In this diversity action, First Investors Corporation and its insurer Liberty Mutual sued Citizens Bank and its parent company for negligence and conversion, alleging that the bank improperly allowed their former agent Dorcas Anne Brooks to open accounts and deposit checks with fraudulent endorsements, resulting in over $639,000 in losses from unauthorized mutual fund sales. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing among other things that the claims were barred by North Carolina's three-year statute of limitations for conversion. The court treated the motion as one for summary judgment due to extraneous materials submitted and held that the action was time-barred. It reasoned that under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-52(4), a conversion claim accrues at the time of the conversion rather than upon discovery, that the legislature had not incorporated a discovery rule into this provision unlike the fraud statute, and that the separate discovery provision in § 1-52(16) for physical damage to property did not apply to this integrated statutory scheme governing commercial paper.
In this case, plaintiffs brought a nationwide class action against Volkswagen alleging breach of implied warranty of merchantability under the federal Magnuson-Moss Act and unfair or deceptive practices under various state "Little FTC Acts," claiming damages from defective valve stem seals in certain Rabbit models. After a jury verdict for Volkswagen that was affirmed on appeal, the district court considered the defendant's motion for attorney fees under the laws of ten states. The court awarded $42,350.98 in fees for work by local counsel in Alaska, Florida, Hawaii, Mississippi, and Montana, where state statutes authorized or required fees to prevailing parties, but denied fees for Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, and Missouri after examining each statute's text, case law, and practices and exercising its discretion without a finding that the claims were frivolous. The reasoning emphasized following the plain language of the state statutes rather than federal standards like Christiansburg Garment, while assessing necessity and similarity to state-court outcomes.
This case involved Trilogy Communications suing Comm Scope and affiliated companies for allegedly infringing three patents on methods, apparatus, and products for manufacturing coaxial cables with foam cellular polyolefin insulation. The defendants denied infringement and sought declaratory judgments of invalidity and non-infringement. The court held that the asserted claims of all three patents were invalid, had not been infringed by any of the defendants' products or processes, and were unenforceable because they were obtained in violation of the duty of disclosure and candor. It further concluded there was no willful infringement and dismissed claims against the parent or acquiring companies due to insufficient evidence of direct involvement or alter ego liability. These rulings rested on the trial evidence, prior art comparisons, and patent prosecution history.
Shell Oil Company sued Commercial Petroleum, Inc. for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act and North Carolina law, alleging that Commercial sold bulk Shell Rotella T lubricating oil using Shell's trademarks without authorization or adherence to quality control standards. The court, after a bench trial, found that Commercial infringed Shell's trademarks "Shell," "Rotella," and "Shell Rotella T" by marketing the oil without complying with Shell's required handling, storage, and transportation procedures, which are essential to prevent contamination and maintain product quality. The decision rested on the principle that unauthorized use without quality control deprives the trademark owner of the right to ensure the product's integrity, leading to a likelihood of consumer confusion. The court granted injunctive relief prohibiting such sales without authorization but awarded no damages, as Shell suffered no proven losses.
The case involved a dispute arising from a 1984 joint venture agreement between Atlanta-Tomberlin, Inc. (ATI) and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians to operate a cable converter repair business on the Cherokee Reservation. After the parties ended operations in 1985, the Tribe initiated arbitration, resulting in a 1987 award that found ATI had breached the contract by failing to make required capital contributions and had breached its fiduciary duty, ordering ATI to pay the Tribe over $100,000 plus penalties. ATI petitioned the federal district court to vacate the award under the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 10-12), arguing that the arbitrators exceeded their authority by considering matters outside the submitted issues and that the award lacked a clear factual basis. The Tribe cross-petitioned to confirm the award. The court denied the petition to vacate and confirmed the award, holding that judicial review is narrowly limited to whether arbitrators exceeded their powers, that the Tribe's broad claims in the arbitration demand encompassed the issues litigated, and that no evident material miscalculation existed to justify modification.
The case involved William F. Flippo, Jr. suing the United States for damages under 26 U.S.C. § 7431, claiming that an IRS revenue officer improperly disclosed his tax return information while attempting to collect unpaid taxes. The court decided that the plaintiff could not recover, finding no unauthorized disclosure in a knowing or negligent manner and that the good faith defense under the statute applied. The reasoning centered on the officer's routine collection efforts, including filing liens and levies based on incomplete records, which were authorized by other code sections like §§ 6303 and 6331, and similar to precedents where such actions did not violate § 6103.
