The North Carolina Court of Appeals published a decision in a free-speech retaliation case in  Ginsberg v. Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina.  The plaintiff, who worked at NC State University as a teaching assistant professor, contended that the University had violated her First Amendment free speech rights by punishing her in a hiring decision in retaliation for her protected speech.  On November 9, 2007, the plaintiff was reprimand by professors for purportedly showing bias during her introductory statements on a film that was being presented on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Just weeks later, the plaintiff was de-listed as a first-tier candidate for an open tenure track position, and some of the professors who had reprimanded her were on the search committee.  Nonetheless, affirming the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, the Court concluded that the plaintiff had failed to present sufficient evidence of causation between her protected speech and the university’s hiring decision.  The Court held that she had not supported her claim “beyond mere speculation.”

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Appeals, Case Commentary, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, First Amendment, Labor and Employment, NC Court of Appeals, North Carolina, Retaliation, Summary Judgment

A civil rights complaint has been filed in federal court on behalf of Plaintiff Gregory Flynt Taylor against Peter Duane Deaver and other former employees of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation seeking damages for his wrongful incarceration.  The complaint may be viewed here.

In April 1993, Mr. Taylor was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to life in prison for a murder two years earlier which he did not commit.  The Defendants worked in the SBI Crime Lab and wrote a deliberately misleading report about evidence collected from the crime scene.  Because this report misrepresented the facts and the findings of the laboratory tests, Mr. Taylor was convicted of a crime he did not commit and spent the next 17 years in prison.  On February 17, 2011 a three-judge panel unanimously found that Mr. Taylor was innocent of the charge of murder and ordered his immediate release.  Mr. Taylor was given a full Pardon of Innocence by Governor Beverly Perdue on May 21, 2010.

Mr. Taylor’s complaint brings claims under the federal constitution, North Carolina Constitution, and North Carolina common law.  Mr. Taylor is represented by Burton Craige and Narendra Ghosh, as well as Spencer Parris and Christopher Olson at Martin & Jones.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Burton Craige, Civil Rights, Complaint, Constitutional Law, EDNC, Exoneration, Narendra Ghosh, Negligence, Personal Injuries, Wrongful Conviction, Wrongful Incaceration

The following briefs opposing defendants’ motion to dismiss have recently been filed in Dail, v. City of Goldsboro, et al.: Plaintiff’s First Response Brief and Plaintiff’s Second Response Brief.  Mr. Dail was convicted of a crime he did not commit and subsequently imprisoned for 18 years.  He was exonerated in 2007 when DNA evidence proved his innocence.  This evidence – which was later recovered – had been improperly handled and allegedly destroyed in 1995 by the City of Goldsboro.  The case is now before Judge Boyle in federal court (EDNC). Mr. Dail is represented by Burton Craige and Narendra Ghosh of Patterson Harkavy, as well as Spencer Parris and Christopher Olson at Martin & Jones.  More on the case can be found here.  This a summary of Plaintiff’s argument:

Dail has properly stated cognizable claims for relief arising from his wrongful incarceration. Dail has stated a valid claim for municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S. Ct. 2018 (1978), because Defendants had a policy or practice of failing to properly inventory and safeguard evidence, including the evidence that ultimately exonerated Dail. Defendants’ unconstitutional conduct arbitrarily denied Dail’s liberty interest and resulted in his continued wrongful incarceration. Unlike the plaintiff in District Attorney’s Office for Third Judicial District v. Osborne, 129 S. Ct. 2308 (2009), the principal case upon which Defendants rely, Dail has not impermissibly used § 1983 to seek access to potential evidence, but instead properly invokes § 1983 to redress Defendants’ unconstitutional failure to reasonably maintain evidence.

Dail has also properly brought state law claims for negligence and obstruction of justice, which are not time-barred. Those claims did not accrue until August 27, 2007, when Defendants first notified Dail of the results of the DNA testing, or on August 28, 2007, when Dail was finally released from custody, and thus were timely filed on August 26, 2010. Finally, Dail has stated valid claims under the North Carolina Constitution based on Defendants’ violations of his rights to procedural due process and entitlement to exculpatory evidence.

This case presents weighty issues of constitutional significance in an evolving area of law. Consideration of the merits of the claims asserted in this action should follow development of a full factual record.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Briefs, Burton Craige, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, EDNC, Exoneration, Narendra Ghosh, Negligence, Personal Injuries, Wrongful Conviction, Wrongful Incaceration

A civil rights complaint was filed this month on behalf of Plaintiff Dwayne Allen Dail against the City of Goldsboro and individual defendants to seek redress for his wrongful incarceration.  The complaint may be viewed here.

Mr. Dail was arrested on May 13, 1988 for the rape of a 12 year old girl.  He maintained his innocence from the date of his arrest onward and insisted that evidence collected from the crime scene be tested against his DNA.  After Mr. Dail’s conviction, the City of Goldsboro reported that the evidence had been destroyed.  Eventually, in 2007, after repeated requests for this evidence, the Goldsboro Police Department acknowledged that, contrary to their previous representations, they were in fact in possession of the evidence from the crime scene.  The DNA evidence was tested against Mr. Dail’s DNA and he was finally exonerated after 18 years of imprisonment and set free.

Mr. Dail’s complaint brings claims under the federal constitution, North Carolina Constitution, and North Carolina common law.  Mr. Dail is represented by Burton Craige and Narendra Ghosh, as well as Spencer Parris and Christopher Olson at Martin & Jones.

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Burton Craige, Civil Rights, Complaint, Constitutional Law, Exoneration, Narendra Ghosh, Negligence, Personal Injuries, Wrongful Conviction, Wrongful Incaceration

Although the Surpreme Court issues opinions throughout its term, many come out towards the back end of the term, which concludes in June.  In the last couple of weeks, the Court has issued several decisions which touch on employment law:

In Conkirght v. Frommert, the 5-3 majority upheld the company’s denial of pension benefits to former employees.  Write-up here.

In Perdue v. Kenny A., the 5-4 majority rejected the trial court’s calculations of the appropriate amount of attorneys’ fees for the prevailing plaintiff in a civil rights case.  Write-up here.

In Stolt-Nielsen v. AnimalFeeds, a similar 5-3 majority rejected class action arbitration in this commercial case.  Down the line, there might be some applicability to employer-employee arbitration agreements.  Write-up here.

Categories: Judicial Decisions Tags: Arbitration, Attorney Fees, Case Commentary, Civil Rights, Class Actions, ERISA, Labor and Employment, Pension Benefits, US Supreme Court

Patterson Harkavy is a sponsor at tonight’s 41st Annual Frank Porter Graham Awards Ceremony, hosted by the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation.  This year’s honorees are:

Frank Porter Graham Award – Jimmy Creech
ACLU of North Carolina Award – Juvencio Rocha Peralta
Paul Green Award – Jeremy Collins & Charmaine Fuller Cooper

Categories: News of the Firm Tags: Civil Rights, Firm News, Frank Porter Graham Ceremony, NC ACLU, Patterson Harkavy

The North Carolina Supreme Court denied the defendants’ petition for discretionary review (PDR) in Fulford v. Jenkins today, among its long list of orders.  This is a wrongful death action based on the negligence of the Duplin County Department of Social Services and its employees.  The defendants lost on the issue governmental immunity, appealed, lost unimously in the Court of Appeals, and then sought review from the Supreme Court.   Burton Craige and Narendra Ghosh assisted with the plaintiff’s representation at the Supreme Court, opposing the PDR.  The Court’s denial of the PDR means that the case will return to the trial court where it can proceed.

Categories: Judicial Decisions, Results Tags: Appeals, Burton Craige, Civil Rights, Narendra Ghosh, NC Supreme Court, Negligence, Personal Injuries, Results, Wrongful Death

In a unanimous decision, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiff could pursue his constitutional claims against the local board of education in Craig v. New Hanover County Board of Education.  Jusitce Hudson, writing for the Court, held that the plaintiff’s constitutional claims could not be barred because the school board enjoyed immunity from other tort claims.   Burton Craige helped to represent the plaintiff on appeal, and argued the case before the Supreme Court.

Categories: Judicial Decisions, Results Tags: Appeals, Burton Craige, Civil Rights, Constitutional Claims, NC Supreme Court, Patterson Harkavy, Results