Lowe Excavating Co. v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 150
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- McLAREN
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Published
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- jury verdict
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
Lowe Excavating prevailed on claims of tortious interference with contractual relationship and prospective economic advantage against the Union and its business agent Darling, who picketed based on inadequate investigation of wage compliance on a federally-funded project where prevailing wages were being paid.
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
More Rulings in This Case
Other orders and opinions in Lowe Excavating Co. v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 150 from the same court.
Similar Rulings
<bold>1. Employer and Employee — wrongful discharge</bold> <bold>— reporting misconduct to management — evidence</bold> <bold>sufficient</bold> <block_quote> The trial court erred by granting defendants' motion for directed verdict on a claim for the wrongful discharge of an at-will employee where the claim was based upon a retaliatory termination after plaintiff reported to management that the company was withholding negative account balance statements from customers, transferring the monies to a separate account, and continuing to invoice customers in violation of N.C.G.S. § <cross_reference>14-100</cross_reference> (obtaining property by false pretenses).</block_quote> <bold>2. Employer and Employee — tortious interference</bold><bold>with contract — termination — wrongful purpose</bold><bold>— evidence sufficient</bold> <block_quote> The trial court erred by granting defendants' motion for directed verdict on a claim for tortious interference with a contract by defendant Smith where plaintiff reported misconduct<page_number>Page 76</page_number> within the company to Smith and was later terminated. Plaintiff forecasted more than a scintilla of evidence that he was terminated for a wrongful purpose.</block_quote> <bold>3. Appeal and Error — preservation of issues</bold><bold>— argument not raised</bold> <block_quote> Plaintiff was deemed to have abandoned an argument on appeal that a corporation ratified the acts of a supervisor in a wrongful termination suit. Plaintiff did not raise the issue in his brief, cite authority, or point to evidence in the record.</block_quote> <bold>4. Unfair Trade Practices — employment dispute</bold><bold>— not an un-fair or deceptive trade practice</bold> <block_quote> The trial court did not err by granting defendants' motion for a directed verdict on plaintiffs claim for unfair and deceptive trade practices after an alleged retaliatory firing. The case involved a simple employment dispute and did not fall with
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.