Ellis & Winters LLP

Blog Post:

A Honey Boo Boo? The Ninth Circuit Discusses Bees, the “Reasonable Consumer,” and the Intersection of Federal Labeling Law and Section 75-1.1 - Ellis & Winters LLP Imagine yourself combing the aisles of the local Trader Joe’s with your brood in tow. You are minding your own beeswax when, above the drone of swarming shoppers, you hear a buzz about a new product: “100% New Zealand Manuka Honey.” As you grab a jar off the shelf, what […]

Blog Post:

The Wheels of Progress on the Economic-Loss Rule and Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Claims - Ellis & Winters LLP Two years ago, I left Ellis & Winters to spend a few years as in-house counsel at a financial institution. Before I left, I wrote several times about the uncertainty surrounding the economic-loss rule and section 75-1.1 (here, here, here, and here). While I was away, my colleagues continued to […]

Blog Post:

Does Noerr–Pennington Immunity Apply to State-Law Tort Claims? - Ellis & Winters LLP A claim under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 can sometimes trigger a constitutional challenge. A defendant might argue that an unfairness claim under section 75-1.1 is unconstitutionally vague, or that applying section 75-1.1 extraterritorially violates the Dormant Commerce Clause. Or a defendant might a...

Blog Post:

A Classic Car Leads to a Classic Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Claim - Ellis & Winters LLP Is a 1966 Mustang a “classic car?” Was that the vintage that Steve McQueen drove in Bullitt? (No.) Can you get special insurance for such a vehicle? And if you do, will your insurer pay if the car is involved in an accident? And what if your insurer says that […]

Tom Segars discusses an out of this world employment-adjacent section 75-1.1 claim in today’s What’s Fair? blog.

Out of this World: One Employee’s Section 75-1.1 Claim Against His Former Employer | Ellis & Winters LLP A section 75-1.1 claim that finds a place in an employment dispute is rare—like a comet, a meteor shower, or a total eclipse. When one comes along, we cannot help but wonder at it. Even those of us who take the heavens for granted keep a telescope in the attic […]

Jamie Weiss discusses a recent opinion about whether the economic-loss rule applies to a claim involving section 75-1.1 and, believe it or not, school lunch juice cups.

Lunch and Learn: More Economic-Loss Rule Uncertainty in Section 75-1.1 Claims, this Time with More Juice Cups | Ellis & Winters LLP Today’s blog post is about a recent Fourth Circuit opinion, Foodbuy LLC v. Gregory Packaging, Inc., involving the intersection of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 and everyone’s favorite school lunch item—juice cups. As a bonus, the Fourth Circuit also waded into the unsettled question of whether the...

In today's What's Fair blog post, Scottie Forbes Lee delivers her second post on the DiCesare v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority decision.

N.C. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Claims under State Constitution’s Anti-monopoly Clause | Ellis & Winters LLP Last month, we discussed an important decision from the Supreme Court of North Carolina involving antitrust claims against Atrium Health, the large public-hospital system in Charlotte. In DiCesare v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, the Supreme Court held that quasi-municipal corporations l...

Tom Segars discusses a recent U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina decision that serves as an important reminder for lawyers to remain vigilant against cyberthreats.

Wire-Transfer Phishing in Recent Section 75-1.1 Case Follows a Familiar Fact Pattern | Ellis & Winters LLP If you aren’t losing sleep over malicious phishing schemes and other cybercrimes, you should be. According to the FBI, one type of cybercrime in particular—Business Email Compromise or BEC—cost businesses more than $26 billion over only three years. And, to bring the point closer to home, acco...

In today’s What's Fair? blog post, Scottie Forbes Lee discusses a recent North Carolina Supreme Court decision addressing whether or not quasi-municipal corporations are exempt from liability under section 75-1.1 and North Carolina’s antitrust laws.

N.C. Supreme Court: Quasi-municipal Corporations Are Immune from State Antitrust and Section 75-1.1 Liability | Ellis & Winters LLP We have previously discussed whether a local-government entity can be sued for money damages based on a federal antitrust violation. Today’s post discusses a similar question: are quasi-municipal corporations—a type of local-government entity—exempt from liability under section 75-1.1 and Nort...

In today's What's Fair? blog post, Jamie Weiss discusses a recent decision that is noteworthy for its application of the heightened pleading standards in Rule 9(b) to a claim resting on a fraudulent omission.

Heightened Pleading Required in Omission-Based Kitty Litter/Beer Carton Dispute | Ellis & Winters LLP This blog is no stranger to litigants attempting to transform run-of-the-mill contract disputes into claims for unfair or deceptive trade practices. Nor are our North Carolina courts, given the prospect of recovering treble damages and attorneys’ fees to a spurned business. Today’s post looks at...

In today's What's Fair? blog post, Steven Scoggan analyzes a recent Western District of North Carolina decision that demonstrates how preemption can be a potent defense in commercial disputes between competing drug and device businesses.

FDCA Preemption: A Powerful Defense in Commercial Litigation, Too. | Ellis & Winters LLP We’ve often discussed the power of preemption defenses to section 75-1.1 claims. Preemption is also a crucial issue in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation, as the federal Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act (FDCA) has been held to preempt a wide variety of products-liability and consumer-protection...

In today's What's Fair? blog post, Preetha Rini discusses a recent Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision.

Can Clickbait Cause Confusion? Purchasing AdWord Did Not Constitute Trademark Infringement or an Unfair Trade Practice | Ellis & Winters LLP In intellectual property disputes, the strength of a section 75-1.1 claim or an unfair competition claim often rises or falls with a trademark infringement claim. For instance, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 80-12 provides that a violation of state trademark law constitutes a per se violation of section 75-1.1....