Reporting on Judicial Decisions of Significance to Business & Shareholders
Plaintiff’s former employer had violated the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act by failing to pay her bonuses when due. The Court granted summary judgment on this claim in favor of the plaintiff.
The Court granted summary judgment against plaintiff on her slander claims, finding that she had neither pled nor proven the alleged slander…
Following its decision in Sompo Japan Insurance Inc. v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP, the Court found that there was no recognized claim under North Carolina law for aiding and abetting fraud. The Court did allow a claim for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty to proceed, however.
Plaintiff, a significant (42.5%) minority shareholder of the corporate defendant, filed a derivative action against the corporate defendant. The Court characterized the case as "a domestic case disguised as a derivative action." The Court looked to the law of Virginia, the place of the incorporation of the company, to determine the appropriate prerequisites.
The claims…
This case involved "tobacco law." The Court found that the enactment of the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 ("FETRA") on October 22, 2004 activated the Tax Offset Adjustment provision in the National Tobacco Grower Settlement Trust created as a part of the Master Settlement Agreement, which permitted the Settlors under the Trust…
Plaintiff, a state agency, charged that the defendants had engaged in a conspiracy to fix prices for environmental consulting work. The defendants claimed that they were entitled to immunity under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. The Court rejected this argument, characterizing defendants’ supposedly protected conduct as involving the submission of false data for the purpose of inflating…
The Court addressed again the issue of indirect purchaser standing under the North Carolina antitrust laws in these consolidated cases. It held that although such purchasers do have standing, there are limitations on that standing which barred the claims of the plaintiffs and it granted defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In the first case, the plaintiffs…
The Court found that Davidson County had breached its contract to pay for services provided.
This action sought to enjoin a merger involving a publicly traded company. The Court addressed whether the action was derivative or direct under Delaware law. If it was derivative, the Court held that the complaint suffered from three flaws: it was not verified, the corporation had not been joined as a party, and there were…
The Court granted summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim for interference with prospective economic advantage. The Court found that there was a "high standard" for such a claim, and that plaintiff was required to show, with specificity, the future contracts that plaintiff would have obtained but for the alleged interference.
Plaintiff’s claim for interference with its…
The plaintiff claimed that the defendant caused its business to fail. The defendant asserted plaintiff’s business had failed because he used illegal drugs, had extramarital affairs, and because he "had a propensity to sleep and fish during the day."
When the defendant sought to question the owner of the plaintiff about these matters at his…