Case law

Alexander Industries, LLC v. Town of Holly Ridge, North Carolina

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 31, 2022

Defendants also argue that defendant Richards and defendant Faircloth are entitled to qualified immunity. A government official sued in his or her personal capacity may invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity. … [ed] bright lines marking the limits of his qualified immunity protection.”

ALLEN v. CITY OF GRAHAM, NC

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 2, 2021

Specifically, the City defendants assert qualified immunity for Lt. … As an affirmative defense, the defendants bear the burden of establishing qualified immunity. Ridpath v. Bd. of Governors Marshall Univ., 447 F.3d 292, 305 (4th Cir. 2006).

Long v. City of Concord

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Aug 23, 2022

In analyzing qualified immunity, the court asks “whether the facts that a plaintiff has shown . make out a violation of a constitutional right,” and “whether the right at issue was clearly established at the … Thus, Long’s right to a fair trial free of knowingly falsified evidence was clearly established in 1976.

Presnell v. Pell

298 N.C. 715 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 4, 1979

Such an allegation at the pleading stage serves to negate the good faith element of qualified privilege. … This is especially true where a statute establishes, as here, a procedure whereby matters of regulation and control are first addressed by commissions or agencies particularly qualified for the purpose.

MITCHELL v. WINSTON SALEM STATE UNIVERSITY

District Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 30, 2020

was clearly established.” … Because Plaintiff must plausibly allege a constitutional violation and that the constitutional right violated was clearly established in order to defeat qualified immunity, the court analyzes

LaFontaine v. Southern Underwriters Ass'n

83 N.C. 132 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jun 5, 1880

I have looked into the cases cited at the bar and am unable to perceive any principle which ought to vary the foregoing opinion,” *142 It is quite obvious from the principle established that much of the information responsive … How can this immunity be invaded by requiring disclosures, rendered inadmissible as evidence against him, and when any attempt by subsequent legislation to make the evidence competent wrnuld be an ex pod facto enactment and

Minyard v. Hooks

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 18, 2019

To overcome the qualified immunity defense at the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff must have shown facts that make out a violation of a constitutional right, and the right at issue must have been “clearly established … (F) Qualified Immunity Defendants argues that qualified immunity shields them from damages in their individual capacities because Plaintiff has not established a constitutional

Hartsfield v. Harvey C. Hines Co.

200 N.C. 356 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Feb 18, 1931

Tbe foregoing instruction is in accord with authority established by tbe decisions of this Court. Ramsey v. Cheek, 109 N. C., 270 ; Gattis v. Kilgo, 128 N. C., 402 ; Gattis v. Kilgo, 140 N. C., 106 ; Fields v. … The legal distinctions between absolute and qualified privilege are pointed out in tbe decisions. Qualified privilege rests upon tbe fact of interest or duty.

Stern v. Lee

115 N.C. 426 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 15, 1894

homestead privileges and immunities therein. … C., 374 , the Justice who delivered the opinion, combatting the rule established by *432 Adrian v.

Harriss v. Wright

121 N.C. 172 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 15, 1897

In this *179 country the sovereign people have established national and state constitutions, and these constitutions are the supreme law of the land. … No man or men have yet been able to establish a government capable of accomplishing its legitimate ends, and also incapable of some inconvenience and mischief.

Knibbs v. Momphard

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Nov 5, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … Here, for the Court to find that Deputy Momphard is not entitled to qualified immunity under the undisputed facts of this case, this Court would have to hold that it is clearly established that use of deadly force was

Gardner v. Gardner

300 N.C. 715 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 15, 1980

(Emphasis original.) *718 At the outset, we note our agreement with the Court of Appeals that the language of the amendment to G.S. 50-3 is clearly mandatory. … Stated otherwise, the statute may be applied retroactively only insofar as it does not impinge upon a right which is otherwise secured, established, and immune from further legal metamorphosis.

Shook

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 2, 2026

Qualified Immunity “Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Ford v. McCain

192 N.C. App. 667 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 16, 2008

Nonetheless, it is also now well established that even when a complaint facially complies with Rule 9(j) by including a statement pursuant to Rule 9Q), if discovery subsequently establishes that the statement is not supported … The Court observed further: Although Rule 9(j) clearly requires a complainant of a medical malpractice action to attach to the complaint specific verifications regarding an expert witness, the rule does not expressly preclude

Thomason v. Railroad

142 N.C. 300 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Oct 16, 1906

J., denies such immunity. … His Honor clearly stated to the jury the limits within which, by the judgment upon the demurrer, he had restricted plaintiffs.

McClellan v. Cothron

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Mar 14, 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

Elliott v. State Board of Equalization

203 N.C. 749 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Dec 21, 1932

If the meaning is clearly expressed it should he adopted; if doubtful, the intention must be sought, McLeod v. Comrs., 148 N. … school population who “are qualified to enter.”

Grodensky v. McLendon

812 S.E.2d 914 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · May 1, 2018

Where plaintiff offered no qualified expert testimony to establish medical causation, he failed to meet his burden of establishing that a doctor's alleged breach of duty caused plaintiff's harm. … In the absence of qualified expert testimony establishing causation, we hold that the trial court did not err in holding that plaintiff had failed to show causation, and granting a directed verdict in favor of Dr.

Baker v. Reid

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jun 22, 2022

“Qualified immunity protects officers who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could reasonably believe that their actions were lawful.” Henry v. … was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.”

Mewborn v. City of Kinston

199 N.C. 72 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jul 2, 1930

Clearly the Legislature had prescribed the mode upon which $200,000 should he issued and the power so delegated had not been exhausted. … The second question of law rests upon the express provision of Article II, section 30, of the Constitution of North Carolina which established the inviolability of sinking funds provided for the retirement of bonds.