Bankruptcy attorneys bring renewed hope and greater stability to our NC communities through skillful pro bono work. Excellence in this vital task deserves to be acknowledged, and the North Carolina Bar Association Bankruptcy Law Section will be celebrating the exemplary pro bono efforts of at least one of its own on Nov. 22 at the 42nd Annual Bankruptcy Institute in Wilmington.
To that end, the Bankruptcy Law Section is now seeking third-party and self nominations for the 2019 Pro Bono Award. This will be the fifth year that the Section will honor one of its members with this distinction. Prior recipients include Michael Martinez (2018), Matt Crow (2017), Jennifer Bennington (2016) and Ciara Rogers (2015).
For more information about the award, and to make a nomination, please see the official nomination form.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Bankruptcyhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngBankruptcy2019-08-06 15:28:162019-08-07 11:45:38Seeking Nominations For the 2019 Bankruptcy Pro Bono Award
Dear Members of the Privacy and Data Security Section:
It is my privilege to serve as the chair of the Privacy and Data Security Section during the 2019-2020 bar year. Following our inaugural Section Council meeting on July 31, I wanted to take this opportunity to welcome everyone to the Section and provide updates on the Section’s work and upcoming events.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Securityhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngSecurity2019-08-06 15:15:272019-08-07 11:15:33Welcome To the NCBA Privacy and Data Security Section's Inaugural Year
In recent years, clients have begun to insist that their corporate counsel sign Outside Counsel Guidelines (“OCGs”) that restrict a lawyer from providing services to competitors of the client, even if the work is unrelated to the work being performed for the client and the lawyer has no confidential client information relevant to the work. Those OCGs have also begun to define the “client” as all subsidiaries, affiliates, or parent companies of the entity to which the lawyer’s services pertain. Both trends restrict a lawyer from representing a host of potential clients in the future. How can outside corporate counsel push back?
The two trends cited above directly implicate ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 5.6, 1.7 and 1.9.[1] By citing these Rules, and the restrictions they impose, corporate counsel may gain headway in negotiating more permissive OCGs.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Litigationhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngLitigation2019-08-06 15:11:162019-08-06 15:11:16How Corporate Counsel Can Push Back on Outside Counsel Guidelines by Citing the Ethics Rules
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Businesshttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngBusiness2019-08-05 12:49:562019-08-08 09:58:33Mark Your Calendars: The Secretary of State’s Office Will be Closed
As described in an earlier ncbarblog post, among the 2018 changes to the North Carolina Business Corporation Act, Chapter 55 of the General Statutes (the “NCBCA”) [1], which took effect Oct. 1, 2018 was the addition of a new Part 6 to Article 1 (N.C. Gen. Stat. §§55-1-60 through 55-1-67) based on changes to the Model Business Corporation Act providing that defects in authorizations of share issuances and other corporate actions shall not be void or voidable solely as a result of a failure of authorization if a prescribed statutory ratification process is followed.
When you discover only one defective corporate act, determining the requirements under the statute for ratification (e.g., board approval, shareholder approval, and/or filing of articles of validation) is perhaps relatively straight-forward. But what should you do when you discover multiple defects, perhaps occurring over a number of years?
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Businesshttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngBusiness2019-08-05 12:38:242019-08-08 11:44:43Tips for Using New Statutory Ratification Procedure to Cure Defects in Authorizations of Share Issuances and Other Corporate Actions
Termination of Parental Rights, NC COA18-926, In re T.H. & M.H., June 18, 2019, Rowan County
Respondents appealed an order terminating their parental rights due to issues of ongoing substance abuse, mental health, and inadequate care and supervision of their children. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion as to the termination of either parent’s rights.
In February 2016, DSS filed a petition alleging Respondent’s children were neglected and dependent. A week later, Respondents entered into an Out of Home Family Services Agreement requiring them to take measures to secure proper housing, employment, mental heath treatment, substance abuse treatment, and to participate in a parenting course and resolve all pending legal/criminal issues. In March 2016, the court entered a consent order adjudicated the children neglected and dependent; the order required Respondents to comply with their case plan. Over the next several months, however, the Respondents were in and out of jail. In June 2017, the trial court entered a permanency planning order which changed the primary permanent plan for the children to adoption with reunification as the secondary plan, finding that Respondents had not made “any progress” on their case plans. The next month, in July 2017, DSS filed a petition to terminate Respondents’ parental rights, which was granted. Respondents appealed.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00FamilyLawhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngFamilyLaw2019-08-05 11:06:082023-02-24 13:03:44NC COA: Termination of Parental Rights, In re T.H. and M.H.
Termination of Parental Rights, COA18-1226, In re D.A.Y., June 18, 2019, Stanly County
Petitioner-Father, a resident of Stanly County, North Carolina, filed a termination of parental rights action in Stanly County against Respondent-Mother, a resident of Ventura County, California. Petitioner alleged the parties’ child lived with him in Stanly County, pursuant to a California custody order, such that North Carolina is the “home state” of the child. Petition further alleged that said California custody order terminated California’s ongoing jurisdiction by its own terms. Petitioner alleged that though Respondent is currently a California resident (as she was when the California custody order was entered), she temporarily relocated to Nevada which also terminated California’s jurisdiction. The trial court in Stanly County entered an order which terminated Respondent’s parental rights. Respondent appealed arguing the North Carolina court did not have subject matter jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to enter its order. The Court of Appeals agreed.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00FamilyLawhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngFamilyLaw2019-08-02 12:01:342019-08-02 12:01:34NC COA: Termination of Parental Rights, In re D.A.Y.
Requirements for Notary Certificate and Acknowledgment; Timeliness of Appeal of Summary Judgment Order from Converted Motion to Dismiss Hearing, COA18-1010, Sfreddo v. Hicks, June 18, 2019, Wake County
Wife filed an action against Husband for breach of contract (a separation agreement). Husband moved to dismiss alleging the separation agreement was void because it was not properly acknowledged under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10.1. Husband specifically alleged the wording of the notary certificate did not have the proper language regarding the notary’s knowledge of the identity of the principal nor did it indicate that the notary acknowledged the signature was that of the principal.
In an order filed July 18, U.S. District Court Judge Louise Flanagan of the Eastern District of North Carolina refused to dismiss a lawsuit brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act for failure to make reasonable accommodations. Judge Flanagan’s decision in Murphy v. County of New Hanover illustrates how important it is for employers to engage in the “interactive process” under the ADA and to continue with that process even if the first attempt at accommodation is unsuccessful.
Allegations
According to his lawsuit, Mr. Murphy was hired as a social worker in the foster care unit at the New Hanover County Department of Social Services in 2016, with the primary function of reunifying families. Mr. Murphy had Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder, which made it difficult for him to focus, concentrate, communicate, and work with others. Mr. Murphy alleged that he had no problem performing his “reunification” duties but that his ADHD made it difficult for him to complete his required paperwork unless he was in a setting without distractions.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00Laborhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngLabor2019-08-01 16:32:182019-08-01 16:39:33Court Decision Highlights Importance of ADA 'Interactive Process'
July 1 welcomed a new year at the Bar Association. With this new year, we say “goodbye” and “thank you” to our past council members and leadership. I am grateful to Immediate Past Chair Holland Ferguson for leadership during the 2018-2019 bar year. Also, many thanks to the council members who have now completed their three-year terms.
As the new year begins, I look forward to serving as the chair, along with the other officers and council members, of this large and diverse section. As you may know, the Section leadership includes the following:
Seeking Nominations For the 2019 Bankruptcy Pro Bono Award
BankruptcyBy Rebecca F. Redwine
Bankruptcy attorneys bring renewed hope and greater stability to our NC communities through skillful pro bono work. Excellence in this vital task deserves to be acknowledged, and the North Carolina Bar Association Bankruptcy Law Section will be celebrating the exemplary pro bono efforts of at least one of its own on Nov. 22 at the 42nd Annual Bankruptcy Institute in Wilmington.
To that end, the Bankruptcy Law Section is now seeking third-party and self nominations for the 2019 Pro Bono Award. This will be the fifth year that the Section will honor one of its members with this distinction. Prior recipients include Michael Martinez (2018), Matt Crow (2017), Jennifer Bennington (2016) and Ciara Rogers (2015).
For more information about the award, and to make a nomination, please see the official nomination form.
Welcome To the NCBA Privacy and Data Security Section’s Inaugural Year
Privacy and Data SecurityDear Members of the Privacy and Data Security Section:
It is my privilege to serve as the chair of the Privacy and Data Security Section during the 2019-2020 bar year. Following our inaugural Section Council meeting on July 31, I wanted to take this opportunity to welcome everyone to the Section and provide updates on the Section’s work and upcoming events.
Read more
How Corporate Counsel Can Push Back on Outside Counsel Guidelines by Citing the Ethics Rules
Litigation SectionBy Amy Richardson, Hilary Gerzhoy, and Lauren Snyder
In recent years, clients have begun to insist that their corporate counsel sign Outside Counsel Guidelines (“OCGs”) that restrict a lawyer from providing services to competitors of the client, even if the work is unrelated to the work being performed for the client and the lawyer has no confidential client information relevant to the work. Those OCGs have also begun to define the “client” as all subsidiaries, affiliates, or parent companies of the entity to which the lawyer’s services pertain. Both trends restrict a lawyer from representing a host of potential clients in the future. How can outside corporate counsel push back?
The two trends cited above directly implicate ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 5.6, 1.7 and 1.9.[1] By citing these Rules, and the restrictions they impose, corporate counsel may gain headway in negotiating more permissive OCGs.
Read more
Mark Your Calendars: The Secretary of State’s Office Will be Closed
Business LawThe Department of the Secretary of State is closed on official state government holidays.
You can view the calendar of holidays here.
If other closings are needed due to weather or other events, the Department will post notice on its website, www.sosnc.gov, if possible.
Tips for Using New Statutory Ratification Procedure to Cure Defects in Authorizations of Share Issuances and Other Corporate Actions
Business LawAs described in an earlier ncbarblog post, among the 2018 changes to the North Carolina Business Corporation Act, Chapter 55 of the General Statutes (the “NCBCA”) [1], which took effect Oct. 1, 2018 was the addition of a new Part 6 to Article 1 (N.C. Gen. Stat. §§55-1-60 through 55-1-67) based on changes to the Model Business Corporation Act providing that defects in authorizations of share issuances and other corporate actions shall not be void or voidable solely as a result of a failure of authorization if a prescribed statutory ratification process is followed.
When you discover only one defective corporate act, determining the requirements under the statute for ratification (e.g., board approval, shareholder approval, and/or filing of articles of validation) is perhaps relatively straight-forward. But what should you do when you discover multiple defects, perhaps occurring over a number of years?
Read more
NC COA: Termination of Parental Rights, In re T.H. and M.H.
Family Law SectionBy Jessica B. Heffner
Termination of Parental Rights, NC COA18-926, In re T.H. & M.H., June 18, 2019, Rowan County
Respondents appealed an order terminating their parental rights due to issues of ongoing substance abuse, mental health, and inadequate care and supervision of their children. The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion as to the termination of either parent’s rights.
In February 2016, DSS filed a petition alleging Respondent’s children were neglected and dependent. A week later, Respondents entered into an Out of Home Family Services Agreement requiring them to take measures to secure proper housing, employment, mental heath treatment, substance abuse treatment, and to participate in a parenting course and resolve all pending legal/criminal issues. In March 2016, the court entered a consent order adjudicated the children neglected and dependent; the order required Respondents to comply with their case plan. Over the next several months, however, the Respondents were in and out of jail. In June 2017, the trial court entered a permanency planning order which changed the primary permanent plan for the children to adoption with reunification as the secondary plan, finding that Respondents had not made “any progress” on their case plans. The next month, in July 2017, DSS filed a petition to terminate Respondents’ parental rights, which was granted. Respondents appealed.
Read more
NC COA: Termination of Parental Rights, In re D.A.Y.
Family Law SectionBy Jessica B. Heffner
Termination of Parental Rights, COA18-1226, In re D.A.Y., June 18, 2019, Stanly County
Petitioner-Father, a resident of Stanly County, North Carolina, filed a termination of parental rights action in Stanly County against Respondent-Mother, a resident of Ventura County, California. Petitioner alleged the parties’ child lived with him in Stanly County, pursuant to a California custody order, such that North Carolina is the “home state” of the child. Petition further alleged that said California custody order terminated California’s ongoing jurisdiction by its own terms. Petitioner alleged that though Respondent is currently a California resident (as she was when the California custody order was entered), she temporarily relocated to Nevada which also terminated California’s jurisdiction. The trial court in Stanly County entered an order which terminated Respondent’s parental rights. Respondent appealed arguing the North Carolina court did not have subject matter jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to enter its order. The Court of Appeals agreed.
Read more
NC COA: Sfreddo v. Hicks
Family Law SectionRequirements for Notary Certificate and Acknowledgment; Timeliness of Appeal of Summary Judgment Order from Converted Motion to Dismiss Hearing, COA18-1010, Sfreddo v. Hicks, June 18, 2019, Wake County
Wife filed an action against Husband for breach of contract (a separation agreement). Husband moved to dismiss alleging the separation agreement was void because it was not properly acknowledged under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 52-10.1. Husband specifically alleged the wording of the notary certificate did not have the proper language regarding the notary’s knowledge of the identity of the principal nor did it indicate that the notary acknowledged the signature was that of the principal.
Read more
Court Decision Highlights Importance of ADA ‘Interactive Process’
Labor & Employment LawIn an order filed July 18, U.S. District Court Judge Louise Flanagan of the Eastern District of North Carolina refused to dismiss a lawsuit brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act for failure to make reasonable accommodations. Judge Flanagan’s decision in Murphy v. County of New Hanover illustrates how important it is for employers to engage in the “interactive process” under the ADA and to continue with that process even if the first attempt at accommodation is unsuccessful.
Allegations
According to his lawsuit, Mr. Murphy was hired as a social worker in the foster care unit at the New Hanover County Department of Social Services in 2016, with the primary function of reunifying families. Mr. Murphy had Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder, which made it difficult for him to focus, concentrate, communicate, and work with others. Mr. Murphy alleged that he had no problem performing his “reunification” duties but that his ADHD made it difficult for him to complete his required paperwork unless he was in a setting without distractions.
Read more
Happy New (Bar) Year!
Workers' Compensation SectionJuly 1 welcomed a new year at the Bar Association. With this new year, we say “goodbye” and “thank you” to our past council members and leadership. I am grateful to Immediate Past Chair Holland Ferguson for leadership during the 2018-2019 bar year. Also, many thanks to the council members who have now completed their three-year terms.
As the new year begins, I look forward to serving as the chair, along with the other officers and council members, of this large and diverse section. As you may know, the Section leadership includes the following:
Vice Chair Barry Jennings
Immediate Past Chair Holland Ferguson
Secretary Mark Leach
Treasurer Heather Baker
Read more