In 2019, banks BB&T Bank and SunTrust Bank announced a merger, with the new bank to be named Truist Financial Corporation (“Truist”). In response, Truliant Federal Credit Union (“Truliant”) filed a lawsuit alleging the name Truist infringes on Truliant’s trademark in its name. For a discussion of trademark law and trademark infringement, please see Lindley Law’s previous blog post related to the trademark dispute regarding Duke’s Mayonnaise. Recently in the dispute between Trulian and Truist, Truliant moved for a preliminary injunction, seeking to prevent Truist from using its name pending the outcome of the lawsuit. What is a preliminary injunction, and how does a court determine whether to issue it?…
-
-
CONTRACTUAL FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES
In S&S Family Business Corp., et al. v. Clean Juice Franchising, LLC, the North Carolina Court of Appeals addressed the impact of a forum selection clause in a business contract. A forum selection clause is a contractual provision that, if enforceable, designates a particular state or court to bring any litigation between the parties. In most instances, a forum selection clause can be mandatory – the parties must litigate disputes in the forum provided in the clause. Factual History Clean Juice Franchising, LLC (“Clean Juice”) entered a multi-unit agreement (the “Multi-Unit Agreement”) with S&S Family Business Corp. (“S&S”) to franchise at least three Clean Juice stores. The Multi-Unit…
-
EARTH FARE AND THE “WARN” ACT
In early February, Earth Fare announced it would be closing all of its stores, likely meaning each of its 3,000 employees would be laid off. In response, two employees of the Asheville-based grocery store chain filed a class-action lawsuit alleging Earth Fare violated the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the “WARN Act”). Generally, the WARN Act requires employers with at least 100 employees to provide at least a 60-day advance written notice of plant closings and mass layoffs; however, the likelihood of success of the plaintiffs’ claims will be determined by the specific definitions provided in the WARN Act, as well as its exceptions and exemptions. The WARN…
-
IMPLIED EASEMENTS BY PRIOR USE
In B.V. Belk, Jr. v. VRS Magnolia Plaza, LLC, the North Carolina Court of Appeals addressed the question of when an easement can be implied by prior use. An easement is an individual’s right to use the land of another individual for a specific purpose. Frequently, easements are created by the express agreement of the landowner and the individual seeking to use the land; however, as the court in Belk confirmed, easements can also be created by implication. Factual History In Belk, B.V. Belk, Jr. (“Belk”) acquired 107 acres of undeveloped land in 1986. He then transferred title to a joint venture consisting of himself, as managing member…
