Summary
The Supreme Court of North Carolina summarily affirmed the North Carolina Business Court’s judgment in a dispute involving alleged compensation for work securing capital investments for Earth Fare. Justice Dietz concurred, emphasizing that a Wage and Hour Act claim requires evidence that the plaintiff was employed to perform the claimed work. Justice Riggs concurred in part and dissented in part, concluding that the trial court improperly required an enforceable contract before allowing the jury to consider the Wage and Hour Act claim.
Holdings
- The Supreme Court of North Carolina affirmed the Business Court's order and opinion.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Business Court properly instructed the jury that it could not reach Talley's North Carolina Wage and Hour Act claim unless it first found an enforceable contract.
- Whether the Business Court properly denied Talley's post-trial motions concerning his breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and Wage and Hour Act claims.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (24)
- Vanguard Pai Lung, LLC v. Moody, 387 N.C. 376, 384–85 (2025)(followed)
- Horack v. S. Real Est. Co. of Charlotte, 150 N.C. App. 305, 309 (2002)(applied)
- Laborers’ Int’l Union of N. Am. v. Case Farms, Inc., 127 N.C. App. 312, 314 (1997)(applied)
- Morris v. Scenera Rsch., LLC, 368 N.C. 857, 859–62 (2016)(distinguished_from)
- Bryant v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 313 N.C. 362, 378–82 (1985)(applied)
- Chiltoski v. Drum, 121 N.C. App. 161, 164 (1995)(applied)
- Garrison v. Garrison, 87 N.C. App. 591, 594 (1987)(applied)
- Ferguson v. Riddle, 233 N.C. 54, 57 (1950)(applied)
- N.C. Dep’t of Corr. v. N.C. Med. Bd., 363 N.C. 189, 201 (2009)(applied)
- Powell v. P2Enterprises, LLC, 247 N.C. App. 731, 733–34 (2016)(applied)
Showing top 10 of 24.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…