A recent Supreme Court decision to not hear further appeal means home healthcare workers must be paid minimum wage and overtime- a ruling that will benefit potentially tens of thousands of North Carolina workers.

Yesterday I read an article about a recent appellate decision in Washington State, confirming the City of Port Orchard's liability for a bike accident allegedly caused by defective maintenance of a city street. I am licensed in Washington (currently inactive) spent the formative years of my legal...

NC State is working on a study to determine how best to decrease the incidents of car on pedestrian collisions. Drivers who hit pedestrians may be liable for the pedestrian's injuries, and injuries that exceed the driver's coverage may be covered under other policies.

Travis Payne argued a mandamus petition in Forsythe County on behalf of our client, a Kernersville firefighter, who was fired and then denied access to unredacted copies of documents used to support his firing. 

The new overtime rule issued by the Dept. of Labor requires that salaried employees who are deemed to be exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime requirement be paid a living wage.

Wake County District Attorney dismissed cases because of a judicial finding that former DWI task force member had lied on the witness stand in at least three different cases.

Summary of a recent important U.S. Supreme Court case affirming class certification in an overtime/unpaid wage case regarding Tyson Foods' refusal to pay employees for the time they spent "donning and doffing" required gear for work.

A more thorough exploration of January's 4th Circuit Court of Appeals case that clearly established a bright-line rule that tasers may not be deployed by law enforcement officers unless the subject to be tased poses an objective immediate danger and use of the taser could mitigate that danger.

Here is a link to the CLE manuscript for the panel presentation including firm partner Vanessa Lucas this afternoon at UNC Chapel HIll. The full schedule of the weekend's National Lawyer's Guild Regional Conference can be found here. 

Under North Carolina General Statute Sect. 14-72.11(2), a person is guilty of a Class H felony if the person commits larceny against a merchant "by removing, destroying, or deactivating a component of an antishoplifting or inventory control device to prevent the activation of any antishoplifting or inventory control device.

The DOL has released a new interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Worker Protection Acts to combat a perceived growth in abusive employment practices involving third party labor contractors and similar devices to avoid obligations to workers.

The 4th Circuit recently ruled that GEICO wrongfully categorized its insurance investigators as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime requirement, but ruled that the misclassification was not willful, and denied the workers liquidated damages and an extended statute of limitations.

Two separate lawsuits were filed against Disney this week by laid-off workers who claim that Disney colluded with two companies to replace them with foreign citizens through the H-1B visa program.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has now "clearly established" that law enforcement use of a Tazer is excessive force unless the individual being tazed poses an immediate threat.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals reversed two convictions of maintaining a building or vehicle for drug purposes, citing insufficient evidence. This is an important case defining what the crime is not, and should provide guidance for prosecutors and defense attorneys who have to deal with these allegations which are often used as bargaining chips to convince defendants to plead guilty to other crimes in a plea bargain.

The North Carolina Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court's ruling that a magistrate-issued warrant for the search of a home was not supported by probable cause to believe that drugs would be found in that particular home and that the evidence found in the home was the "fruit of the poisonous tree" and could not be used against the defendants in support of criminal charges.

A writ of mandamus is a court order that a state or local government official perform a ministerial, non-discretionary act that is part of their official duties. Our attorneys recently traveled to Statesville to secure such an order so our client could appeal the decision not to promote him.

Burn piles creating extreme smoke that impairs visibility on nearby roadways could be considered negligence, creating liability for personal injuries and property damage.

The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments regarding the question of when the filing period for a race discrimination constructive discharge claim should begin.

Sometimes it's better not to appeal a ruling you don't agree with.

A fatal tragedy in Wayne County, North Carolina, should remind us to be grateful to the working men and women who make our country great, and to support politicians who will protect our workers' rights to safe working environments and the wages they are owed.

Growth brings problems, including increased traffic. The Research Triangle Park area of North Carolina has been one of the fastest growing regions in the country, and has experienced a predictable increase in traffic congestion. According to a Raleigh News & Observer article earlier this week...

Companies in the emerging "Share" economy may not yet be adequately regulated, but there is a good chance they can be liable for injuries that result from their failure to take reasonable precautions to ensure customers' safety.

The New York Times has published a valuable series on the effects of widespread use of mandatory arbitration clauses in corporate contracts.

The exclusionary rule prevents the government from  presenting evidence in a criminal case that is tainted by a violation of the suspect/defendant's constitutional rights. A recent 4th Circuit Appellate concluded that drug evidence should have been suppressed under the exclusionary rule because the police seized the defendant without a reasonable suspicion that he was engaged in criminal behavior. This article explores the case and the law behind the Court's ruling.