(1).jpg)
In a case decided last week, McKenzie v. Hall, the Fourth Circuit sent a clear message that it does not tolerate Motions to Strike. The Appellants had filed such a Motion to strike portions of an adversary’s brief which they said were objectionable.
The Court struck back, quoting a Seventh Circuit decision, Redwood v.
North Carolina has had more than its fair share of hurricanes over the years, but Hurricane Sandy, which hit New Jersey and New York City, even reached the North Carolina Business Court.
It came in the most mundane of motions, one to expand the word limitation for a brief. The Order is in Gusinsky as
You’ve gone through the laborious process of getting a subpoena issued in another state for production of documents. You’ve had a commission issued by the Superior Court and you’ve hired out-of-state counsel to get the subpoena.
.jpg)
But now, opposing counsel shows up in North Carolina Superior Court and moves to quash the subpoena issued in
You probably remember the earlier opinion in Elliott v. KB Home, Inc., in which Judge Jolly certified a class action against the homebuilder KB Home over the improper installation of HardiePlank siding.
Last week, the Business Court ruled in another opinion in the case (2012 NCBC 55) that KB Home had waived its
You’ve undoubtedly had a Judge announce that she was entering an order "nunc pro tunc." In case you didn’t have your Latin-English dictionary with you at the time, that literally means "now for then."
A nunc pro tunc order is a way for a Judge to correct an order previously made which was improperly entered
It’s hard for me to think of a case I’d rather not write about than GR&S Atlantic Beach, LLC v. Hull, 2012 NCBC 52. It’s not just that it’s deathly boring or that it involves the interpretation of poorly written transaction documents. It’s also that it centers on an indemnification agreement, one of the
.jpg)
The efforts to disqualify Defendants’ counsel were unsuccessful in Atkinson v. Lackey. In denying the motion to disqualify this week, Judge Murphy gave some insight on Rule 1.9 of the Revised Rules of Professional Conduct.
Rule 1.9 is titled "Duties to Former Clients." It says that:
A lawyer who has formerly represented a client
If you dip in to Judge Murphy’s Wednesday opinion in Blue Ridge Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, Inc. v. First Colony Healthcare, LLC, 2012 NCBC 51, you’ll find a little bit of everything. It’s a ruling on a Motion to Dismiss a Complaint that alleged everything under the sun. Here are the high points:
Quick
.jpg)
For the first time that I am aware of, the Business Court has found a Complaint to sufficiently allege a breach of fiduciary duty claim against a bank, in today’s opinion in WNC Holdings, LLC v. Alliance Bank & Trust Co., 2012 NCBC 50.
The case has a familiar ring to it on
If you think that tailors have nothing to do with class actions, you are wrong. Judge Jolly denied a motion for class certification last week because the proposed class was not "tailored" as was "practicable under the circumstances." Op. ¶37 & n.34 The case is Lee v. Coastal Agrobusiness, Inc., 2012