A party making claims out of the dissolution of a law firm PLLC was not entitled to proceed on its unfair and deceptive practices. Judge Tennille held that the claims between the lawyers involved an "internal dispute," and that such disputes did not "affect commerce" as required by the statute.
There was also an issue
The Business Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claim that he had been dismissed from his employment in violation of the public policy of North Carolina.
Plaintiff, a doctor who had been employed by the Defendant medical practice, alleged that he had been forced to resign his employment while he was disabled and seeking medical treatment. He asserted that
Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Co. v. Sellars, 2008 NCBC 12 (N.C. Super. Ct. June 6, 2008)(Diaz)
It is very common to get discovery responses which have "General Objections" up front, followed by specific objections to each of the numbered discovery requests.
There’s a danger in responding that way, based on Judge Diaz’s opinion today
The Business Court has mandatory jurisdiction under N.C. Gen. Stat. §7A-45.4 over claims involving "antitrust law, except claims based solely on unfair competition under N.C. Gen. Stat. §75-1.1."
The Court gave a broad reading to its grant of its antitrust jurisdiction in an Order today in Sonic Automotive, Inc. v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, in
The North Carolina Wage and Hour Act does not apply to out-of-state employees working for North Carolina companies even if their employment agreements provides that the law of North Carolina applies, per the ruling of the North Carolina Court of Appeals today in Sawyer v. Market America, Inc.
Sawyer, a resident of Oregon, worked for
There’s an old Jackson Browne album called "Lawyers in Love." Lately, there have been a lot of cases involving lawyers out of love, and dissolving their firms. One was decided by the Business Court on June 2nd, Walters & Zimmerman, PLLC v. Zimmerman.
Plaintiff, a lawyer in the dissolved law firm who was a
Looking ahead, there are a number of Business Court cases in which summary judgment motions have been fully briefed and in which rulings should be issued over the next few months. In alphabetical order, with links to the Business Court electronic file, they are:
Edgewater Services, Inc. v. Epic Logistics, Inc.: dispute between competing third
Today, in Eglinton v. Blue Ridge Bone & Joint Clinic, P.A., the Business Court dismissed Plaintiff’s claim that he had been dismissed from his employment in violation of the public policy of North Carolina.
Plaintiff, a doctor who had been employed by the Defendant medical practice, alleged that he had been forced to resign his
The Court ruled, on summary judgment, that the word "value" in a Trust Agreement meant "’fair market value’ of the shares of the railroad company which was the subject of the case as value would be viewed by the Trust, as prospective seller, and the Blue family [those entitled to buy them per the Trust Agreement]
Compliance with the meet and confer obligations contained in Business Court Rule 18.6 is essential before the filing of a discovery motion.
In this case, the Court denied the Plaintiff’s Motion for a Protective Order because of counsel’s failure to comply with the certification requirements of that Rule. Judge Tennille held that "this reason alone