North Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Where defendant knew she was dealing with an Iowa company when she signed a contract, which said it would not be valid until accepted by plaintiff in Iowa and which included a clause consenting to jurisdiction in Iowa courts, the ...

  We affirm the Business Court’s award of attorneys’ fees against plaintiffs’ counsel individually as a sanction for discovery violations (Although plaintiff Preiss showed up an hour and a half late – unaccompanied by counsel – for her deposition, since ...

Where a contraceptive device, regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, failed to work as intended, forcing the plaintiff to undergo a total hysterectomy to have it removed, the manufacturer of the device could not remove the action to federal ...

Only one neighboring landowner intervened (and later petitioned for judicial review) when respondent American Towers, LLC, successfully sought a conditional use permit and variance to build a telecommunications tower. On appeal, the owner of a different neighboring tract could not ...

Even though the plaintiff-appellant’s many gross and substantial appellate rules violations are non-jurisdictional, they impaired the court’s ability to conduct meaningful appellate review, requiring the dismissal of plaintiff’s appeal. Plaintiff violated at least seven mandatory North Carolina Rules of Appellate ...

Plaintiff’s attempts to serve defendant with process were limited to a singled failed attempt at personal service at an address where defendant did not reside and a general internet search. We cannot hold that these efforts constituted due diligence when ...

Given the trial court’s copious findings, which amply supported its conclusions that defendant had repeatedly failed to obey the trial court’s order compelling discovery, and given the trial court’s consideration of lesser sanctions, the trial court did not violate defendant’s ...

After the trial court denied defendant’s request for attorney’s fees under N.C. R. Civ. P. 11, defendant filed a motion under N.C. R. Civ. P. 60(b) requesting attorney’s fees on an entirely new legal basis: G.S. § 55-7-46(2). As a ...

The court believes plaintiff is unlikely to succeed on appeal, and it is not likely to be prejudiced by the lack of a stay pending appeal, so, in its discretion, the court denies plaintiff’s motion for a stay under N.C. ...

Even though respondent’s daughter was afraid of her father, she should not have been allowed to testify outside the presence of the pro se respondent; however, she was entitled to have the trial court address her safety and protection from ...