The Business Court held that it had jurisdiction over a case relating to securities law under N.C. Gen. Stat. sec. 7A-45.4(a)(2). The Complaint concerned issues regarding the ownership of shares in Centura Bank.
Mandatory Jurisdiction
Cox v. Mitchell, February 27, 2007 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court held that it had mandatory jurisdiction over a case involving the sale of financial products, holding "It is sufficient for purposes of removal to the Business Court that there are issues concerning which law applies which will have industry-wide application. The potential thus exists for the establishment of case law which may…
Delhaize America, Inc. v. Hinton, January 31, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court held that it had mandatory jurisdiction over a case involving complex tax matters. The Court also noted that its decision "could have implications for other companies, and thus the publication of a written opinion by this Court could prove beneficial to the State and those companies."
Bueche v. Noel, June 4, 2007 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court found that a case raising claims for receivership, securities law violations, piercing the corporate veil, and unfair and deceptive practices fell within its mandatory jurisdiction. Among other things, the Court held that "claims based on piercing the corporate veil clearly fall within" its mandatory jurisdiction because they involve a material issue related…
Albemarle Electric Membership Corp. v. Temple, Oct. 30, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court held that it had mandatory jurisdiction over a claim involving the interpretation and validity of the corporate bylaws of an electric membership cooperative. The bylaws were similar to those of a number of other electric membership cooperatives, and the Court held "that the disposition of this case may have an impact far…
Velocity Fiber Broadband, LLC v. Lang Mangement, Inc., October 14, 2008 (unpublished)(Tennille)
The Court found that a Complaint seeking commissions due which would require the interpretation of various infrastructure agreements concerning "the fiber optic infrastructure to support the provision of telecommunication and internet services" fell within its jurisdiction over matters involving "the internet and electronic commerce."
The Court found additional support for the designation in Defendant’s counterclaim…
Workplace Benefits, LLC v. Lifecare, Inc., July 14, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
If a case involves only a breach of a covenant not to compete or a confidentiality agreement, it is not within the mandatory "unfair competition" jurisdiction of the North Carolina Business Court.
The Complaint in this case asserted that the Defendant was improperly using a Confidentiality Agreement signed by the individual Plaintiff to threaten her so she wouldn’t call on potential…
Mattress Now, Inc. v. KS Bank, Inc., September 2, 2008 (Tennille)
Plaintiff sued the Defendant Bank for allegedly allowing improper deposits of company checks into a personal account. The Bank designated the case to the Business Court based on its jurisdiction over cases involving "the law governing corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, and limited liability partnerships."
The Plaintiff moved to remand, arguing that the case involved nothing more…
Women’s Healthcare Associates, P.A. v. TSI Healthcare, Inc., March 3, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Court overruled an objection to its mandatory jurisdiction in this case involving a software license agreement. It held, in affirming Defendant’s Notice of Designation of the case as one involving "intellectual property law," that:
Software licensing has become an integral part of economic life. Decisions concerning software licensing can have an impact beyond the confines
…
Lexington Furniture Industries, Inc. v. The Bob Timberlake Collection, Inc., July 25, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)
The Business Court overruled an objection to its mandatory jurisdiction over a Complaint alleging breach of a trademark license agreement. It held "this case involves both the right to use trademarks and the right to use designs previously sold under the trademarked names at issue. It involves issues which fall within the mandatory issues supporting assignment…