Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

equal protection

Jul 8, 2022

4th Circuit: Skirt requirement violated rights 

A public charter school violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when it required female students to wear skirts to school based on the view that girls are “fragile vessels” deserving of “gentle” treatment by boys, the en banc 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled, affirming summary judgment in favor of […]

Aug 27, 2018

Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Valuation – Sports Memorabilia – Wife’s Research

Although an unsubstantiated opinion as to property’s value is insufficient, the defendant-wife could testify about the value of the plaintiff-husband’s sports memorabilia collection after she (1) researched (a) plaintiff’s eBay bidding history, (b) his Bank of America credit card statements, and (c) a PayPal report in plaintiff’s name; (2) took inventory from the sports memorabilia [&helli[...]

Nov 6, 2013

Labor & Employment – Public Employees – Administrative – Law Enforcement Certification — Suspension

Krueger v. NC Criminal Justice & Training Standards Commission : A 180-day suspension of a law enforcement certification cannot be said to “shock the conscience” when the certified officer knowingly and willfully falsifies training records. Therefore, the suspended officer’s substantive due process rights have not been violated.

May 17, 2012

Labor & Employment – Civil Rights – Public Employees – Schools & School Boards – Constitutional – Equal Protection – Discrimination – Sexual Orientation – In Forma Pauperis

Dawkins v. Richmond County Schools Plaintiff alleges that he was let go from his teaching position because, according to a school administrator, the defendant-principal “had a problem with” plaintiff’s sexual orientation. This allegation is sufficient to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

Mar 20, 2012

Constitutional – Equal Protection – Smoking Ban – Exemptions – Private Clubs – For Profit vs. Nonprofit

Edwards v. Morrow We read G.S. § 130A-496 to exempt private, nonprofit country clubs from the general prohibition on smoking in restaurants and bars; however, private, for-profit country clubs are not exempt from the ban. Given the General Assembly’s motive for enacting the ban – protection of the public from secondhand smoke – this is a rational, and therefore constitutional, dist[...]

Nov 11, 2011

Municipal – Ultra Vires Action – Subdivision Ordinance – Schools & School Boards – School Funding – Developer & Builder Fees – Civil Practice – Appeals – Interlocutory – Mootness – Standing – Statute of Limitations – Constitutional – Due Process – Equal Protection

Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Our Court of Appeals held that the defendant-town was not responsible for setting up or funding schools, and it lacked statutory authority to charge developers and/or builders a fee designed to ensure adequate funding for area schools. With Justice Jackson not participating, the remaining members of the court are equally divided, with three members votin[...]

Jul 21, 2011

Constitutional – Equal Protection — Smoking Ban – Private Clubs – First Impression — Administrative — Civil Penalties

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 cour[...]

Apr 7, 2011

Constitutional – Public-Purpose Clause – Exclusive Emoluments – Equal Protection – Standing

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 . . .

Aug 4, 2010

Municipal – Ultra Vires Action – Subdivision Ordinance – Schools & School Boards – School Funding – Developer & Builder Fees – Civil Practice – Appeals – Interlocutory – Mootness – Standing – Statute of Limitations – Constitutional – Due Process – Equal Protection

Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary. The defendant-town was not responsible for setting up or funding schools, and it lacked statutory authority to charge developers and/or builders a fee designed to ensure adequate funding for area schools. [...]

Top Legal News

See All Top Legal News

Commentary

See All Commentary