Case law

Lenzer v. Flaherty

106 N.C. App. 496 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 7, 1992

immunity because their conduct was not clearly unlawful under existing precedent. … In general, qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for performing discretionary functions to the extent that such conduct does not violate “ ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional

S&M Brands, Inc. v. Stein

2018 NCBC 26 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 2, 2018

Plaintiff established an Escrow Fund and has made yearly payments into its Escrow Fund since the NC Qualifying Statute was enacted in 1999. … its immunity from suit.”

Maney v. Fealy

69 F. Supp. 3d 553 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Nov 17, 2014

In determining whether a governmental official is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must decide “whether a constitutional violation occurred and ... whether the right violated was clearly established.” … Instead, the Fourth Circuit rested its finding for the officer on the basis, of the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis, finding that the officer did not violate clearly established law. Id. at 359-60 .

Pruitt v. Pernell

360 F. Supp. 2d 738 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 5, 2005

Therefore, immunity can be established by showing the right allegedly violated was (1) not “clearly established” at the time, or (2) that the violation of a “clearly established” right by a police officer was reasonable when … Therefore, to determine whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, the Court must: (1) identify the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determine whether the right was clearly established at the time of the

Wyche v. City of Franklinton

837 F. Supp. 137 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Nov 5, 1993

Caldwell is entitled to qualified immunity if he can establish that, in light of the clearly established principles governing the use of force to effect an arrest, he could, as a matter of law, reasonably have believed that … In Slattery , the Fourth Circuit elaborated upon the scope of qualified immunity: The right of the plaintiff must be established so clearly that a reasonable official would know what he is doing violates that right.

Munn-Goins v. Board of Trustees of Bladen Community College

658 F. Supp. 2d 713 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 17, 2009

Page contend that qualified immunity bars plaintiffs section 1983 claim for money damages. … , 119 S.Ct. 1692 . *725 In most cases, the qualified immunity analysis does not require factual findings, because the inquiry is a “purely legal one: whether the facts alleged ... support a claim of violation of clearly

Little v. Smith

114 F. Supp. 2d 437 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 17, 2000

Government officials performing discretionary functions are entitled to qualified immunity from liability for civil damages to the extent that “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … [Qualified immunity is an immunity from suit, and not merely a defense to liability....

White v. Town of Chapel Hill

899 F. Supp. 1428 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jan 6, 1995

Examining a claim of qualified immunity requires “(1) identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determining whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established; and (3) if so, … establish’ a right for qualified immunity purposes.”

Ellis v. White

156 N.C. App. 16 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 4, 2003

“Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, ‘governmental officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … “Therefore, ruling on a defense of qualified immunity requires (1) identification of the specific right allegedly violated; (2) determining whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established; and

Helms v. Rafter

853 F. Supp. 897 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 14, 1994

Qualified Immunity Public officials are free from liability for monetary damages if they can plead and prove that their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … If it is undisputed that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time, the defendant asserting a qualified immunity defense may still be immune from damages for violation of that right if, under the circumstances

Jones v. Chandrasuwan

76 F. Supp. 3d 603 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Dec 30, 2014

When subject to suit under § 1983, state and local officials may assert qualified immunity to shield them from liability for civil damages, “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Finding that this right is not clearly established, this court determines that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, even if there was some sort of constitutional violation.

Lucas v. Swain County Board of Education

154 N.C. App. 357 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 3, 2002

Both affidavits established the Trust is not authorized and licensed to execute insurance contracts in this State and that it is not considered a qualified insurer as determined by the Department of Insurance. … Moreover, defendant established through three affidavits from Hale, Earley and Dunlap that the Trust is neither a licensed and authorized insurer, nor a qualified insurer as determined by the Department.

Isquierdo v. Frederick

922 F. Supp. 1072 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 22, 1996

“does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … For the purpose of determining whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity the plaintiffs rights must be clearly established under the particular circumstances confronting the official at the time of the questioned

In re Cline

230 N.C. App. 11 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 1, 2013

“Generally, qualified immunity protects public officials from personal liability for performing discretionary functions to the extent that such conduct “ ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights … Cline possess a qualified immunity to make those untruthful statements with reckless disregard for the truth.”

U.S. Tobacco Coop., Inc. v. Big S. Wholesale of Va., LLC

365 F. Supp. 3d 604 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 19, 2019

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for a statutory or constitutional violation so long as they can reasonably believe that their conduct does not violate clearly established law. Harlow v. … Accordingly, as the rights alleged to have been violated were not clearly established, the Big Sky defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs' federal RICO claims. B.

Estate of Williams v. Pasquotank County Parks & Recreation Department

211 N.C. App. 627 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 3, 2011

However, when the motion is made on the grounds of sovereign and qualified immunity, such a denial is immediately appealable, because to force a defendant to proceed with a trial from which he should be immune would vitiate … What qualifies as a governmental function and what qualifies as a proprietary function is not always clear; our Supreme Court noted in Sides v.

Petersen v. Midgett

140 F. Supp. 3d 490 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 25, 2015

Qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or … legal rules that were clearly established at the time it was taken.”

Lea v. Kirby

171 F. Supp. 2d 579 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Sep 27, 2001

Section 1988 Claim Police officers sued in their individual capacity are entitled to immunity from Section 1983 liability for money damages as long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Police officers performing a discretionary function are entitled to immunity from civil damages “unless (1) the officers’ conduct violates a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established

Ward v. CSX Transportation, Inc.

161 F.R.D. 38 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 22, 1995

, entitled to only a qualified immunity since no mental impressions, conclusions, or legal theories of the attorney are implicated. … The qualified immunity can be overcome by a showing of substantial need.

Harter v. Vernon

953 F. Supp. 685 · District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 22, 1996

The court, therefore, will grant Vernon qualified immunity in his individual capacity on the First Amendment claim because the contours of Plaintiffs’ rights were not clearly established. V. … The Fourth Circuit’s qualified immunity discussion in Orga is on-point: [W]e conclude that the right asserted by [the deputies] had not been clearly established by Fourth Circuit case law.