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 Thomas H. Segars
How Not Deploying Zero Trust Data with AI May Risk Team Safety, Mission Failure
Prologue: A critical component of next-generation security is the adoption of Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) for physical security equipment (PSE) and Operational Technology (OT) environments. As AI capabilities grow exponentially, ZTA greatly enhances and optimizes AI effectiveness; without ZT data, the risks are undoubtedly high.
A Latin Lesson: Section 75-1.1 Claims in Education
Last Spring, the North Carolina Court of Appeals had a rare occasion to consider an unfair and deceptive trade practice claim asserted in the context of private-school education. Turpin v. Charlotte Latin Schools, Inc. is sui generis—a must-read for anyone interested in either education law or section 75-1.1 claims.
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.
Time Is On My Side, Yes It Is
Most of our readers are well aware of the four-year statute of limitations that applies to section 75-1.1 claims. But what happens if the parties agree that a shorter limitations period should govern their potential claims against one another? Can they change this period by contract? In today’s post, we examine Warren v. Cielo Ventures, a case that addresses just this situation. As discussed below, the Warren court held that such an agreement is unenforceable as against public policy.
When Self-Help is Decidedly Unhelpful
Nothing good ever happens when someone tells you that they don’t “give a damn what the judge says . . . I can do whatever I want.” A recent Court of Appeals decision, Myers v. Broome-Edwards, illustrates this point. The Facts: A Tenant Is Kicked To the Curb Myers involved a dispute between a residential tenant, Henry Myers, and his landlord. After filing several unsuccessful summary-ejectment proceedings, the landlord decided to take matters into her own hands.
Don’t Mess With Texas: One Californian’s Confusion About Hot Sauce
Have you purchased tickets for a Tennessee Williams play—assuming that you were going to enjoy a distinctly “Tennessee” theater experience—only to learn that Tennessee Williams was born in Mississippi? Were you crestfallen to find out that your Canadian bacon didn’t come from Canada at all? If so, you may have a claim for money damages—at least in the Central District of California. A California consumer named Phillip White recently paid three dollars for a bottle of Texas Pete hot sauce.
A Chicken In Every Pot: Brakebush Brothers Part II
Earlier this year, we wrote about two cases that considered whether an assignee of insurance proceeds could maintain a section 75-1.1 claim against insurers. The North Carolina Business Court found that such an assignee could maintain the claim in Brakebush Brothers. The Fourth Circuit reached the opposite conclusion in Skyline Restoration. Since our post, the Brakebush Brothers court has revisited the issue. Its new opinion is significant.
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 Thomas H.
Contact Thomas H., search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack