Discovery in a complex commercial case can feature its fair share of mayhem, particularly where it includes a large document production. Yet, where parties plan and execute information exchanges with reasonable diligence, the Business Court typically affords considerable latitude. That’s consistent with the ethic of the Court’s discovery rules – “designed for the parties to
Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true.
– drawn from The Old Man and Death, Aesop
In Brewer v. Grue, 2020 NCBC 59, Judge Conrad offers a helpful update to convert that traditional morality tale to the rough and tumble world of commercial litigation. With apologies to Aesop, and the
Jeff MacHarg & Ashley Barton Chandler
In this order from Buckley LLP v. Series 1 of Oxford Ins. Co. NC LLC, Chief Judge Bledsoe dealt with dueling motions to compel. Both sides claimed that their hybrid business-legal communications were privileged. After an exhaustive review – Judge Bledsoe concluded that both sides were right, and
In a dispute among the members of a dissolved soccer gear company, the Business Court flashed a “red card” on litigants who professed full compliance with discovery requests but missed that goal by at least several hundred documents. Kixsports, LLC v. Ryan Munn, et al., 2019
Following up on my post from earlier this week, the Mecklenburg County Business Court CLE concluded on Friday with the panel of Judges, Chief Judge Bledsoe, Judge McGuire, and Judge Conrad, sharing some practice pointers and personal preferences. What follows is my summary and interpretation of what they said. As with my
It started out like a typical Business Court case: a company filed suit against its former employees (and their new company) and asserted claims for things like breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets. The plaintiff also filed motions for a temporary restraining