Free Newsletter
Tort/Negligence – Fraud – Civil Practice – Statute of Limitations – Unfair Trade Practices – Parol Evidence Rule
North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff//February 21, 2012//
Tort/Negligence – Fraud – Civil Practice – Statute of Limitations – Unfair Trade Practices – Parol Evidence Rule
North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff//February 21, 2012//
Wood v. South Carolina Bank & Trust Co. of the Piedmont, N.A. (Lawyers Weekly No. 12-04-0201, 5 pp.) (Frank D. Whitney, J.) 3:11-cv-00300; W.D.N.C.
Holding: As late as May 13, 2008, plaintiff continued to follow the defendant-bank’s instructions and contracted to sell his home. Plaintiff did not learn of the bank’s purported fraud until after the bank allegedly blocked this sale, which was in late June. Based on plaintiff’s allegations, he filed his June 20, 2011 complaint within the three-year statute of limitations for fraud.
Defendant’s motion to dismiss is denied.
Since there is a four-year limit for filing unfair trade practice claims, plaintiff’s claim under the N.C. Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act was also timely filed.
Where breach of contract is not alleged in this action, and where – more importantly – the parol evidence rule does not apply in actions when it is alleged the contract was entered into by fraud, the parol evidence rule does not apply in this case.
Top Legal News
- The third option: Why your best employees are quietly losing their edge
- Sentencing enhancement vacated for lack of firearm findings
- Visa, Mastercard $38 billion swipe fee settlement wins US judge’s approval
- GOP Rep. Sarah Stevens resigns to focus on NC Supreme Court race
- Occupancy tax funds may support tourism-related public safety services
- Teachers association takes on Trump in RI court over money for English learners
- US judge asked to bar Trump’s UFC fight at White House
- Trial date set for New Hanover development lawsuit
- SCOTUS News: Drugmaker’s ‘induced infringement’ suit comes up short
- Class certification denied over dealership prize mailer
- Deleted files cost defendants in trade secret case, NC Supreme Court rules
Commentary
- The third option: Why your best employees are quietly losing their edge
- AI divorce is real, but family law can still save itself
- ‘AI won’t take your job’ and other things CEOs say before the layoffs
- When not to believe (your lyin’ eyes)
- Conduct a technology audit to improve law firm efficiency
- When the client brings ChatGPT to the consultation
- Content Marketing: Where law firms lose referrals and how to prevent it
- Your best people are not leaving for more money — they are leaving because you stopped paying attention
- Best at Work Insights: The choice we’re making about AI
- New life for the noncompete
- 2026: The year of tech, both heroes and villains
- Beyond burnout: The case for workplaces where people thrive
