Case law

Blythe v. Bell

2013 NCBC 8 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 4, 2013

As to this initial opinion Barbee offers, the court concludes: (1) Barbee is clearly qualified to present expert testimony regarding damage calculations so long as he does so using a recognized methodology; (2) Barbee utilized … A similar conclusion arises when applying established North Carolina case precedent dealing with proof of lost profits.

Remi Holdings, LLC v. Ix Wr 3023 HSBC Way L.P.

2016 NCBC 96 · North Carolina Business Court · Dec 12, 2016

A non-outsider enjoys qualified immunity from liability on a tortious interference claim. Combs v. City Elec. Supply Co., 203 N.C. App. 75, 84, 690 S.E.2d 719, 725 (2010). … A non-outsider loses qualified immunity if the non-outsider acts with “legal malice.” Varner v. Bryan, 113 N.C. App. 697, 702, 440 S.E.2d 295, 298 (1994).

Abrons Family Practice & Urgent Care v. N.C. Dep't Health & Human Servs.

2015 NCBC 60 · North Carolina Business Court · Jun 12, 2015

Although some courts have held that sovereign immunity presents a question of personal jurisdiction, the North Carolina Court of Appeals has noted that whether the doctrine of sovereign immunity presents a question of subject … As noted above, where "the remedy established by the APA is inadequate, exhaustion is not required.

State of N.C. v. Tiktok Inc.

2025 NCBC 47 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 19, 2025

Immunity. … In those cases, one court after another has concluded that designing an app to induce addictive, compulsive use by minors comfortably qualifies as an unfair practice.

Med1 N.C. Servs., L.L.C. v. Med1 Plus, L.L.C.

2020 NCBC 15 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 26, 2020

Robeson County solicits bids from qualified non-emergency ambulance providers for the exclusive contractual right to provide their services (the “Robeson County Contract”). … However, these factors are not sufficient to establish a fiduciary duty on the part of Davis and Hagins.

Elliott v. Kb Home N.C., Inc.

2017 NCBC 37 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 17, 2017

There are three basic requirements to establish class certification under Rule 23:  First, parties seeking to employ the class action procedure pursuant to our Rule 23 must establish the existence … RPC 1.5 provides that “[a] lawyer shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an illegal or clearly excessive fee or collect a clearly excessive amount for expenses.” Id.

Volvo Grp. N. Am. v. Roberts Truck Ctr., Ltd.

2020 NCBC 73 · North Carolina Business Court · Oct 14, 2020

Winner and Fink corresponded on multiple occasions regarding whether Roberts had met the sales quotas established by the Settlement Agreement.  28. … Winner reported Roberts’ Volvo sales as a total of 24 qualifying sales, only 8 of which were made within Roberts’ AOR but were qualified for other reasons. (4/4/2017 E- mail Chain.)

cnc/access, Inc. v. Scruggs

2006 NCBC 20 · North Carolina Business Court · Nov 15, 2006

The term “quasi-judicial” is not clearly defined, but was addressed both in McDonald and in Angel v. Ward, 43 N.C. App. 288, 258 S.E.2d 788 (1979). … {78} Based on the foregoing, there are genuine issues of fact as to whether CNC/Access can meet its burden of establishing a qualified privilege.

Safety Test & Equip. Co., Inc. v. Am. Safety Util. Corp.

2015 NCBC 37 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 23, 2015

The Court concludes that Plaintiff has not established a case against Curry that survives summary judgment. Curry is therefore entitled to have all claims against him dismissed. … May 16, 2005) (dismissing civil conspiracy claim against corporation and its agents under intracorporate immunity doctrine).

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

2011 NCBC 30 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 8, 2011

That is, Lorillard claims that it is immune from any Section 75–1.1 claim grounded on its having brought the litigation. … “[A] practice is unfair when it offends established public policy” and “when the practice is immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious to consumers.” Eastover Ridge, L.L.C. v.

S&M Brands, Inc. v. Stein

2020 NCBC 23 · North Carolina Business Court · Mar 24, 2020

In July 1999, North Carolina enacted a Qualifying Statute (the “NC Qualifying Statute”) based on the model Qualifying Statute. N.C.G.S. §§ 66-290–294.2 (2019). 14. … Clearly, by use of the word ‘including’ the lawmakers intended merely to list examples of known safety devices, but not to exclude others equally well known.

Tong v. Dunn

2012 NCBC 16 · North Carolina Business Court · Mar 19, 2012

Such an allegation falls within the intra-corporate immunity doctrine and outside its exception recognized in Delaware. … {33} There are separate policy issues that ultimately may need to be addressed by the North Carolina appellate courts if an aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary claim is to be clearly recognized.

Media Network, Inc. v. Mullen Adver., Inc.

2006 NCBC 6 · North Carolina Business Court · May 24, 2006

{4} Mullen seeks disclosure of the terms of the Settlement Agreement for impeachment purposes, i.e., to establish the possible bias or prejudice of Mr. … Foley as a witness for Gateway, and is not immune from discovery by Rule 408. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Mullen’s Motion to Compel discovery of Gateway’s Settlement Agreement with Carteles.

N.C. Dep't of Revenue v. Fsc II, LLC

2023 NCBC 9 · North Carolina Business Court · Jan 30, 2023

Thus, the heart of the parties’ dispute concerns whether FSC qualifies as a “manufacturing industry or plant.” … App. at 730, that statement is clearly dicta and therefore lacks precedential value. See State v.

Potts v. Steel Tube, Inc.

2018 NCBC 24 · North Carolina Business Court · Mar 27, 2018

These cases concerned unfair acts that “clearly occurred in the broader marketplace.” Powell v. Dunn, 2014 NCBC LEXIS 3, at *10 (N.C. Super. Ct. … Potts does not address these allegations and appears to concede that they do not qualify as special, individualized injuries.

Midrex Techs., Inc. v. N.C. Dep't of Revenue

2015 NCBC 88 · North Carolina Business Court · Oct 7, 2015

The hands-on work could include, inter alia, installation and re-wiring of electrical equipment, hauling mortar, and performing repairs and modifications to equipment in the Midrex Plant.22 The record does not clearly reflect … contractor-type establishment."

Addison Whitney, LLC v. Cashion

2020 NCBC 48 · North Carolina Business Court · Jun 10, 2020

Apart from the privilege objection, Miller asserts overbreadth and work-product immunity. … Addison Whitney again asserts work-product immunity. (See Pl.’s Opp’n 19.)

Praxair, Inc. v. Airgas, Inc.

2000 NCBC 10 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 14, 2000

In order to admit expert testimony under Rule 702, the proponent must establish that the witness is qualified to testify as an expert on the subject about which the testimony is offered. See State v. … Defendants do not argue that Professor Donaldson’s testimony is irrelevant, as it clearly goes to the central issue in this case.

State v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.

2006 NCBC 22 · North Carolina Business Court · Dec 4, 2006

1) the present dispute between the State of North Carolina and the tobacco companies is arbitrable under the plain language of the Master Settlement Agreement, (2) the courts of North Carolina and the United States have established … The NPM Adjustment is clearly an adjustment “described in subsection IX(j),” and “any dispute” concerning the NPM Adjustment is subject to arbitration under section XI(c).

USA Trouser, S.A. De C v. v. Williams

2016 NCBC 54 · North Carolina Business Court · Jul 21, 2016

However, the doctrine of intracorporate immunity, which is well established in North Carolina law, generally prohibits making a conspiracy claim against a corporation and its agents because “claiming that a corporation has … The Court concludes that the doctrine of intracorporate immunity bars claims based on the first category of allegations.