In a mobile economy, with company executives and key employees working far afield from their company’s homes and interests, the often-tricky business of personal jurisdiction has taken on new layers
Continue Reading Business Court Explains When a Single Contract can be Enough to Show “Substantial Connection” to North Carolina for Jurisdiction
By Jeff MacHarg and Sarah Traynor
A few months after successfully settling its lawsuit and obtaining a consent judgment against JUUL, the State of North Carolina doubled down, suing
Continue Reading Not all contacts are created equal: more PJ lessons from the Business Court.
A targeted effort by a New York company and its president to recruit Chinese investors for a marina and hotel project in Wilmington, North Carolina brought an international spin to
Continue Reading Investors in Wilmington Project Lose Bid to Sue Company that Solicited Their Investments through Marketing Efforts in China
A business plan to promote vodka sales in North Carolina, with a particular focus on Duke University sports fans, was key to a North Carolina Business Court decision that GameDay
Continue Reading Vodka Maker’s Hopes for Partnership with Duke University Land Something it Didn’t Seek: a Defendant’s Chair in a North Carolina CourtroomIn the Land of Technology Oz a
Continue Reading All that Glitters May Just be Yellow Paint
Contract with “substantial connection” with NC leads to PJ over a California Defendant who never visited NC.
In Toshiba Global Commerce Solutions, Inc. v. Smart & Final Stores LLC, 2020
Continue Reading When it comes to PJ, KYC (Know Your Contractor) – or at least where they are headquartered.
If you have employees that work from home (WFH), you may be subject to PJ in their location.
During the last few months, the NC Supreme and Business Courts have
Continue Reading Another PJ Decision: SC employer was subject to PJ in employee’s NC WFH location. Compared to other PJ questions, this one seemed Easy.
In Button v. Level Four Orthotics
Continue Reading And… Another PJ Decision (Still not that kind…): Pre-conflict contacts are relevant.
In Cohen v. Continental, 2020 NCBC Order 12 (N.C. Super. Ct. Mar. 12, 2020) Judge Gale discussed several practical PJ issues – including waiver and website/e-mail contacts. Some takeaways are:
Continue Reading Another PJ Decision: Remember – PJ is a waivable defense…
Shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision in Beem USA Limited-Liability Ltd. P’ship v. Grax Consulting, LLC, — N.C. –, 838 S.E.2d 158 (2020)
Continue Reading More on PJ… (still, not that kind…): Contacts, not contracts, are key.