Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,198 results
0.70s
Building Graphics, Inc. v. Lennar Corp.
866 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 30, 2011
The matter of access in Bonner , an inapposite case, was clearly established as the plaintiff directly provided its copyright-protected work to defendant on a previous occasion. … Regardless, where a defendant's work is based upon work furnished by another, “the defendant’s ignorance that such third party has wrongfully copied from plaintiff will not create any immunity.” 4 Melville B.
Cited 6 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Mar 18, 2022
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 … When a district court dismisses all claims independently qualifying for the exercise of federal jurisdiction, it “ordinarily dismiss[es] all related state claims.” Artis v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 1, 2022
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 … 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
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 11, 2023
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 … To establish an Eighth Amendment claim, an inmate must satisfy both an objective component–that the harm inflicted was sufficiently serious–and a subjective component–that the prison official acted with a sufficiently
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 10, 2022
It is well-established law that 6 B. … Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978). 7 were clearly aware of the absence of a camera and used that knowledge to beat the Plaintiff
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 6, 2020
. § 523(a)(8)(B) and the facts clearly establish that the Jubers’ loan would be nondischargeable if it is determined that the loan was “used to refinance” Ms. … First, the Jubers’ must establish that their loan was a “refinance” under 26 U.S.C. § 221(d)(1).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 27, 2021
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 scenarios. … Rather, to establish liability under § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendant “acted personally” to cause the alleged violation. See Vinnedge v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 26, 2024
On January 10, 2024, the Court entered 1 The Plaintiff is reminded to clearly title any request for relief as a “Motion.” [Doc. 3 at ¶ 3 (Order of Instructions)]. … Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (establishing the prisoner mailbox rule); Lewis v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Mar 15, 2021
it was not clearly established law at the time of the incident that drawing, or even pointing, a weapon at a subject for 33 seconds during a felony traffic stop is unconstitutional. … the Defendants’ entitlement to qualified immunity.
Cited 0 timesUnknown669 F. Supp. 1353 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 28, 1987
If any potential sales does not clearly fall within the definition of “new business” or “follow on business,” the parties may by mutual agreement establish a special incentive compensation plan for that particular sale and … memorandum, the court stated that Subsequent to the execution of a written contract, it is competent for the parties, by a new contract, although not in writing, either to abandon, waive, or annul, the prior contract, or vary or qualify
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 28, 2020
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 … “The objective component asks whether the force applied was sufficiently serious to establish a cause of action.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 25, 2023
NCDPS is a state agency, and suit against it is barred by sovereign immunity. See Kawai Am. Corp. v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill, 152 N.C. … App. 163, 167, 567, S.E.2d 215, 218 (2002) (North Carolina’s Tort Claims Act does not waive sovereign immunity for intentional torts); Harwood v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · May 25, 2021
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 … To establish an Eighth Amendment claim for the use of excessive force, an inmate must satisfy both an objective component–that the harm inflicted was sufficiently serious–and a subjective component–that the
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 4, 2022
To establish an Eighth Amendment excessive force claim, an inmate must satisfy both an objective component–that the harm inflicted was sufficiently serious–and a subjective component–that the prison official … Here, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Miller pepper sprayed him “while in handcuffs, which is clearly excessive use of force.” [Doc. 1 at 3].
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 29, 2020
The Federal Defender did not do so, however, because such arguments were clearly precluded by established Circuit law. See United States v. … Mathis, 932 F.3d 242 (4th Cir. 2019) (holding that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as “crime of violence” under § 924(c)).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Oct 20, 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 … In allowing Plaintiff to amend his Complaint, the Court instructs Plaintiff that, to establish liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must show that the defendants “acted personally” to cause the alleged violation
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 3, 2022
clearly baseless factual contentions, such as fantastic or delusional scenarios. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-28 (1989). Furthermore, a pro se complaint must be construed liberally. Haines v. … When a district court dismisses all claims independently qualifying for the exercise of federal jurisdiction, it “ordinarily dismiss[es] all related state claims.” Artis v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 20, 2020
Complaint to determine whether it is subject to dismissal on the grounds that it is “frivolous or malicious[,] fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or [ ] seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Further, Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Sims based on interference with Plaintiffs practice of religion is not clearly frivolous. IV.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 7, 2023
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 … The Plaintiff has not established any of the elements that would warrant preliminary injunctive relief.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 27, 2022
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 … 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
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna