Case law

Hailey v. City of Winston-Salem

196 N.C. 17 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 12, 1928

S., 2832 (Art. 16) that any city shall have the right to acquire, establish, and operate . . . schools. … Necessary buildings are an integral factor in the maintenance of the school system and their construction under the facts here presented is clearly a municipal purpose.

Crosmun v. Trustees Of Fayetteville Technical Cmty. Coll.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Aug 6, 2019

After careful review, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion by compelling 5 We recognize that the work-product doctrine is “not a privilege, but a ‘qualified immunity.’ ” Evans v. United Serv. … both traditional privileges, such as attorney-client privilege, and the qualified work-product immunity

Moseley v. Hendricks

Supreme Court of North Carolina · Aug 22, 2025

Hendricks—to “clearly establish[ ] the lack of any triable issue of fact by the record properly before the court.” Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc., 296 N.C. 467, 469–70 (1979). … In contributory negligence cases, then, summary judgment is foreclosed unless the evidence “so clearly establishes [the plaintiff’s] own negligence as one of the proximate causes of his injury that no other reasonable inference

White v. Cochran

216 N.C. App. 125 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 4, 2011

On the other hand, a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) should only be granted when the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that the movant is entitled … The issue of sovereign immunity is not before this Court. Defendant’s initial answer and amended answer did not assert the defense of sovereign immunity.

Bunn v. Bowen

637 F. Supp. 464 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 5, 1986

a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings involved, justifies a higher fee____ (emphasis added). … Nelson, 762 F.2d at 1333 (allowing rates of $100-$125 per hour based on the limited availability of qualified attorneys for immigration proceedings); Underwood v.

Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States

436 F. Supp. 1314 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 12, 1977

First, the plaintiff seeks to qualify as an organization exempted from F.I.C.A. and F.U.T.A. taxes. … did not have the prohibited effect of establishing a religion.

In Re Appeal of McElwee

304 N.C. 68 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 6, 1981

We think the use of sales of similarly used land by Wilkes County was clearly improper. … Hoots qualified his answer with this addendum: “I based that opinion on the market and the production of the timber land in Wilkes County — the market value and what the timber will bring on the stump.” Clearly, Mr.

Crosby v. CITY OF GASTONIA

682 F. Supp. 2d 537 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 7, 2010

civil tort immunity by purchasing liability insurance. … “It is well established that unsworn, unauthenticated documents cannot be considered on a motion for summary judgment.

Heritage Village Church & Missionary Fellowship, Inc. v. State

299 N.C. 399 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Mar 5, 1980

We affirm the Court of Appeals' holding that the partiality of the qualified exemption provided by section 75.7(a)(1) works an unconstitutional "establishment" of religion. … This conclusion is clearly incorrect.

Plemmons Ex Rel. Teeter v. City of Gastonia

62 N.C. App. 470 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jun 7, 1983

We agree with the Board that the statute renders it immune from liability in this instance. … The Legislature clearly intended to do more than codify the common law rule. See, e.g., City of Raleigh v.

legalzoom.com, Inc. v. N. Carolina State Bar

2014 NCBC 9 · North Carolina Business Court · Mar 24, 2014

{72} Sovereign immunity protects a State agency from suit absent a waiver of its immunity. Walton v. N. Carolina Dep’t of Agric. & Consumer Servs., No. 5:09- CV-302-FL, 2010 U.S. Dist. … A state agency is entitled to this immunity, as is the State itself. See Meyer v.

ROOKS v. NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Aug 20, 2025

To establish a violation of either statute, plaintiffs must prove (1) they have a disability; (2) they are otherwise qualified to receive the benefits of a public service, program, or activity; and (3) they were … The Plaintiff also clearly pled sufficient facts to permit a jury to find that his disability was the reason for the withdrawal of the employment offer.

Hailey v. . Winston-Salem

196 N.C. 17 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 12, 1928

S., 2832 (Art. 16) that any city shall have the right to acquire, establish, and operate . . . schools. … Necessary buildings are an integral factor in the maintenance of the school system and their construction under the facts here presented is clearly a municipal purpose.

Hochheiser v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF TRANSP.

348 S.E.2d 140 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 16, 1986

By enacting G.S. 143-291, the Tort Claims Act, the legislature waived the State's sovereign immunity for claims arising "as a result of the negligence of any officer, employee, involuntary servant or agent of the State while … had been developed which established a methodology for dealing with roadside hazards.

Powell v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.

178 N.C. 243 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 15, 1919

C., 367 , and authorities cited), this right and immunity only exists for the public benefit and may not be used or sanctioned by contract or ordinance of the municipality in favor of a private or public service corporation … satisfactorily appear, under permanent physical conditions of the kind presented here and in the absence of any definite testimony showing, meantime, a substantial change in values, we think that the opinion of these witnesses, qualified

Wright v. Hamilton

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 14, 2022

from liability by qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably

Gill v. Board of Commissioners

160 N.C. 176 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Nov 7, 1912

In a proceeding of this character, tbe burden is on tbe relator to clearly establish tbe right sought to be enforced.” … Does the term embrace women, or only men and qualified voters or electors?

State v. Jenkins

74 N.C. App. 295 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 16, 1985

Assuming arguendo that the chain of custody was not adequately established, we think the admission of the plant was harmless error. … One is qualified as an expert if, through study or experience, he is better qualified than the jury to form an opinion on the particular subject. Id.

Velez v. Dick Keffer Pontiac GMC Truck, Inc.

144 N.C. App. 589 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jul 3, 2001

immunity.” … Materials that are prepared in the ordinary course of business, however, are not protected by the work product immunity. Willis, 291 N.C. at 35 , 229 S.E.2d at 201 .

King-El v. Wilson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Feb 7, 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