublished) (citing Grand Jury Subpoena John Doe v.

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Taylor

118 F.R.D. 426 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 7, 1988

Hanes Corp. v. Millard, 531 F.2d 585, 592-93 (D.C.Cir.1976). … Board of Education v. HEW, 396 F.Supp. 203, 250 (S.D.Ohio 1975) (“the right to maintain a declaratory judgment action does not depend on which party filed suit first”). See also Fireman’s Ins. Co. of Newark v.

United States ex rel. Clark v. Fraley

282 F. Supp. 948 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 9, 1968

Similarly, in Evans v. … In Cuevas v.

Beck v. City of Durham

129 F. Supp. 2d 844 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 23, 2000

Biser v. Town of Bel Air, 991 F.2d 100, 104 , (4th Cir.) cert. denied, 510 U.S. 864 , 114 S.Ct. 182 , 126 L.Ed.2d 141 (1993) (citing Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972)). … Alvarado v. Board of Trustees of Montgomery Community College, 928 F.2d 118, 121 (4th Cir.1991).

Royal Mfg. Co. v. Spradlin

6 F. Supp. 98 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 5, 1934

First Nat’l Bank v. Davis, 114 N. C. 343 , 19 S. E. 280 , 41 Am. St. Rep. 795 ; Corporation Com. v. Bank, 137 N. C. 697 , 50 S. E. 308 ; N. Car. Corp’n Com. (Pine Hall Brick Company) v. Bank of Hamlet, 192 N. … E. 561 and Board of Education v. Hood, 204 N. C. 353 , 168 S. E. 522 , denied the existence of the lien for the same reason.

SMITH v. KIJAKAZI

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Feb 21, 2023

(citation omitted); Brown v. Comm?’ … Moreover, the AL] provided no explanation as to how those particular activities—or any of the activities depicted by Brown—showed that he could persist through an eight-hour workday.”); see also Fletcher v.

Gowens v. Morgan & Sons Poultry Co.

238 F. Supp. 399 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 28, 1964

Maddox v. Brown, 232 *403 N.C. 542 , 61 S.E.2d 613 (1950). However, the Court finds that the defendant Beeson was not in the act of passing, even though there is evidence that he was contemplating it. … White v. McCabe, 208 N.C. 301 , 180 S.E. 704 (1935); Spivey v.