By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: October 16,2012
Bass v. Hoskins Plaintiffs contend the defendant-attorney should have discovered trustees’ wrongdoing when the attorney reviewed and revised trust documents for plaintiffs’ decedent in 2006.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: November 10,2011
In re Foster Where the beneficiary of the debtors’ life insurance policies is a trust, and where the trust authorizes payments to the unsecured creditors of the debtor-decedent - creditors who would otherwise have been barred from accessing such funds by the protection offered under N.C. Const. art. X, § 5 - such a trust is not for the “sole use and benefit” of the debtor’s spouse and children, as contemplated by art. X, § 5. The court sustains the trustee’s objection to exemptions claimed in the debtors’ life insurance policies.
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: February 22,2011
Taryn Roberts and her brother, Thomas J. Strahan, were beneficiaries under a trust created by their grandmother, Edwena Haber. The trust was split into two shares, one for the benefit of Taryn and her brother, the other for the benefit of their uncle, James M. “Jimmy” Strahan. Jimmy served as the trustee of both shares [...]
By North Carolina Lawyers Weekly Staff
Published: October 5,2010
Hasselman v. Barnes. (Lawyers Weekly 10-07-0954, 5 pp.) (Donna S. Stroud, J.). Appealed from New Hanover County Superior Court (Jay D. Hockenbury, J.). N.C. App. Click here for the full text of the opinion. Holding: The trial court erred in granting partial summary judgment to the plaintiff because four beneficiaries whose interests will be affected by [...]
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
Bartlett v. Wayne County Board of Education Plaintiffs contend that the majority of eyewitnesses in this case testified that the responding officer’s diagram depicting the accident scene was accurate, that the diagram demonstrates plaintiffs’ “van had to have been almost directly in front of the bus at the time [the bus driver] started her turn,” and that this evidence conclusively established that the bus driver failed to yield the right-of-way to plaintiffs’ van.
Fidelity Bank v. North Carolina Department of Revenue Even though the N.C. Revenue Act uses the Internal Revenue Code to determine state net income, and even though the Code treats “market discount income” on U.S. Treasury bonds as interest for purposes of the Code, under the N.C. Revenue Act market discount income on U.S. Treasury bonds is treated as income rather than interest.
Apex Tool Group, LLC v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. Neither plaintiff nor the individual defendants are Texas residents; nevertheless, each of the individual defendants’ employment agreements includes an unambiguous and mandatory forum selection clause, which says any lawsuit involving the agreement must be brought in Harris County, Texas. The employment agreements were entered into by plaintiff’s predecessor and the individual defendants, who apparently did not live in Texas when they entered into the contracts and thus apparently anticipated interstate travel in the event of a trial.
