The owners of a now-closed Greenville automobile repair shop didn’t violate the Unfair Trade Practices Act, but the couple still must pay their opponents’ attorney costs and fees and may yet be required to pay punitive damages for other fraud charges they admitted to, the South Carolina Court of Appeals has ruled. Natasha Turner […]
Banks & Banking — Unfair Trade Practices – Regulated Industry Exemption – Consumer Protection Code – Real Property
Cantrell v. New Penn Financial, LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-167-17, 10 pp.) (Mary Geiger Lewis, J.) 7:17-cv-01078; D.S.C. Holding: Although the South Carolina Supreme Court has recognized that financial institutions are subject to a robust regulatory regime, it has not strayed from its holding that the regulated-industry exemption from the Unfair Trade Practices Act “is […]
Champion Pro Consulting Group Inc. v. Impact Sports Football LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-001-17, 19 pp.) (Hendricks, D.J.) No. 15-1899, Dec. 22, 2016; USDC at Greensboro, N.C. (Osteen, J.) 4th Cir. Holding: A sports agent whose client – a University of North Carolina student recruited by professional football teams – signed with a competitor eight […]
First South Bank v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-150-14, 20 pp.) (Mary Lewis, J.) 7:10-cv-02097; D.S.C. Holding: Where plaintiff asked for and received rescission as a remedy at trial – putting plaintiff back in the position it held before the parties entered into their contract – plaintiff is not entitled to seek […]
Neeltec Enterprises, Inc. v. Long An officer or controlling person in a corporation may be individually liable for unfair trade practices in which he participates or which he authorizes; therefore, plaintiff is allowed to assert an unfair trade practices claim against defendant Long individually. Plaintiff has the right to decide which party it wishes to sue for certain acts; accordingly,[...]
Hill v. Canal Insurance Co. The plaintiff, an independent contractor/truck driver, is not a party to the insurance policy between the defendant-trucking company and the defendant-insurer; therefore, she lacks standing to bring a breach of contract claim based on the insurance policy. Defendants’ motions to dismiss are granted.
Attorneys – Tort/Negligence — Legal Malpractice Claim – Real Property – Closing – Fiduciary Duty – Unfair Trade Practices – Securities
RFT Management Co. v. Tinsley & Adams L.L.P. Since the parties agreed at trial that plaintiff’s legal malpractice claim involved questions of fact that required submission of the claim to a jury, plaintiff may not now complain that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on its legal malpractice claim.
Tort/Negligence – Real Property – Slander of Title – Lis Pendens – Absolute Privilege – Unfair Trade Practices – Breach of Contract – Abuse of Process
D. R. Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co. Even though the plaintiff-buyer allowed its first lis pendens to expire while the parties continued to negotiate, the buyer filed a second lis pendens on the same property and perfected it by filing this lawsuit involving that property. Therefore, the first lis pendens cannot form the basis of a slander of title claim.
Intellectual Property – Trade Dress Infringement – Cookware – Unfair Trade Practices – Treble Damages
Belk Inc. v. Meyer Corp. Meyer, a manufacturer of “Anolon Advanced” cookware, wins its suit alleging trade dress infringement and violation of North Carolina unfair trade practices law against defendant Belk department store, which sold a private-label cookware that was “deceptively similar”; the 4th Circuit upholds a $1.26 million damage award for plaintiff.
Hennes v. Shaw Where the complaint alleged and the parties presented evidence on a claim of breach of contract, the trial court erred when it sua sponte instructed the jury on conversion. We affirm the trial court’s grant of a directed verdict for plaintiff on defendant’s unfair trade practices claim. We affirm the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a directed verdict [...]
Babaee v. Moisture Warranty Corp. Defendant’s brochure said, “We know what steps to take to assure homeowners that their home is dry, and we guarantee their home will remain dry during the term of the warranty ... or we’ll pay to get it dry.” Defendant’s warranty defined “excessive moisture” as any moisture reading equal to or above 25 percent.
McKnight v. Surgical Associates of Myrtle Beach LLC Even though, as an element of her state-law unfair trade practices claim, plaintiff alleges that defendants violated a federal law - the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) - this allegation alone is insufficient to give this court federal question jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claim. Plaintiff’s [...]
- Economy forces attorneys to get down to business
- Business Court judges trawl for customers
- Va. company's Web site did not subject business to personal jurisdiction in S.C., appeals panel rules
- Former running back from S.C. wins courtroom victory in contract dispute
- Contract – Government Contract – Qui Tam – False Claims Act
- Tort – Business Tort – Va. Computer Crimes Act – Trade Secrets
- Consumer Protection – FCRA – Auto Loan – Bank Accounting Errors
- Licenses & Permits – Beer & Wine Permit – Restrictive Covenant – Suitable Location
- Licenses & Permits – Veterinarian – Vaccine Maintenance
- State regulators look at car dealer accused of lying to customers
- Textile firm, railroad settle Graniteville train wreck lawsuit
- Subprime mortgage meltdown hits securities law
- High court justices cross the line of propriety
- High court’s term was rough on big business
- The flip side of generative AI in law and how to address it
- The fight for equal educational opportunity continues
- Letter From The Editor – Working from Home
- NLRB joins FTC in taking aim at non-competes
- Supreme Court leaves key internet protection untouched
- US Supreme Court bites back at parody’s use of the First Amendment
- My goal: Provide the information that you need now
- Case study: North Carolina courts provide guidance on scope, limitations of attorney-client privilege
- A Different Ode to Pro Bono Work
- N.C. Bar Association embraces homophobia