The Court found that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine did not apply to the false submission of data to a public agency. The Court further found this conduct was not entitled to free speech protection under the First Amendment and the North Carolina Constitution. Nor were the Defendants entitled to state action immunity, or the protection of
State ex rel. Cooper v. McClure, January 4, 2007 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Court granted a Motion for Protective Order preventing Defendant from determining the identity of a confidential informant to the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. The Court found that the identity of the confidential informant was "of no consequence to the issues in this case." The Court further found that there was good cause
State ex rel. Cooper v. McClure, April 4, 2007 (Tennille)(unpublished)
Plaintiff sought an injunction preventing Defendant from selling its assets in North Carolina. The Motion was filed pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-485, which permits an injunction when "the defendant threatens or is about to remove or dispose of his property, with intent to defraud the plaintiff."
The Court denied the injunction, finding that it
UPS Capital Business Credit (Inc.) v. Royal American Company, LLC, January 31, 2007 (Tennille)(unpublished)
This opinion dealt with subpoenas to a party’s attorney and its accounting firm. The Court quashed the subpoena to the law firm (Gray Layton), holding:
Service of a subpoena duces tecum on a law firm seeking documents from the firm’s client files clearly raises worrisome issues of attorney-client and work product privilege. The attorney-client privilege
Azalea Garden Board & Care, Inc. v. Vanhoy, February 28, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The personal representative of a decedent was not required to give personal notice of the deadline for filing claims against the estate to a claimant, as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 28A-14-1, where she did not have actual knowledge of the claim. The Court also determined that she had no obligation to conduct an
Lexington Furniture Industries, Inc. v. The Bob Timberlake Collection, Inc., July 25, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court overruled an objection to its mandatory jurisdiction over a Complaint alleging breach of a trademark license agreement. It held "this case involves both the right to use trademarks and the right to use designs previously sold under the trademarked names at issue. It involves issues which fall within the mandatory issues supporting assignment
Covenant Not To Compete Cases (Without More) Aren’t Within The Business Court’s Mandatory Jurisdiction
If a case involves only a breach of a covenant not to compete or a confidentiality agreement, it is not within the mandatory "unfair competition" jurisdiction of the North Carolina Business Court, based on two recent decisions.
The first case is Workplace Benefits, LLC v. Lifecare, Inc, decided by the Court on July 14, 2008. In that
Covenant Not To Compete, And Summons, Held Invalid
Today, in its Order and Opinion in Bolick v. Sipe, the North Carolina Business Court rejected a novel argument regarding the validity of post-employment consideration for a covenant not to compete. It also dealt with the issue of the validity of a summons issued in the wrong name.
On the non-compete side, Plaintiff signed the non-compete with
Kaplan v. O.K. Technologies, June 27, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
A minority member (Kaplan) of a limited liability company, who was the LLC’s only source of funds and who controlled the LLC’s checkbook, did not have fiduciary duties to the LLC and its other members.
Judge Tennille held:
Being an investor in a company does not create a fiduciary relationship. . . . Kaplan, as a minority shareholder, had
Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Co. v. Sellars, October 23, 2007 (Diaz)(unpublished)
The Court denied a motion for expedited discovery, but noted that the discovery at issue had already been served, and stated that "[i]n light of the claims alleged in the Complaint, the Court is not inclined to look favorably upon a motion by Defendant for an extension of time to respond to those requests."