I hope you don’t think I am harping on this recent change in the procedure for designating a case to the Business Court, but on Friday Judge Jolly withdrew his Order in the Kight v. Ganymede Holdings II, Inc. case, recognizing that it was "a change in the previous practice relative to certain time
Watching The Court
Change In Business Court Designation Procedure: A Plaintiff No Longer Has 30 Days From Filing A Complaint To Designate The Case To The Business Court
There was one thing I could have told you for sure about Business Court procedure before August 10th. That was that a Plaintiff had 30 days from the filing of his Complaint to designate the case to the Business Court per N.C. Gen. Stat. §7A-45.4.
That certainty was based on a decision from…
Please Nominate This Blog For The ABA “Blawg 100”
Do me a favor. Take five minutes and fill out an American Bar association form (link here) nominating this blog to be included on the ABA’s list of the 100 best legal blogs.
The blog fits pretty well the criteria set out by the ABA for a nomination. The ABA says:
- We’re primarily
…
You Need All Your Ducks In A Row To Prove Default Under A Security Agreement

The Plaintiff in Kreich, Inc. v. Tarheel Publishing Co. thought he had all of his ducks in a row for summary judgment and a preliminary injunction. But he didn’t.
Defendant was in serious default under promissory notes given in connection with its acquisition of the Plaintiff’s interest in an LLC. Payments were due on…
Fourth Circuit Blunts CFAA As A Remedy Against A Rogue Employee
Let’s say a client calls telling you that a valued former employee has left to work for a competitor. Just before leaving, the employee emailed himself a substantial number of your client’s confidential documents. He’s now made a presentation to a potential customer, using the "stolen" information, and he secured the customer for his new…
E-Discovery Landmark Decision For NC: Attorney-Client Privilege Waived In Electronic Discovery Production
In a classic understatement, Judge Gale said in a North Carolina Business Court opinion last Thursday that "North Carolina case law addressing problems inherent in electronic discovery. . .is not yet well developed." Op. ¶50. But in Blythe v. Bell, 2012 NCBC 42, the Judge went ahead and posted some road…
Fourth Circuit Carves Up Children (For Bankruptcy Purposes Only)
Maybe you’ve got a friend who is a bankruptcy lawyer. Maybe not. But if you do, you should think about forwarding to them this post about the Fourth Circuit’s decision from last Tuesday in Johnson v. Zimmer. It’s a decision of first impression in all of the Circuit Courts about how to determine the size of a Chapter 13 Debtor’s "household", which is relevant to determining her "disposable income" for purposes of a Chapter 13 Plan.
Let’s start with why those terms are important. A Chapter 13 Debtor is obligated to make payments to his creditors based on her "projected disposable income." The Bankruptcy Code defines "disposable income" as "current monthly income received by the Debtor" reduced by "amounts reasonably necessary to be expended for the Debtor’s maintenance and support, for qualifying charitable contributions, and for business expenditures."
The "amounts reasonably necessary to be expended" are determined, in part, by the size of the Debtor’s "household." Congress didn’t bother to define what "household" means, so that was the main challenge for the Fourth Circuit.
How The Dictionaries Define "Household"
Well that’s easy, you would think. Look up "household" in the dictionary. Because we give undefined words their ordinary meaning. But that doesn’t really work because the common definitions for "household" are different and could yield different results.
Black’s Law Dictionary says that a "household" is "1. A family living together. 2. A group of people who dwell under the same roof." Webster’s Third New International Dictionary says that the term means "a social unit comprised of those living together in the same dwelling place."
How The Bankruptcy Courts Have Dealt With This Issue
The bankruptcy courts have adopted three different approaches to define a "household." Those are:
- The "heads-on-beds" approach, which follows the Census Bureau’s broad definition of a household as "all the people who occupy a housing unit," without regard to relationship, financial contributions,or financial dependency;
- the "income tax dependent" method derived from the Internal Revenue Manual’s definition that examines which individuals either are or could be "included on the debtor’s tax return as dependents";
- The "economic unit" approach that "assesses the number of individuals in the household who act as a single economic unit by including those who are financially dependent on the debtor, those who financially support the debtor, and those whose income and expenses are inter-mingled with the debtor’s."
The reason that Johnson’s case was so difficult was that she was divorced and remarried. Her new husband had three kids from his prior marriage and she had two. The children from the first marriages spent about half a year with the Debtor and her new husband and the rest of their time with their other parent.
So the Debtor said her household consisted of her husband and all the kids, or seven. Zimmer, a creditor, said that the count of 7 resulted in an overcalculation of the Debtor’s expenses and that counting the household as smaller would free up income to pay under her Chapter 13 Plan to her unsecured debts.
The Fourth Circuit Applies The Economic Unit Approach, With Fractions
The Bankruptcy Judge, J. Rich Leonard, agreed partly and applied a variation of the economic unit approach. He "fractionated" the kids based on the number of days that they were in the Debtor’s house, and calculated that she had 2.59 children in her house full-time. He rounded that up to three, and declared the household to be one of five.
A divided Fourth Circuit affirmed.Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Carves Up Children (For Bankruptcy Purposes Only)
Summary Judgment From NC Business Court On Third Party Claims Against Appraisers
We all know how a residential real estate loan goes. You apply to a Bank for the loan; the Bank orders an appraisal of the property; maybe you get a copy of the appraisal; maybe you don’t; the Bank makes the loan taking a Deed of Trust on the property as security. What if the…
Preliminary Injunction Reinstating Contract Ordered By Business Court
It’s not every day that you see a "mandatory injunction," In fact, Judge Jolly said last Friday that such an injunction was "rare and generally disfavored as an interlocutory remedy," in Bayer Cropscience LP v. Chemtura Corp., 2012 NCBC 40. Op. ¶22. But that didn’t stop the Judge from entering an injunction that…
You Can’t Force A Defendant To Join In Another Party’s Counterclaim
Can you force a party to a lawsuit to join in another party’s claim? There’s no answer in the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. But Judge Gale provided an answer this week in Nelson v. Alliance Hospitality Mgt., LLC, 2012 NCBC 39.
Two Rules were implicated: Rule 18, which allows for joinder of claims…