Case law

Moss v. Harwood

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Sep 9, 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 … Plaintiff has not come forward with any evidence that Defendants violated his clearly established rights, and therefore, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Bulluck v. Martin

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Jan 19, 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

Dieckhaus v. Bd. of Governors of The Univ. of N.C.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Jan 17, 2023

Then, Defendant contends even if an implied-in-fact contract is sufficient to waive sovereign immunity, “the Amended Complaint is completely void of any factual allegations establishing the existence of even … While Defendant’s section on sovereign immunity only includes a single sentence arguing “the Amended Complaint is completely void of any factual allegations establishing the existence of even an implied

Frazier v. NC Cent. Univ.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Nov 17, 2015

Such is clearly not the case here. … finding of waiver of sovereign immunity.”

Nieves v. McHugh

111 F. Supp. 3d 667 · District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jun 3, 2015

Rivera also argues that the APA’s waiver of sovereign immunity applies. PL’s Mem. [D.E. 21] 6. … Thus, Rivera’s claim falls within section 702’s waiver of sovereign immunity. 2.

Williamson v. Clay

243 N.C. 337 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Jan 13, 1956

The elements of each have been clearly defined. Ramsbottom v. R. R., 138 N.C. 38, 41 , 50 S.E. 448 ; Hall v. Coble Dairies, 234 N.C. 206 , 67 S.E. 2d 63 . There is no controversy as to these well established rules. … But it is for the jury to pass upon the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given the evidence tending to establish such facts.

Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. Morgan

9 N.C. App. 460 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 21, 1970

advice and research data and to establish an office with pertinent supplies, equipment and staff.” … The implication of item 5 of Section Seven of the Will is to the contrary; by this section the compensation for administering the trust is clearly set out by Mrs. Reynolds.

State v. Norris

242 N.C. 47 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Apr 13, 1955

The test as to the sufficiency of *54 evidence to go to the jury in a case of culpable negligence is clearly set forth in the case of S. v. Cope, 204 N.C. 28 , 167 S.E. 456 . … The care and vigilance of one driver are not sufficient to give immunity from injury and death which often single out those who are free from blame.

Lyon v. Continental Trading Co.

76 N.C. App. 499 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 3, 1985

Plaintiffs have clearly alleged in their complaint a claim for relief based upon defendant’s storage of the chemical Dinitro-phenol in defective and leaking containers and that such negligence on the part of defendant was … There is nothing whatsoever alleged or unalleged in plaintiffs’ complaint to establish an insurmountable bar to plaintiffs’ claim.

Toineeta v. Andrus

503 F. Supp. 605 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Aug 15, 1980

Article 12 of the treaty was amended to provide that those Cherokees who desired to stay and become citizens of the State could do so if they were qualified to take care of themselves and their property. … This conclusion is clearly borne out by the various Acts of Congress.

Bradley Woodcraft, Inc. v. Bodden

251 N.C. App. 27 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Dec 20, 2016

Bradley represented to Defendant that he was qualified to carry out these projects. … Such claims are, in fact, allowable as has been clearly established by Jones.

Whitford v. Board of Commissioners

159 N.C. 160 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 28, 1912

Elections were duly held in the county and township, and by a majority of the qualified voters the levy of a tax of $2,500 and the issue of bonds by the county to the par value of $5,000, and by the township to the amount … We are not at liberty to declare a legislative act void, as being-unconstitutional, unless it is clearly so beyond any reasonable doubt.

Bond v. . Wool

107 N.C. 139 · Supreme Court of North Carolina · Sep 5, 1890

Clearly, then, if the western boundary line of lot No. 187 be located where plaintiff claims that it runs, the defendant had not trespassed on the water front of that lot by crossing over to the east of it, but had, as far … The only remaining question is, whether the testimony establishes the right of the plaintiff to demand a perpetual injunction in order to restrain the defendant from injuring or destroying the fish-house or any part of it

State v. Torrence

247 N.C. App. 232 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Apr 19, 2016

TORRENCE Opinion of the Court Rule 702(a) and establish proper foundation. Id.; see State v. Godwin, ___ N.C. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___ (Apr. 19, 2016) (No. … In reversing this Court’s holding that such error was harmless, the Supreme Court explained, The evidence presented at trial was clearly sufficient to send the case to the jury and to support a

State v. Nabors

207 N.C. App. 463 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Oct 19, 2010

Gendreau was qualified or testified as an expert in the chemical analysis of drugs, forensic chemistry, or another related field. … The prosecutor at trial referred to him as ‘supremely qualified.’ ” Id. at 145, 694 S.E.2d at 746 . 4 .

Pope v. Blue

809 F. Supp. 392 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 16, 1992

We note that in Bandemer the plurality held that the results of a single election were insufficient to establish discriminatory effect. … While requiring the General Assembly to adopt nonpartisan, computer-generated districts might be a good idea, it clearly goes beyond what the Constitution mandates.

Scott v. Watson

District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 6, 2021

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

State v. Turbyfill

243 N.C. App. 183 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Sep 1, 2015

“Daubert clearly contemplates the vesting of significant discretion in the [trial] court with regard to the decision to admit expert scientific testimony.” Id. (quoting Maryland Cas. Co. v. … Taylor establishes a key point in the debate between an expert’s qualification and his application of his expertise and resulting opinion.

Norton v. Columbus County Board of Elections

District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 13, 2020

The CCBOE defendants are entitled to qualified immunity under section 1983 unless “(1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was clearly established at … The Supreme Court has reserved judgment on whether decisions of a federal court of appeals are a source of clearly established law for purposes of qualified immunity. See id.; Kisela, 138 S.

State v. Privette

218 N.C. App. 459 · Court of Appeals of North Carolina · Feb 7, 2012

As the Supreme Court has clearly stated, a defendant’s presence at premises at which contraband is located does not establish that the defendant constructively possessed the items in question unless he or she was in such … Stat. § 14-118.4 establishes that the term “wrongfully” modifies “to obtain anything of value or any acquittance, advantage or immunity,” so that an individual accused of extortion is not guilty if he believes that he is