Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Reid v. Ayersgreen2 sentences2018App. 261 , 531 S.E.2d 231 (2000), this Court articulated the following test to determine when the learned profession exception applies: "In order for the learned profession exemption to apply, a two-part test must be satisfied. 2015App. 261 , 531 S.E.2d 231 (2000). {60} In Reid v. Ayers, the North Carolina Court of Appeals established a two-part test to determine whether activities fell within the learned profession exception: (1) “the person or entity performing the alleged act must be a member of a learned profession,” and (2) “the conduct in question must be a rendering of professional services.” Id. at 266 , 531 S.E.2d at 235. | 2 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sperry Corp. v. Patterson
green
1 sentence2019The North Carolina Court of Appeals’ decisions in Sperry Corp. v. Patterson, 73 N.C. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Hardy v. Toler
green
2 sentences2019With regard to unfair or deceptive trade practice claims, the jury determines the facts underlying the plaintiff’s claim, “and based on the jury’s finding[s], the court . . . [determines] as a matter of law whether the defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce.” Hardy v. Toler, 288 N.C. 303, 310 , 218 S.E.2d 342 , 346–47 (1975). 2019With regard to unfair or deceptive trade practice claims, the jury determines the facts underlying the plaintiff’s claim, “and based on the jury’s finding[s], the court . . . [determines] as a matter of law whether the defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce.” Hardy v. Toler, 288 N.C. 303, 310 , 218 S.E.2d 342 , 346–47 (1975). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Cameron v. New Hanover Memorial Hospital, Inc.
green
1 sentence2018Id. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Abram v. Charter Medical Corp. of Raleigh, Inc.
green
1 sentence2015Corp. of Raleigh, Inc., 100 N.C. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Sharp v. Gailor
green
1 sentence2015App. 213 , 510 S.E.2d 702 (1999) (holding that the practice of law falls within the learned profession exception); Abram v. Charter Med. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.