U.S. v. Guijon-Ortiz A police officer who questioned a pickup passenger’s alien legal residence card during a routine traffic stop did not violate the passenger’s Fourth Amendment rights when he extended the stop to call the local customs office to check the validity of the passenger’s identification, and the 4th Circuit affirms defendant passenger’s conviction for illegal reentry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
Baysden v. State The trial court erred by granting the state’s summary judgment motion and denying the summary judgment motion filed by plaintiff since he has a right under N.C. Const. art. I, § 30 to possess a firearm despite the prohibition set out in G.S. § 14-415.1.
State v. Yencer The Campus Police Act’s provision of secular police protection for the benefit of the students, faculty, and staff of Davidson College, as applied to defendant’s conviction for driving while impaired, does not offend the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Defendant has failed to demonstrate that her arrest and conviction for driving while impaired were influenced by any consideration other than secular enforcement of a criminal statute, G.S. § 20-138.1.
Preston v. Leake A North Carolina statute that prohibits a registered lobbyist from contributing to the campaign of any candidate for the N.C. General Assembly or the Council of State does not violate the free speech and association rights of appellant lobbyist, and the 4th Circuit upholds the district court decision rejecting the lobbyist’s suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Brown v. Winders If, as plaintiff has alleged, the defendant-deputy told the 62-year-old overweight, disabled plaintiff that the deputy knew plaintiff wasn’t the one riding plaintiff’s motorcycle when it sped away from the deputy, then the deputy violated plaintiff’s clearly established right to be free from unreasonable seizures when he arrested her for fleeing to elude arrest.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted as to plaintiff’s state-law claims against the defendant-sheriff. Otherwise, the motion is denied.
Lanier Construction Co. v. City of Clinton Since the defendant-city was entitled to exercise a great deal of discretion in awarding a construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, a disappointed bidder - like plaintiff - has no protected property interest in the contract.
Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted as to plaintiff’s claims of due process violation, defamation, intentional interference with prospective contractual relations, and breach of contract.
Johnson v. Antioch United Holy Church, Inc. Even though defendants are a church and three of its members, the trial court need not delve into eccliastical law to decide whether defendants’ actions were authorized by the church’s bylaws.
We reverse the trial court’s order granting defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for Rule 11 sanctions.
Liebes v. Guilford County Dept. of Public Health The statutory scheme exempting nonprofit private clubs but including for-profit private clubs within the ambit of the smoking ban does not violate the plaintiff’s equal protection rights since there exists a rational basis for the legislature’s differential treatment of for-profit and nonprofit private clubs.
We affirm the trial court’s order.
U.S. v. Edwards. (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-02-0391, 22 pp.) (Terrence W. Boyle, J.) E.D.N.C. Holding: Even though the government has a strong interest in protecting its citizens from sexually dangerous individuals, if they are to be civilly committed, those individuals are still entitled to due process, including the protection of the Brady doctrine. Background Respondent [...]
Saine v. State. The session law allocating $1 million to Johnson and Wales University serves a public purpose by providing funds to a private, nonprofit university in order to assist in educating N.C. citizens . . .
