Case law

Winston v. Hendley

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 5, 2024

In its frivolity review, this 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. … The Fourth Circuit has “rarely, if ever, found that a plaintiff has set forth sufficient facts to establish a section 1985 conspiracy.” Id.

Reid v. North Carolina

837 F. Supp. 2d 554 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 28, 2011

A district court order dismissing a case on the grounds that the undisputed facts establish a lack of subject matter jurisdiction is a legal determination subject to de novo appellate review. Revene v. … The court can find no merit to plaintiffs objection to this finding as such finding is clearly consistent with current case law.

Smith v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 26, 2022

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 Parratt-Hudson doctrine does not apply, however, to deprivations that are a “result of some established state procedure.” Logan v.

Satterfield

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 12, 2026

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 … Retaliation An inmate has a clearly established First Amendment right to be free from retaliation for filing lawsuits. See Booker v. S.C.

Government Employees Insurance Company v. Apex Spine & Orthopaedics, PLLC

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 3, 2024

The Noerr-Pennington doctrine “safeguards the First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances . . . by immunizing citizens from the liability that may attend the exercise of that right.” … Defendants make no argument supporting a departure from this established practice.

McClellan v. Cothron

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 27, 2021

For injuries, Plaintiff states that he was “stabbed and cut on back,” “messed up [his] shoulder during [the] struggle,” and “clearly had a head injury.” … 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 from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Vang v. Valdese Weaver

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 18, 2023

As such, the Plaintiff’s allegations fail to establish that she has a “disability” within the meaning of the ADA. … Here, while the Plaintiff asserts a claim for retaliation, she has pled no facts to establish such a claim.

Ketchersid v. Murphy

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 29, 2023

Baltimore Cnty., Md., 913 F.2d 113, 120 (4th Cir. 1990) (“A serious psychological impairment can qualify as [a serious] medical need.”). … immunity on Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim against him.

Hefner v. Jones

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 1, 2023

The Defendants explain that the discs were not 14 The Defendants attempt to raise qualified immunity in their Reply. [Doc. 47: MSJ Reply at 6]. The Court declines to consider it. See DiSimone v. … Even if the qualified immunity argument and Surreply were considered, however, such would not change the outcome of the case.

Robinson v. AFFINIA GROUP, INC.

815 F. Supp. 2d 935 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 2, 2011

four months after the protected activity cannot alone establish causation. … Dingraudo consistently and frequently qualified the limitations on his answers as being outside the realm of his knowledge.

McMahan v. Griffin

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

Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 708 (1997) (“The proponent of a stay bears the burden of establishing its need”). III. … Further, while Defendants assert that a stay of the Second Twenty Cases would allow them to litigate the issue of qualified immunity fully (including through appeal), Defendants also note that an appeal of a ruling regarding

Hendon v. Redmond

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jul 31, 2024

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 … 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.

Brown v. Thomas

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 28, 2022

a defendant who is immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); see 28 U.S.C. … The Plaintiff has not established any of the elements that would warrant preliminary injunctive relief.

Watkins v. Copeland

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 4, 2022

To establish an Eighth Amendment claim, an inmate must 8 According to the Defendants the Plaintiff became “verbally aggressive and non- compliant” during the strip search and decontamination shower because … Moreover, because genuine disputes of material fact exist regarding whether the Defendants violated the Plaintiff’s constitutional right to be free from excessive force, the Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity

Bartlett v. Miller

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 18, 2023

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 … 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.

Riddle v. Wilson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 27, 2025

Defendant Wilson also argues that he is entitled to public official immunity on Plaintiff’s state law assault and battery claim. [Id. at 7-8]. … Retaliation An inmate has a clearly established First Amendment right to be free from retaliation for filing grievances. See Booker v. S.C.

Gause v. Jacobs

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 11, 2022

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 … First Amendment An inmate has a clearly established First Amendment right to be free from retaliation for filing lawsuits. See Booker v. S.C.

Oaks v. United States

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 28, 2019

Thus, under Reed, the Petitioner has established “cause” for failing to raise a vagueness challenge to the ACCA's residual clause on direct appeal. … The subsections of § 39-2-101(b) clearly set out alternative elements for committing aggravated assault. See McGee v. United States, No. 16- 1111-JDT-egb, 2018 WL 2170198, at *4 (W.D. Tenn.

McAbee v. Marlow

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 9, 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 … “The Constitution creates no entitlement to grievance procedures or access to any such procedure voluntarily established by a state.” Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir. 1994).

Stroupe v. Whisnant

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 7, 2022

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 … As a pro se pretrial detainee, he is not qualified to do so. See Myers v. Loudoun Cnty. Pub.