.jpg)
I wrote yesterday about the arbitration aspects of Gaylor, Inc. v. Vizor, LLC, 2015 NCBC 98.
But there is a significant aspect of Business Court procedure addressed in that case which deserved its own post.
It concerns the authority of a non-Business Court Judge (i.e. a regular Superior Court Judge) to make a
There’s an ominous sounding sentence in a Business Court decision this week:
A party practicing before the North Carolina Business Court should take the deadlines imposed by its orders and the rules of practice very seriously.
Estate of Capps v. Blondeau. 2014 NCBC 24 at ¶36. It is so ominous sounding that you
After a case is designated to the Business Court, the Clerk of Court in the county in which the case is pending no longer has the authority to grant a motion for extension of time. In this case, per Business Court Rule 9.2, the Court struck the Order entered by the Clerk granting an extension
The Court struck an Entry of Default which had been signed by an assistant clerk of court in the county where the case had been filed. The entry of default was signed after the case was designated to the Business Court. Judge Diaz cited Business Court Rule 15.1, stating:
Because the above-captioned cases are Business
The Court struck Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment because it violated Business Court Rule 15.2, which requires that "[]ll motions, unless made orally during a hearing or trial, . . . be in paper writing or electronic form and . . . be accompanied by a brief . . . set out in a separate
The parties failed to submit their designation of mediator to the Court by the deadline provided for in the Case Management Order, and also after an inquiry from the Court. The Court held that the parties had as a result "forfeited their right" to select a mediator.
The parties were also delinquent in filing their
Business Court Rule 9.2 says that "the movant shall have a good faith basis for requesting any . . . extension of time and, except in extraordinary cases, the movant shall first consult with any opposing party and reflect that party’s position in the motion and indicate whether the opposing party wishes to be heard
.jpg)
In North Carolina Superior Court, there is no civil procedure tradition more respected than the courtesy of a thirty day extension of time to answer a Complaint or to respond to discovery. Like it or not, motions seeking the extra month are granted almost without exception, and are so routine that the requesting party usually doesn’t even bother
Compliance with the meet and confer obligations contained in Business Court Rule 18.6 is essential before the filing of a discovery motion.
In this case, the Court denied the Plaintiff’s Motion for a Protective Order because of counsel’s failure to comply with the certification requirements of that Rule. Judge Tennille held that "this reason alone
When you have an additional three days to respond to a filing served by mail, and the response period ends on a weekend or holiday, this is how you calculate the response period:
"The correct formula for the computation of a time period during which a filing is required is as follows: number of days