Case law

Bullock El-Bey v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 27, 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

LeMaitre v. Grindstaff

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 12, 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

Corkey v. Edwards

322 F. Supp. 1248 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 1, 1971

Indeed, each of them is doubtless qualified to testify as an expert witness in this very case. … As well said by Judge Cooley, ‘The right to one’s person may be said to be a right of complete immunity: to be let alone’.

Penland v. Long

922 F. Supp. 1080 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 19, 1995

There *1083 fore, Penland’s subpoenas clearly encompass nonconfidential information from nonconfi-dential sources. … As the parties’ briefs indicate, the Fourth Circuit has not established a clear test for analyzing the protection afforded by the journalists’ qualified privilege.

Ollis v. Ribicoff

208 F. Supp. 644 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 14, 1962

This is under her jurisdiction and the claimant has nothing at all tó do with it.” *648 Thus the evidence clearly establishes that the plaintiff can no longer engage in any of his former occupations. … Assuming that the plaintiff was physically and mentally qualified for some types of clerical work, the record does not disclose that he has any other education, training or experience that would qualify him for such work.

Hesed El v. Bryson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 1, 2024

§ 122-24, was interpreted by the North Carolina Supreme Court as creating qualified immunity for ordinary negligent acts. See Pangburn v. Saad, 73 N.C. … Sec. 122-24 (1981) affords only a qualified immunity, immunizing physicians only from liability for their ordinary negligent acts but not from liability for their ‘willful, wanton or recklessly’ negligent acts or their

Garrett v. Tomas

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 14, 2021

Qualified Immunity Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity from suit in their personal capacities. … A plaintiff’s claims will survive a qualified immunity challenge if (1) a constitutionally protected right was violated and (2) “the right violated was clearly established.” Tobey v.

Fraley v. Spaventa

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 22, 2020

clearly established. … Defendants, therefore, are entitled to qualified immunity if either their conduct did not violate any constitutional rights, or the right was not clearly established. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 232 (2009).

Latimore v. President & Board of Governors of the University

669 F. Supp. 1345 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 24, 1987

Fretwell, Chancellor of UNCC on the ground that he was entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiff’s First Amendment claim. … Janet Levy was not any more qualified to be tenured than was the Plaintiff.

Simpson v. Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

977 F. Supp. 2d 552 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 3, 2013

Generally speaking, “ ‘non-outsiders’ [to an employment contract] often enjoy qualified immunity from liability for inducing their corporation or other entity to breach its contract with an employee.” Lenzer v. … This qualified immunity is lost, however, “if exercised for motives other than reasonable, good faith attempts to protect the non-outsider’s interests in the contract interfered with.”

North Carolina Civil Liberties Union v. Constangy

751 F. Supp. 552 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 18, 1990

Plaintiff North Carolina Civil Liberties Union is a non-profit North Carolina corporation which holds itself out as being devoted to securing and defending the rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the United States … Central to its holding was the Court’s finding that: “Clearly the men who wrote the First Amendment Religion Clauses did not view paid legislative chaplains and opening prayers as a violation of that Amendment, for the practice

Bryant

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jul 22, 2026

To the extent Plaintiff asserts these claims against Officer Assisou individually, the Complaint fails to allege facts showing violation of a clearly established constitutional right, as required to overcome … qualified immunity. , 597 F.3d 163, 169 (4th Cir. 2010).

New NGC, Inc. v. ACE American Insurance

105 F. Supp. 3d 552 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 13, 2015

ACE argues that injuries and damages alleged .in the Fee complaint clearly fall within the pollution exclusion because: (1) released sulfur qualifies as pollution because it is a substance that makes the. environment impure … Further, the cleaning substance was expected while the sedimentation was clearly objectionable. Id.

Federal Insurance Co. v. Piper Aircraft Corp.

341 F. Supp. 855 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 20, 1972

Defendant, a Pennsylvania corporation not domesticated in North Carolina nor qualified to do business here, contends that North Carolina General Statutes, § 1-75.4, is not applicable, and that even if it is applicable it … The magazine advertisements clearly are solicitations “by or on behalf of” the defendant.

Smith v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories Co.

278 F. Supp. 2d 684 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 17, 2003

Nor is there is any doubt that the IPPHS established an association between fenflu-ramines and PPH. … Moye is clearly not a pharmacologist and, therefore, is not qualified. For this reason, he will be precluded from testifying about the alleged chemical similarities between the two (2) drugs. 5.

United States v. Boyd

68 F. 577 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 17, 1895

It only authorizes them to become citizens when it is recognized that they are qualified or calculated to become useful citizens. … C. 229 , distinctly recognizes and clearly and forcibly sustains the position taken above. The Case of the Cherokee Trust Funds, 117 U. S. 288 , 6 Sup. Ct 718, does not conflict with these views.

Wright v. Olin Corp.

585 F. Supp. 1447 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 2, 1984

These qualified experts further testified that there is no available scientific evidence from human studies which establishes that exposure of the male to lead adversely affects the fetus. … Clearly, the hazard is significantly greater for women workers than for males, and the risk is substantially confined to women workers.

Abney v. White

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 19, 2019

Here, Plaintiff alleges that the handcuffs were tight, Lastly, even if the Court were to find that Plaintiffs constitutional rights were violated in this case, qualified immunity would shield Defendant from suit because … Plaintiffs constitutional rights were not “clearly established” at the time such that a reasonably prudent officer in Defendant’s position would have known of those rights.

Buckner v. General Signal Technology Corp.

163 F. Supp. 2d 617 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 13, 2000

Unsupported allegations “do not confer talismanic immunity from Rule 56.” Ross v. Communications Satellite Corp., 759 F.2d 355, at 365 (4th Cir.1985). … Finding that plaintiff has failed to establish a causal connection between the first two elements, the court will dismiss such claim, inasmuch as plaintiff has not established a prima facie case.

Potts v. ADP, Inc.

47 F. Supp. 3d 361 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 16, 2014

As to the April 2011 “Sales Executive” position, not only was plaintiff not the most qualified candidate, the position was offered to a woman. … “In a failure to promote case, the plaintiff must establish that she was the better qualified candidate for the position sought.” Evans v. Technologies Applications & Service, Co., 80 F.3d 954, 960 (4th Cir.1996).