Practicing in the North Carolina Business Court requires more than simply following the Rules of Civil Procedure. Once a case is designated as a mandatory complex business case, North Carolina Business Court Rules (BCRs) take center stage. Among them, BCR Rule 7 governs motions practice and functions as the Business Court’s enforcement mechanism for disciplined, paper-driven litigation. BCR 7 is designed to preserve judicial resources and force lawyers to make early, deliberate choices about what actually merits the Court’s attention.
North Carolina Business Court Rule 7 fundamentally changes motions practice compared to standard North Carolina Superior Court procedure. This article walks through Rule 7’s structure, highlights common pitfalls, and explains why compliance matters. You can also review our BCR 7 Checklist that walks through how to avoid these pitfalls.
Rule 7.1: The Business Court Judge Controls the Case
Rule 7.1 makes clear that, once a case is in the Business Court, the assigned Business Court judge presides over all motions and proceedings, unless the designation is later revoked.
Motions should not be directed to local Superior Court judges, and parties should not expect parallel motion practice outside the Business Court’s supervision.
Rule 7.2: Separate Motions, Separate Briefs
Rule 7.2 requires that motions in the Business Court must be accompanied by a brief at the time of filing, eliminating the “placeholder” motions practice that is common in Superior Court. Failing to submit a brief with a motion may result in the Business Court denying the motion outright.
BCR 7.2’s briefing requirement is a departure from general Superior Court motions practice. In Superior Court, a lawyer may file a motion to dismiss and let it sit for months to only be briefed in the days before a hearing, in Business Court, that does not fly. There are no “placeholder” motions that stop the clock or test the waters
A short list of motions are exempt from briefing under Rule 7.10, which is discussed below.
As for content, parties are expected to brief the issues they intend to argue, but at a hearing, the Business Court has discretion to expand the scope to matters that were not briefed. This is another change from standard Superior Court practice, where argument is usually cabined to the issues that the parties analyzed in their briefs.
7.3: Mandatory Consultation (With Limited Exceptions)
Rule 7.3 requires consultation with opposing counsel before filing most motions, which screens unnecessary motions and lets the parties signal whether judicial intervention is truly necessary. The motion must state whether the opposing party (1) consents to the motion, (2) does not object to the motion, or (3) objects and intends to respond to the motion. If consultation is not possible, the movant must describe reasonable and diligent efforts to confer.
Failure to include a proper consultation statement is a frequent and avoidable error that may result in a motion being denied. This requirement applies to many motions that attorneys routinely file as a matter of course.
However, the consultation requirement does not apply to the following motions:
- Rule 12 motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings;
- Rule 55 motions for default judgment;
- Rule 56 motions for summary judgment;
- Rule 59 motions for amending a judgment or for a new trial;
- Rule 60 motions for relief from a judgment or order;
- Rule 65 motions for injunctive relief.
In practice, the consultation requirement functions as a gatekeeping device. Judges routinely deny or strike motions that omit a consultation statement—not because the underlying request lacks merit, but Business Court judges rely on the consultation statement to determine whether the movant approached the Business Court as a last resort rather than a first reaction.
In practice, Business Court judges prefer that a party either object or consent. Merely stating that you “do not object” to the motion, while allowed under the rules, is not preferred.
Taken together, Rules 7.2 and 7.3 reflect the Business Court’s effort to make motion practice rarer, narrower, and more consequential than in ordinary Superior Court litigation.
Rule 7.4: Hearings Are Optional, Not Automatic
Under Rule 7.4, hearings are discretionary, reinforcing the Business Court’s preference for a paper-driven process. If counsel believes oral argument would be helpful, they should explain why in the motion or response. Even then, the court may elect to rule on the papers alone.
When the Business Court cites to Rule 7.4 (which is quite frequent), it is generally for the proposition that the Business Court has discretion to decide motions without a hearing or that no party requested a hearing.
This reflects the broader theme of Rule 7. The Business Court prioritizes efficient decisions. It’s also another notable departure from standard North Carolina Superior Court practice: aside from certain motions that are allowed as a formality or through consent, most motions before a Superior Court judge will require a hearing. Not so with the Business Court.
Rule 7.5: Supporting Materials Must Be Precise and Disciplined
Rule 7.5 governs supporting materials and has been cited by the Business Court as a basis for disregarding entire arguments. All materials relied upon must be filed, but parties are instructed to limit voluminous exhibits and file only the relevant pages where possible. Every citation should include a pinpoint citation to the precise page relied upon. Previously filed materials do not need to be refiled and can be referenced by citation to its ECF number in the record.
If citing an unpublished or hard-to-find authority, the Business Court expects that filers attach a copy.
Sloppy exhibits—or dumping hundreds of pages into the record without guidance—can undermine credibility with the court.
Rules 7.6 and 7.7: Strict Response and Reply Deadlines (with Real Consequences)
Rule 7.6 gives opposing parties 20 days to file a response brief after service of the moving party’s brief. Attorneys must note this deadline: it can be easy to miss because of its similarity to the federal court response deadline of 21 days.
The 20-day deadline is extended to 30 days for summary judgment motions and administrative appeals.
If no response is filed, the motion may be decided as uncontested.
Reply briefs are permitted under Rule 7.7 but are limited to matters newly raised in the response and must be filed within 10 days.
Rule 7.7 allows the Business Court to decline to consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief. This happened recently when ByteDance LTD raised a “group pleading” argument for the first time in its reply. The Court rejected the argument, stating, “[i]f ByteDance wished to rebut these allegations or argue that they are deficient, it should have done so in its opening brief. Because it did not, the argument is waived, and the allegations are deemed uncontested.”
This is yet another difference from how things work in Superior Court, where the standard timeline for serving briefs is a mere two days before an already scheduled hearing.
Rule 7.8: Word Limits Matter
Business Court briefing word counts are tightly regulated. Under Rule 7.8:
- Opening and response briefs: 7,500 words
- Reply briefs: 3,750 words
What’s included in the word count? What’s not?
What’s included in the word count?
- Body of the brief;
- Footnotes; and
- Endnotes.
What’s excluded from the word count?
- Captions;
- Indexes;
- Tables of contents;
- Tables of authorities;
- Signature blocks; and
- Any required certificates.
Trying to sneak around the word limit won’t work either: The Business Court generally wields Rule 7.8 with citation to its limitation on incorporating other briefs by reference or filing multiple motions to avoid the word limits.
If you need more words than allowed, the Business Court will let you ask for more, but a request to exceed the word limit must be made no later than five days before the deadline for filing the brief and the requesting party must make a “convincing showing” that additional words are required.
Rule 7.9: Supplemental Authority
After the briefing has closed, a party may submit a “suggestion of subsequently decided authority” containing a citation to new authority and a brief explanation of its relevance (not more than 100 words).
A party can respond to a suggestion with a 100-word response within five days of being served with the suggestion of a subsequently decided authority.
Parties should not treat the suggestion as an opportunity to pick up where their briefing left off. Suggestions are limited to new decisions and authority that came after the briefing had closed.
Rule 7.10: Motions That Do Not Require Briefs
The following motions do not require briefs, but must state the grounds for relief sought, include necessary support, and be accompanied by a proposed order:
- Motions for extension of times made prior to expiration of the time to be extended;
- Motions to continue a pretrial conference, hearing, or trial;
- Motions to add parties;
- Motions made by consent;
- Motions to approve fees of a receiver, special master, referee, or court-appointed expert or professional;
- Motions for substitute parties;
- Motions to stay proceedings to enforce a judgment;
- Motions to modify the CMO pursuant to Rule 9.1(a), provided the motion is filed prior to the expiration of the case management deadlines being extended;
- Motions for entry of default;
- Motions for pro hac vice admission;
- Motions in limine complying with Rule 12.9;
- Motions to seal confidential information (except as provided by Rule 5);
- Motions to withdraw as counsel; and
- Motions for a bill of costs.
Rule 7.10 has been used to reject an oral motion for summary judgment made at a hearing on an opposing party’s motion for summary judgment. Because Motions for Summary Judgment are not identified as not requiring a brief, the Court explained that an oral motion for summary judgment was improper under Rule 7.2 (as no motion had been filed or briefed) and under Rule 7.10 because the motion made was not an exception to Rule 7.2.
Rule 7.12: Motions Decided Without Live Testimony
Motions in the Business Court are generally decided without live testimony, including emergency motions, unless the Court orders otherwise. If an attorney wants to present live testimony at a hearing, they request permission.
After such a request, the Court may request a response, deny the request, or issue further instructions, and the opposing party need not respond unless directed. If the Court holds a telephone conference, it may decide the motion during that conference.
Notably, a request for live testimony should be made as its own motion. The Business Court has rejected requests for live testimony that were buried within the briefing of another motion, even when the requested live testimony would support the motion being briefed.
Rule 7.13: Emergency Motions
When a party files a Notice of Designation at the outset of a case and seeks emergency relief, the rule stresses prompt coordination. They should quickly contact the Chief Justice to request expedited designation as a mandatory complex business case and notify the Business Court’s Trial Court Coordinator that an emergency motion is pending. This process ensures the Business Court can assume jurisdiction without delay and prevents administrative or jurisdictional confusion.
When an emergency motion is filed before designation, and the case is later assigned to the Business Court, the motion will ordinarily be heard by the assigned Business Court judge. If, however, a Superior Court judge has already ruled on the emergency motion before designation, the Business Court will generally defer to the Superior Court’s ruling absent exceptional circumstances, promoting continuity and judicial efficiency.
Briefing on emergency motions is conducted by a briefing schedule set by the court when practicable. Once a party moves for emergency relief, the Business Court’s briefing schedule will establish deadlines for a response, and, if necessary, a reply.
Rule 7.14: Amicus Briefs
Rule 7.14 allows amicus briefs but requires permission from the Business Court. Amicus briefs are subject to strict word limits and disclosure requirements. Amicus participation is the exception, not the norm.
Final Takeaway
Rule 7 reflects the Business Court’s expectations of precision, professionalism, and discipline. Further, the BCRs are often supplemented by the presiding Business Court judge’s own Case Management Order. Lawyers should be careful to maintain compliance with each. Lawyers who treat the Business Court as any other Superior Court do so at their client’s peril.
***
