Case law

Pope v. Blue

809 F. Supp. 392 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 16, 1992

We note that in Bandemer the plurality held that the results of a single election were insufficient to establish discriminatory effect. … While requiring the General Assembly to adopt nonpartisan, computer-generated districts might be a good idea, it clearly goes beyond what the Constitution mandates.

Doe v. Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of Education

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 12, 2022

However, the cases Plaintiff cites regarding qualified immunity do not support her position where, as here, Plaintiff has not alleged the violation of a clearly established right at the time the conduct occurred. … for qualified immunity in a case where the court concluded that there was a clearly established right at the time of the relevant conduct.

Pacheco

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 29, 2025

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Toineeta v. Andrus

503 F. Supp. 605 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 15, 1980

Article 12 of the treaty was amended to provide that those Cherokees who desired to stay and become citizens of the State could do so if they were qualified to take care of themselves and their property. … This conclusion is clearly borne out by the various Acts of Congress.

Scott v. Watson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 6, 2021

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

McClary v. Downey

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 28, 2020

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Aleman v. City of Charlotte

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 30, 2021

The burden of establishing the affirmative defense of qualified immunity rests on the party seeking to invoke it. Ever since Graham v. … “Qualified immunity shields federal and state officials from money damages unless the facts show (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the

McNabb v. North Carolina

156 F. Supp. 2d 546 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 26, 2001

immunity. … Clearly, Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claim against state officials in their official capacity must be dismissed.

Pickens v. Hendricks

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 12, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … An award of qualified immunity is inappropriate if a question of material fact exists that, when resolved, would amount to the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. See Quinn v.

Pittman v. Huneycutt

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 13, 2025

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Trent v. Baers

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 6, 2023

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Williams v. Ishee

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 30, 2024

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Mayweather v. Guice

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

To overcome the qualified immunity defense at the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff must have shown facts that make out a violation of a constitutional right, and the right at issue must have been “clearly established … clearly established violation of law.

Ellis v. Masscegee

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

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Monds v. Bennett

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Mar 15, 2021

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Griffin v. Hollar

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Mar 10, 2022

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Jones v. Parry

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 6, 2021

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … “To determine whether an officer is entitled to qualified immunity, the court must examine (1) whether the plaintiff has demonstrated that the officer violated a constitutional right and (2) whether that right was clearly

Laschober v. Ammons

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 17, 2023

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity “is an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation.” Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985). … “If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”

Jones v. Haire

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 27, 2022

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Raybon v. Williamson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 11, 2024

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”