The written provisions of a franchise agreement — and its merger clause — resulted in summary judgment on a franchisee’s fraud and other claims against a franchisor. The case, decided last Friday by the Business Court, is L’Heureux Enterprises, Inc. v. Port City Java, Inc.
Conflicting Representations
Plaintiffs claimed they had premised their purchase of
The Court granted the motion to dismiss of a member of an LLC in which the Plaintiff sought dissolution, ruling that “'[i]t is not necessary to join members as parties to a proceeding to dissolve a limited liability company unless relief is sought against them individually, however the court shall order that appropriate notice of
I write sometimes about litigation involving Duke University’s sports teams. In fact, the most popular post ever on this blog was The Law And Duke Football: The Video, which has a video of Duke’s own lawyer telling a judge how bad Duke football is. That video, according to youtube, has been watched over 17,000
Six new cases were designated to the Business Court in August 2009, including a case seeking class certification over charges for medical records (Toney), and a shareholder dispute pitting a father against his son (Shallcross).
Moltzon v. King (Wake)(Tennille): minority shareholder dispute in which plaintiff alleges the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by
When an employee quits his or her job, unemployment benefits aren’t available unless there was "good cause" for leaving the job. Today, the North Carolina Supreme Court answered the question whether an employee who quits in the face of a downsizing, accepting a "voluntary" retirement package, can show the good cause necessary to receive unemployment
If you are getting ready to designate a case to the North Carolina Business Court, you might want to go ahead and do that in the next few days. That’s because starting September 1, 2009, it’s going to cost your client a bunch more money to have a case heard in the Business Court.
Effective
A minority shareholder who said he was forced to resign as an officer and director of the company got past a Motion to Dismiss challenging his claims for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, conspiracy, and punitive damages in the Business Court’s opinion last Friday in Oakeson
The Court had mandatory jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s complaint because it involved the interpretation of a shareholders agreement, and also because it involved the rights to manufacture certain products and use certain processes covered by patents.
Once the Business Court takes jurisdiction over a case, that jurisdiction remains in place for the life of the case, regardless of dismissals of parties or changes in the nature of the claims.
That was the ruling of the Court last week in Mattress Now, Inc. v. KS Bank, Inc. in response to the Plaintiff’s
The Court of Appeals issued today a number of opinions worth a mention, running the gamut from two personal jurisdiction rulings to a significant legal malpractice decision.
Personal Jurisdiction
The opinion in Brown v. Meter contains a thorough discussion of personal jurisdiction based on product sales in the "stream of commerce," with a mention of