Case law

Zayre-Brown v. North Carolina Department of Adult Corrections

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 2, 2022

In the case of information reduced to physical paper form or information reduced to non-physical paper form upon which a designation can be clearly affixed (e.g. … The non-filing by the objecting party of a motion for relief shall not be deemed an admission that the information in question qualifies for the disputed designation. 10.

Stratton v. State of North Carolina

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 1, 2021

claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Rule 4, 28 U.S.C.A. foll. § 2254; When conducting a frivolity review, the Court must determine whether the filing raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly

Wiener v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 24, 2020

The Court concludes that Burgess’s knowledge and experience qualifies him to render his offered expert opinions. … Plaintiff filed the motion three months after the close of discovery, and it is well established in this district that “a party must generally move to compel a party to comply with a discovery request prior to the close

Lowe v. Cathey

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 13, 2024

review and identify and dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Moreover, to establish liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendants “acted personally” to cause the alleged violation. See Vinnedge v.

Williams v. United States

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jul 8, 2021

Petitioner has also failed to establish prejudice. … However, appellate counsel may render deficient performance by failing to raise “issues [that] are clearly stronger than those presented.” Mason, 774 F.3d at 828-29.

Hariri

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 3, 2026

. § 58-63-15(11) may be used to establish an unfair or deceptive act under the first element of a UDTP claim. See Kenney, 665 F. … First, as noted above, the pleading seeks to add facts that arose before, not after, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and thus does not qualify under Rule 15(d).

Burchette v. Brown

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 3, 2020

In its frivolity review, this Court must determine whether the Complaint raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional … First, Plaintiffs have not established that the four prerequisites to a class action under Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, i.e., numerosity, typicality, commonality, and adequacy of representation, are

Stroud

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 4, 2026

To establish a prima facie case for disability discrimination under the ADA, Stroud must show: “(1) that she has a disability, (2) that she is a ‘qualified individual’ for the employment in question, and (3) that [her … A “qualifying event” includes termination of employment for any reason other than gross misconduct. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1161(a); 1163(2).

Barnett v. Bank of America, N.A.

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 28, 2021

Instead, a Plaintiff’s words must clearly revoke consent. … To establish a claim under the NCDCA Plaintiff must first establish three things: “[f]irst, the obligation owed must be a ‘debt’; second, the one owing the obligation must be a ‘consumer’; and third, the one trying to collect

USA Farm Labor, Inc. v. Julie Su

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 26, 2023

Financial losses may constitute irreparable harm, however, where the plaintiff cannot recoup its losses later due to the defendant’s sovereign immunity. See Feinerman v. … The Balance of Equities and the Public Interest A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that the balance of the equities tips in its favor and must establish that the granting

Franks v. SSC Brevard Operating Company, LLC

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 12, 2019

According to the Defendants, the Plaintiff’s Objections and Answers qualified as an “‘other paper’ from which they [first ascertained] that the case [was] removable.” [Id. at 12]. … Further, the Complaint and Civil Cover Sheet plainly state contradictory amounts in controversy, one that might possibly support diversity jurisdiction and one that clearly would not. [Id. at ¶ 9].

Hesed El v. Bryson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 27, 2024

Having determined that the savings provision of Rule 41 applies, the next issue is establishing the date of accrual of the Plaintiff’s claims. … North Carolina state law immunizes hospitals and their employees from civil liability for their actions which are not grossly negligent. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 122C-210.1.

Kimble v. Jenkins

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 11, 2019

determine whether it is subject to dismissal on the grounds that it is “(i) frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … In its frivolity review, a court must determine whether the Complaint raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional scenarios.

Cureton v. Unnamed

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 20, 2024

determine whether it is subject to dismissal on the grounds that it is “(i) frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … In its frivolity review, a court must determine whether a complaint raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional scenarios.

James v. United States

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 9, 2019

However, Petitioner was found to qualify as a career offender based on his prior convictions for breaking and/or entering (96CRS3127) and robbery with a dangerous weapon (98CRS915), and he was found to qualify as an armed … Section 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of a sentence under the “savings clause” when: (1) at the time of sentencing, settled law of this circuit or the Supreme Court established the legality of

Jackson v. United States

638 F. Supp. 2d 514 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 19, 2009

The record clearly shows that Belser was prepared for and argued the motion. … In any event, the undersigned clearly would not have made such an appointment.

Cooper v. United States

362 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 21, 2005

Neither party disputes that requirements II and IV are met, as Plaintiff clearly did not have an unrestricted right to the money in a subsequent year and the amount greatly exceeded $3000.00. … As such, Debtor’s payment to trustee qualifies as a payment made pursuant to the settlement of a business dispute, and is consequently deductible under § 162 as a necessary and ordinary business expense.

Grimes v. Hamby

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 10, 2024

and identify and dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Gibbs, 550 F.2d 926, 928 (4th Cir. 1977) (to establish liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendants “acted personally” to cause the alleged violation) (citation omitted).

Elmore v. Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Department

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 27, 2023

In its frivolity review, this Court must determine whether the Complaint raises an indisputably meritless legal theory or is founded upon clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional … Individual Capacity Claim against Defendant McFadden To establish liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendants “acted personally” to cause the alleged violation.

McClellan v. Cothron

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 13, 2020

dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … As to Defendant Schitter, Plaintiff has not established any of the elements that would warrant preliminary injunctive relief.