It’s Just Business

Analysis of North Carolina Business Court Decisions (and other musings)

Subscribe
Visit Blog
By: Fox Rothschild LLP

Blog Authors

Lisa W. Arthur
Ashley Barton Chandler
Olivia F. Fajen
Patrick M. Kane
Matthew Krueger-Andes
Matthew Nis Leerberg
Jeffrey P. MacHarg
Kip D. Nelson
Fox Rothschild LLP
Bradley M. Risinger
Troy Shelton
Craig Turner
Jeffrey R. Whitley

Latest from It’s Just Business

On January 5, 2021, the North Carolina Business Court published on its website guidance for attorneys seeking admission to the Court pro hac vice.  You can find a link to the resource here along with additional information and procedures for appearing before the Business Court.  The resource is also available from the website’s landing page on the right side, where there is a link to “Pro Hac Vice Motions Practice.” The pro hac vice process…
Contract with “substantial connection” with NC leads to PJ over a California Defendant who never visited NC.     In Toshiba Global Commerce Solutions, Inc. v. Smart & Final Stores LLC, 2020 NCBC 95, Judge Conrad held that a California-based company that reached into NC to contract with a NC business was subject to personal jurisdiction.  What makes this decision interesting for PJ purposes is that the California company never travelled to NC or met…
Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true. – drawn from The Old Man and Death, Aesop In Brewer v. Grue, 2020 NCBC 59, Judge Conrad offers a helpful update to convert that traditional morality tale to the rough and tumble world of commercial litigation. With apologies to Aesop, and the Court, it goes something like this: Be careful what you ask for in litigation, because you will get that (if you’re…
On December 15, 2020, the North Carolina Business Court updated its Quick-Reference Guide for the North Carolina Business Court’s Electronic Filing System, a hyper-linked reference guide accessible from the Business Court’s website. Of significance, the Court updated Sections 2.3 and 4.1.  Section 2.3.3 reflects file size limits, reminding filers that the file size limit for an individual document is 110 MB, but also notes that there is no file size limit for the…
Jeff MacHarg & Ashley Barton Chandler In this order from Buckley LLP v. Series 1 of Oxford Ins. Co. NC LLC, Chief Judge Bledsoe dealt with dueling motions to compel.  Both sides claimed that their hybrid business-legal communications were privileged.  After an exhaustive review – Judge Bledsoe concluded that both sides were right, and wrong, and certain materials had to be produced. Key takeaway: to protect intertwined business-legal communications, seeking (or providing) legal advice…
A group of mostly powerless Class B members in a utility services firm suspected its only Class A member of self-dealing, but their suspicions did not mate with corporate authority to do much about it. However, blessed with wide-ranging inspection and audit rights under an operating agreement, they pushed forward with requests to determine the company’s financial health and investigate its management.  In Richardson v. Utili-Serve, LLC, 2020 NCBC 83, the Business Court considered…
Effective November 5, 2020, the Business Court amended its procedure for litigants seeking designation to the Business Court for mandatory complex business cases.  See here.  Of significance, the Court changed Sections II(b)(i) and (ii), which address the specifications for providing a Notice of Designation (“NOD”) to the Court. Section II(b)(i) requires the designating party to provide the Court with a file-stamped copy of the NOD to assist the Court in ascertaining the NOD’s timeliness…
Back at the start of the pandemic, this Blog took a brief look at how the anticipated flood of business interruption insurance claims might play out under North Carolina Law:  See here. These cases are now winding their way through the North Carolina court system (but not the NCBC).  Fox commercial litigator Greg Holland has detailed one of the first dispositive opinions on this issue: Over the last several months, business interruption claims have…
Effective October 1, 2020, House Bill 679 amended Rules 3 and Rule 5 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.  See here.  Of significance, Rule 5 was amended to make electronic mail, and e-filing where available, permissible forms of service in most circumstances.  Notably, HB 679 did not alter the “three day mailing rule” found in North Carolina Rule of Civil Procedure 6(e).  That rule, which allows for three additional days to be…
In ALC Manufacturing, Inc., v. J. Streicher & Co., 2020 NCBC 55, the Business Court dispatched a case that started off with bad timing, and ended that way too. Plaintiff claimed defendant BBP Bandenia, PLC breached a settlement agreement under which it, and other parties, owed plaintiff $850,000. Plaintiff brought suit over non-payment, and while Bandenia was served it neither filed a response nor appeared in a Mecklenburg Superior Court case designated to the…