Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Scottie Lee
Federal Court Declines to Impose UDTP Liability Against Defaulted Apparel Purchaser
Most of the cases we write about are contested; two (or more) parties with conflicting views on the propriety of a section 75-1.1 claim present their arguments and let a Court decide who’s right. But what happens when the defending party doesn’t even show up? Does the plaintiff automatically prevail on a section 75-1.1 claim? The answer is “no.” And a recent decision from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Citadel Brands v. Teespring, illustrates this point.
Trane Technologies Employee Savings Plan v. Johann et al
Plaintiff: Trane Technologies Employee Savings Plan Defendant: Nicholas T. Johann, Gregory T. Johann, James Schermerhorn, Patricia Schermerhorn and Daniel J. Keller Case Number: 3:2023cv00532 Filed: August 22, 2023 Court: US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina Nature of Suit: Contract: Other Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits Jury Demanded By: None RSS Track this Docket This docket was last retrieved on August 22, 2023.
The North Carolina Supreme Court Weighs In On Two Exemptions To Section 75-1.1 Liability
United States: The North Carolina Supreme Court Weighs In On Two Exemptions To Section 75-1.1 Liability 09 March 2022 Ellis & Winters To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. It's not every day that our state's highest court gets an opportunity to weigh in on the scope of N.C. Gen. Stat.
N.C. Supreme Court: Quasi-municipal Corporations Are Immune from State Antitrust and Section 75-1.1 Liability | Lexology
We have previously discussed whether a local-government entity can be sued for money damages based on a federal antitrust violation. Today’s post discusses a similar question: are quasi-municipal corporations—a type of local-government entity—exempt from liability under section 75-1.1 and North Carolina’s antitrust laws? Last month, the Supreme Court of North Carolina unanimously answered yes to that question.
Pleading Reliance in Unfair-Trade-Practice Claims Involving North Carolina’s Insurance Laws | Lexology
Seven years ago, in Bumpers v. Community Bank of Northern Virginia, the Supreme Court of North Carolina held that a plaintiff who sues under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 based on a misrepresentation must show actual and reasonable reliance on the misrepresentation. A recent decision by the North Carolina Court of Appeals confirms that Bumpers extends to misrepresentation-based section 75-1.1 claims premised on conduct that constitutes an unfair practice under North Carolina’s insurance laws.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Scottie
Contact Scottie, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack