Ellis & Winters LLP

Litigating Injury in a 75-1.1 Case: The 12(b)(1) vs. 12(b)(6) Distinction

In cases under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1, it’s important to distinguish arguments under Rule 12(b)(1) from arguments under Rule 12(b)(6). On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, a court generally must…more
| Civil Procedure, Business Torts

Update on Athletes’ 75-1.1 Lawsuits Against UNC

Last November, we posted on the putative class action that former UNC football player Michael McAdoo has filed against UNC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina…more
| Art, Entertainment, & Sports Law, Civil Procedure, Business Torts

Do Treble Damages Count Toward Minimum Amounts In Controversy?

Today’s post involves the relationship between N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 and amounts in controversy—especially the new amount in controversy in the statute that governs assigning cases to the North Carolina Business Court…more
| Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Commercial Law & Contracts

Recent Appellate Decisions Reshape the Landscape of Arbitration Law

For in-house counsel who draft and enforce arbitration agreements, trying to keep up with the fast-moving landscape of arbitration law is a significant challenge. Over the last several years, the United States Supreme Court has…more
| Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Civil Procedure, Commercial Law & Contracts, Conflict of Laws

Helpful Treatises on Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices

Someday, you’ll have an issue under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 that needs in-depth research—perhaps comparisons to similar bodies of law in other jurisdictions. Diving straight into the hundreds of court decisions under section…more
| Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Civil Procedure, Consumer Protection, Business Torts

Section 75-1.1 and Out-of-State Injuries Based on In-State Conduct

In earlier posts, we have discussed the two-part test that courts use to assess whether section 75-1.1 applies to out-of-state conduct. First, the plaintiff must suffer an injury in North Carolina…more
| Civil Procedure, Business Torts

Amended Complaints and Industry Standards

Can a party who is accused of an unfair trade practice raise the same defense? That is, can a business avoid section 75-1.1 liability by proving that the plaintiff business engages in the same allegedly unfair conduct?…more
| Civil Procedure, Business Torts, Intellectual Property

Readers Like Suspense—Just Not in the Introduction to Your Brief

I welcome evidence to the contrary, but I don’t think that most courts appreciate surprises in briefs. Courts have limited time; they want to use that time to make the right decisions. The sooner you can tell a court why you…more
| Civil Procedure

Reflections and Gratitude

We started this blog about eight months ago. We did so because of the prevalence of section 75-1.1 claims in North Carolina business disputes. Indeed, it’s the unusual business dispute in North Carolina that does not include a…more
| Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Commercial Law & Contracts, Communications & Media Law, Business Torts

Damages in “Aggravated Breach” Cases

We have written before about the “aggravated breach of contract” theory under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1. This theory can make a breach of contract a springboard to treble damages…more
| Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Commercial Law & Contracts, Business Torts, Science, Computers, & Technology

HAMP and Section 75-1.1, Part 2

In yesterday’s post, we discussed when a lender’s failure to comply with guidelines under the federal Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP) might violate N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 as well. We analyzed a very recent federal…more
| Bankruptcy, Civil Procedure, Finance & Banking, Business Torts, Real Estate - Residential

HAMP and Section 75-1.1, Part 1

In a recent article, Matt Sawchak explained per se violations of section 75-1.1. When courts recognize a per se violation of section 75-1.1, they are saying that violating a separate source of law—a separate statute, a…more
| Civil Procedure, Finance & Banking, Business Torts, Real Estate - Residential

Section 75-1.1 Stars in New Putative Class Action Against UNC

Last Thursday, former UNC football player Michael McAdoo filed a putative class action against UNC-Chapel Hill. This federal complaint has already received extensive publicity. The publicity, though, has overlooked the…more
| Art, Entertainment, & Sports Law, Business Torts, Civil Procedure, Education

State Supreme Court’s Interpretation of FAA Sidesteps SCOTUS Court Review

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent string of pro-arbitration decisions is well documented. In those decisions, the Court has not hesitated to admonish state courts for failing to follow the Federal Arbitration Act…more
| Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Civil Procedure, Commercial Law & Contracts

Distinguishing Standing and Injury in 75-1.1 Cases

A Minnesota judge was probably enjoying fond October baseball memories when he recently wrote a notable decision in a putative class action that involved kosher hot dogs. That decision, Wallace v. ConAgra, addresses the roles of…more
| Civil Procedure, Communications & Media Law, Constitutional Law, Business Torts, Products Liability
Showing 1-15 of 45 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Contact

1100 Crescent Green Drive Suite 200
Cary, NC 27518, United States

  • 919 865 7000
  • 919 865 7010

Areas of Practice
  • Administrative Law
  • Antitrust & Trade Regulation
  • Appellate Practice
  • Bankruptcy
  • Business Torts
  • Class Action
  • Commercial Law & Contracts
  • Communications & Media Law
  • Constitutional Law
  • Construction Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Environmental Law
  • Finance & Banking
  • Insurance
  • Intellectual Property
  • Labor & Employment Law
  • Litigation
  • Products Liability
  • Professional Malpractice
  • Real Estate
  • Securities Law
  • Toxic Torts
See more
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • North Carolina
Number of Attorneys

25-50 Attorneys

This profile may constitute attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any correspondence with this profile holder does not constitute a client/attorney relationship. Neither the content on this profile nor transmissions between you and the profile holder through this profile are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×