This post concerns an intriguing question of civil procedure. We wrote a few years ago about whether the trebling feature in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-16 can be used in calculating the minimum amount in controversy required to designate a case to the North Carolina Business Court. We look in […]
This post revisits litigation over the federal Home Affordable Mortgage Program, known as HAMP. Several years ago, in a pair of posts, we studied the application of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 to a lender’s conduct under this mortgage program. HAMP doesn’t provide a private right of action, so borrowers needed […]
Sometimes small errors can have big consequences. According to a recent Fourth Circuit decision, big consequences do not turn small errors into unfair or deceptive trade practices. Edwards v. Genex Cooperative, Inc. considered a section 75-1.1 claim based on a breach of contract accompanied by “substantial aggravating factors.” Parties to […]
Today’s post examines an intersection of two familiar topics: (1) the “conduct standards” by which conduct is judged to be “unfair,” and (2) the “pervasively regulated conduct” rationale for section 75-1.1’s securities exemption. Robichaud v. Engage2Excel, Inc., a new decision from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of […]
