Livingston v. Bakewell (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-16-0133, 16 pp.) (Per Curiam) Appealed from Wake County Superior Court (Donald W. Stephens, J.) N.C. App. Unpub. Holding: Where the disciplinary action against the plaintiff-attorney resulted in an admonition against him for the ...Read More »
Attorneys – Tort/Negligence – Legal Malpractice Claim – Damages – Intellectual Property – Patent Application
Carter v. Clements Walker PLLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-15-0087, 13 pp.) (James L. Gale, J.) 2014 NCBC 1 Holding: Plaintiff has not forecast evidence of any damages he suffered because of the defendant-law firm’s failure to timely apply for international ...Read More »
McKinnon v. CV Industries After a full course of discovery, plaintiff was unable to marshal any proof of his claim that, when the parties entered into plaintiff’s severance agreement, defendant did not intend to perform under the contract. Nevertheless, plaintiff continued to pursue this unfair and deceptive trade practices claim after losing at the summary judgment stage; as a result, the court awards attorneys’ fees to defendant.
Tagged with: deceptiveRead More »
Church v. Decker Defense counsel informed the trial court that it would be difficult to separate out the time he had spent on the frivolous parts of plaintiff’s prior appeal from the total time he had spent on the appeal; nevertheless, this did not justify the trial court’s award of 100 percent of defendant’s attorney’s fees when this court had found only certain portions of plaintiff’s prior appeal to be frivolous.
Tagged with: frivolousRead More »
Attorneys – Tort/Negligence – Legal Malpractice – Civil Practice – Statute of Limitations – Domestic Relations – Equitable Distribution – Mediated Settlement
Podrebarac v. Horack, Talley, Pharr, & Lowndes, P.A. Even though the allegedly unenforceable “mediation stipulations” in plaintiff’s equitable distribution action were signed on April 29, 2009, plaintiff could not reasonably have been expected to discover that the stipulations were defective until April 13, 2012, when his wife’s attorney filed a motion opposing plaintiff’s motion to enforce the “mediated settlement agreement.”
Tagged with: notarizedRead More »
Hennessey v. Duckworth The parties’ consent order did not give either party a win or a loss, so neither party was entitled to attorney’s fees under their separation agreement. However, the trial court’s findings as to the parties’ finances and the plaintiff-mother’s good faith in bringing the custody/support action are sufficient to support its award of attorney’s fees to the mother under G.S. § 50-13.6.
Tagged with: attorney's feesRead More »
Attorneys – Fee Award – Out-of-State Counsel – Higher Rates – Reasonableness – Contempt – Pro Hac Vice Revocation – Contract – Labor & Employment – Tort/Negligence – Unfair Trade Practices – Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
GE Betz, Inc. v. Conrad When awarding attorneys’ fees at the much higher rate charged by plaintiff’s out-of-state counsel, the trial court must make additional findings which demonstrate why awarding such unusually high fees is reasonable in the community where the litigation took place.
Tagged with: Practices ActRead More »
Farlow v. Brookbank The plaintiff-attorney sent the defendant-client five invoices, but she only mentioned charging 18 percent interest on past-due fees in the fourth invoice; this was insufficient under G.S. § 24-11(a). We affirm the trial court’s award of interest at the legal rate.Read More »
Capitol Commission, Inc. v. Capitol Ministries Since the defendant voluntarily dismissed its third-party complaint against its former directors Anderson and Jackson, Anderson and Jackson were not successful “on the merits”; therefore, they are not entitled to indemnity under Cal. Corp. Code § 9246.
Tagged with: IndemnityRead More »
Attorneys – Defense Counsel – Debt Relief Scheme – RICO — Tort/Negligence – Civil Practice – Personal Jurisdiction
Taylor v. Bettis An attorney does not violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act by simply defending his client against a RICO claim. Plaintiffs’ allegations do not indicate that the actions of the Emanuel & Dunn defendants went to the heart of their clients’ alleged debt elimination and credit restoration scheme.
Tagged with: RICO ClaimRead More »