A shareholder who guarantees the debt of a corporation does not have an injury "separate and distinct" from the injury sustained by the corporation itself. The shareholder did not standing to pursue damages for the breach of a contract with the corporation. A shareholder "cannot assert claims against a third party for loss of its
Standing
Garrett v. Parton, January 30, 2009 (Jolly)(unpublished)
By Mack Sperling on
Posted in Standing
The Business Court held that an individual taxpayer did not have standing to sue over alleged misuse of taxes paid by residents of the City of Roanoke Rapids to build a music entertainment theater, rejecting his arguments that he was entitled to bring suit individually because the losses from the theater would be borne by…
Teague v. Bayer AG, 2007 NCBC 12 (N.C. Super. Ct. May 7, 2007)(Tennille)
By Mack Sperling on
The Court, again, considered the issue of indirect purchaser standing. It reiterated the factors it looks to in determining whether there is such standing, as articulated in its opinion in Crouch v. Crompton Corp.
Crouch had involved one product, tires, but this case involved ethylene propylene diene monomer, which the Court observed might be used…
Crouch v. Crompton Corp. and Morris v. Visa U.S.A. Inc., 2004 NCBC 7 (N.C. Super. Ct. Oct. 26, 2004)(Tennille)
By Mack Sperling on
The Court addressed again the issue of indirect purchaser standing under the North Carolina antitrust laws in these consolidated cases. It held that although such purchasers do have standing, there are limitations on that standing which barred the claims of the plaintiffs and it granted defendants’ motion to dismiss.
In the first case, the plaintiffs…
Adams v. Aventis, S.A., 2003 NCBC 7 (N.C. Super. Ct. Aug. 26, 2003)(Tennille)
By Mack Sperling on
The Court found that an indirect purchaser had standing under North Carolina law to assert an antitrust claim, and denied a motion to dismiss. It certified the issue for immediate appeal.