Case law

S&M Brands, Inc. v. Stein

2018 NCBC 26 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 2, 2018

Plaintiff established an Escrow Fund and has made yearly payments into its Escrow Fund since the NC Qualifying Statute was enacted in 1999. … its immunity from suit.”

STATE v. MCCLURE

2004 NCBC 8 · North Carolina Business Court · Dec 4, 2004

The NFPA members at least had a plausible argument that excluding the plastic conduit may have involved some legitimate safety concerns. {36} The petitioning activities of NCESPA clearly do not qualify for immunity under … Id. {58} The Court first turns to whether DENR clearly expressed and articulated intent to displace competition with regulation among environmental consultants by establishing reasonable rates.

Eidogen-Sertanty, Inc. v. Univ. of N.C.

2018 NCBC 127 · North Carolina Business Court · Dec 11, 2018

“The concept of sovereign immunity is so firmly established that it should not and cannot be waived by indirection or by procedural rule. … In short, the TSPA does not clearly or unmistakably waive sovereign immunity for claims of trade-secret misappropriation.

Hill v. Stubhub, Inc.

2011 NCBC 7 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 28, 2011

It is not entitled to immunity. It does not qualify as a Good Samaritan. … The facts set out above clearly establish that StubHub’s actions were “in and affecting commerce” as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1. {53} There are class action issues remaining to be decided.

In Re Judicial Review of Final Agency Decision of N.C. Bd. of Cpa Exam'rs

2017 NCBC 39 · North Carolina Business Court · May 1, 2017

Johnson filed a complaint with the Board alleging that Purvis was not qualified to perform peer audits. 10. … Purvis was determined qualified to perform the peer review services provided to [the Firm,]” but that Purvis’s complaint against Johnson “has been held open.” (OR 27.)

Dicesare v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hosp. Auth.

2019 NCBC 13 · North Carolina Business Court · Feb 27, 2019

“A motion for judgment on the pleadings should not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” … Plaintiffs argue that the question of governmental immunity is a fact question. (Mem. Opp’n 13.)

Orbitz, LLC v. Hoyle

2013 NCBC 33 · North Carolina Business Court · Jun 21, 2013

Plaintiffs acknowledge that they qualify as facilitators under the Amendments. (Compl. ¶ 80.) … “[S]overeign immunity is not a constitutional right[,] [but rather] a common law theory or defense established by th[e] [c]ourt[s] . . . .” Id. at 786, 413 S.E.2d at 292.

Orbitz, LLC v. Hoyle

2013 NCBC 29 · North Carolina Business Court · May 28, 2013

Plaintiffs acknowledge that they qualify as facilitators under the Amendments. (Compl. ¶ 80.) … “[S]overeign immunity is not a constitutional right[,] [but rather] a common law theory or defense established by th[e] [c]ourt[s] . . . .” Id. at 786, 413 S.E.2d at 292.

STATE v. MCCLURE

2005 NCBC 6 · North Carolina Business Court · Oct 28, 2005

If it is determined that Ross and CBM engaged in an unlawful conspiracy with respect to the remaining claims, liability will be established. … Clearly, actions such as those alleged against defendant McClure would not fall within the immunity provisions.

Aspen Specialty Ins. Co. v. Nucor Corp.

2022 NCBC 19 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 22, 2022

Information generated after that date, it reasoned, was subject to work product qualified immunity. Id. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed. Id. at 534. 26. … Thus, Wachovia Bank establishes that reserves are not categorically off limits in discovery as long as they are not shielded by privilege or qualified immunity.

Monarch Tax Credits, LLC v. N.C. Dep't of Revenue

2021 NCBC 6 · North Carolina Business Court · Jan 25, 2021

[but is rather] a common law theory or defense established by [our] [c]ourt[s,]” “when there is a clash between these constitutional rights and sovereign immunity, the constitutional rights must prevail.” … On the other hand, if the remedy established by the NCAPA is inadequate, exhaustion is not required.

N.C. Acupuncture Licensing Bd. v. N.C. Bd. of Physical Therapy Exam'rs

2016 NCBC 31 · North Carolina Business Court · Apr 26, 2016

Sovereign Immunity {22} “[I]t is an established principle of jurisprudence that a state may not be sued unless by statute it has consented to be sued or has otherwise waived its immunity from suit.” Ray v. N.C. … Comm’n, 336 N.C. 200, 443 S.E.2d 716 (1994), as establishing a waiver of sovereign immunity where state actors have, as Plaintiff argues here, “invade[d] or threaten[ed] to invade the personal or property rights of a citizen

McKnight v. Wakefield Missionary Baptist Church, Inc.

2021 NCBC 35 · North Carolina Business Court · Jun 14, 2021

Immunity 35. … . § 61-1(b)(7) (establishing an exception to immunity if the trustee “[i]s sued in an action that would qualify as a derivative action if the organization were a for-profit corporation”).

legalzoom.com, Inc. v. N. Carolina State Bar

2014 NCBC 9 · North Carolina Business Court · Mar 24, 2014

{72} Sovereign immunity protects a State agency from suit absent a waiver of its immunity. Walton v. N. Carolina Dep’t of Agric. & Consumer Servs., No. 5:09- CV-302-FL, 2010 U.S. Dist. … A state agency is entitled to this immunity, as is the State itself. See Meyer v.

State v. W. Sky Fin., LLC

2015 NCBC 84 · North Carolina Business Court · Aug 27, 2015

The movant bears the burden of establishing the right to a preliminary injunction. Pruitt v. Williams, 288 N.C. 368, 372 (1975). … An injunction that is mandatory in nature, rather than prohibitory, “will ordinarily be granted only where the injury is immediate, pressing, irreparable, and clearly established.” Auto. Dealer Res., Inc. v.

Berger v. New Hanover Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs

2013 NCBC 45 · North Carolina Business Court · Sep 5, 2013

Plaintiff acknowledges that North Carolina case law clearly establishes that a witness may offer observations based on personal experience. (Pl.’s Supp. Br. 26.) … An elected official is not necessarily immune from the government’s power to respond simply because he was elected.

Bochkis v. Med. Justice Servs., Inc.

2016 NCBC 89 · North Carolina Business Court · Nov 23, 2016

Although the Court concludes that Defendant is not immune from civil liability under N.C. Gen. … As to the Motion to Strike, the Court concludes in its discretion that none of the allegations in the Complaint that Defendant seeks to have stricken are clearly irrelevant or improper.

Klos Constr., Inc. v. Premier Homes & Props., LLC

2020 NCBC 53 · North Carolina Business Court · Jul 21, 2020

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 this 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).

Ford v. Jurgens

2021 NCBC 64 · North Carolina Business Court · Oct 5, 2021

Once the party invoking the doctrine establishes that the documents or things in question were prepared in anticipation of litigation, work product immunity attaches unless the other party establishes that he has “substantial … may not have fully understood the legal ramifications resulting from the transfer of Association funds at the time the transfer occurred, Defendants point out that the operating agreement that was thereafter created clearly

S. Envtl. Law Ctr. v. Saylor

2019 NCBC 59 · North Carolina Business Court · Sep 11, 2019

“A motion for judgment on the pleadings should not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” … On a Rule 12(c) motion, “[t]he movant is held to a strict standard and must show that no material issue of facts exists and that he is clearly entitled to judgment.” Ragsdale v.