By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: May 19,2011
High Point Bank & Trust Company v. Sapona Manufacturing Co. A trial judge correctly granted the defendants summary judgment based on determinations (1) that no material issue of fact existed and (2) that the plaintiffs' claim that the defendants were required to purchase a woman's shares in the defendant corporations after her death was unreasonable as a matter of law.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: January 6,2011
White v. Collins Bldg., Inc. One is personally liable for all torts committed by him, including negligence, notwithstanding that he may have acted as agent for another or as an officer for a corporation. The trial court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' . . .
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: December 15,2010
Owensby v. Estate of Phillips. Even though the trial court ultimately found that plaintiff Owensby lacked standing to sue on behalf of the corporate plaintiff, since defendants delayed producing corporate documents, and since Owensby . . .
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: November 22,2010
American Decorative Fabrics, LLC v. Jordan Alexander, Inc.. Plaintiff alleged and proved that defendant Jackie Teague's husband dominated and controlled the corporate defendant. Although Mrs. Teague owned half of the stock in the corporation and was nominally one of its officers, her responsibilities were only those of an employee: selecting and coordinating fabrics for the corporation to purchase, which she did from home. We affirm the trial court's refusal to pierce the corporate veil as to Mrs. Teague.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: October 29,2010
Smith v. Raymond. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-15-1037, 9 pp.) (Albert Diaz, J.) N.C. Bus. Ct. Click here for the full text of the opinion. Holding: Even though several corporate executives pleaded guilty to conspiring with the corporation’s competitors to suppress and eliminate competition along the corporation’s Puerto Rico trade route, and even though these executives [...]
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: July 25,2010
Burgess v. Burgess. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-07-0658, 36 pp.) (Robert N. Hunter Jr., J.) (Donna S. Stroud, J., concurring in part & dissenting in part) Appealed from Rowan County Superior Court. (John L. Holshouser Jr., J.) N.C. App. Holding: The plaintiff-wife and the defendant-husband already have an equitable-distribution action pending in district court. Therefore, the [...]
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: July 16,2010
High Point Bank & Trust Co. v. Sapona Manufacturing Co. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-15-0653, 27 pp.) (Ben Tennille, Ch.J.) N.C. Bus. Ct. Holding: In corporations with dozens of non-employee shareholders, where there is no plan for redeeming the stock of shareholders upon their deaths, and where the shareholder in question never mentioned to the directors [...]
By dmc-admin
Published: May 24,2010
Collier v. Collier. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-07-0456, 6 pp.) (Donna S. Stroud, J.) Appealed from Wake County Superior Court. (James C. Spencer Jr., J.) N.C. App. Holding: Plaintiffs alleged that they had been issued stock in Panilla Corp., but that their share certificates had been lost. Since plaintiffs failed to forecast evidence of the number [...]
By dmc-admin
Published: April 5,2010
State ex rel. Commissioner of Insurance v. Custard. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-15-0302, 70 pp.) (Ben F. Tennille, Ch.J.) N.C. Bus. Ct. Holding: An outside expert, whose methodology plaintiff approved, did not foresee the insurance company’s financial peril until it was too late to avert liquidation. The defendant-officers and directors relied on the same information as [...]
By dmc-admin
Published: March 29,2010
Vernon v. Cuomo. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-15-0287, 14 pp.) (Ben F. Tennille, Ch.J.) N.C. Bus. Ct. Holding: Given the uncertainty of the market for the inventions that are the only assets of the parties’ corporation, the court finds that a royalty-sharing arrangement is the most appropriate fair value arrangement. Should an appellate court reject the [...]
NC Lawyers Weekly keeps you connected with the latest legal news, Daily Practice and Breaking
News alerts.
Sign up for NC Lawyers Weekly email alerts
State v. Squires When a state trooper saw a pickup truck on the side of the road after midnight and stopped to see if any assistance was needed, he was not required to leave after a person outside the truck told him everything was okay. The trooper did not impermissibly extend the stop when he checked on the driver of the vehicle.
State v. Rouse Even though, in his opening and closing statements, defense counsel referred to the arresting officers as “very good officers,” counsel did so in the context of arguing that everyone makes mistakes. Counsel could have reasonably made a tactical decision to refrain from challenging the officers’ general professionalism and competence, while still encouraging the jury to find that the officers arrested defendant on May 23, 2010 as a result of their inadvertent mistakes.
Robinson v. North Carolina Department of Correction Where plaintiff testified that, all the way around his wrist, there were “teeth marks” from too-tight handcuffs and that his wrist was bruised and swollen, but where a drawing plaintiff made to document his injuries indicated that only his left finger and thumb were swollen with no indication of bruising, discoloration, a cut or “teeth marks” laterally around his wrist, the evidence supports the Industrial Commission’s finding that plaintiff’s drawing was inconsistent with his testimony regarding his injuries.
Pickney v. Department of Transportation Even though the parties’ settlement agreement provided that plaintiff could “request a job reallocation or pay grade increase” and that defendant would “cooperate with such a request,” the settlement agreement did not provide plaintiff with any guarantee that he would actually receive a job reallocation or pay grade increase upon request. Even if plaintiff proved that defendant breached the settlement agreement by failing to cooperate with his request for a second job reallocation, plaintiff’s evidence provided no basis upon which the trial court could have properly calculated damages.
