Skip to content

menu

Open Legal Blog Archive logo
HomeAboutBlogsFAQsSubmit

Goldstein v. Countrywide Homes, Inc., April 1, 2008 (Tennille)(unpublished)

By Mack Sperling on April 19, 2008

The Court threw out a securities fraud case that would otherwise have been within the scope of its mandatory jurisdiction because there were already two cases pending in Wake County making similar claims. One of those cases had already received a Rule 2.1 designation as an exceptional case. The Court found that it would be more efficient if discovery in the cases was coordinated, and that inconsistent rulings would be avoided, and recommended that the case receive a 2.1 designation.

See this post for other cases involving challenges to the Court’s mandatory jurisdiction.

Full Opinion

  • Posted in:
    Civil Litigation, Corporate & Commercial
  • Blog:
    North Carolina Business Litigation Report
  • Organization:
    Brooks Pierce LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Open Legal Blog Archive, Inc. logo
Seattle, Washington
Copyright © 2026, Open Legal Blog Archive, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo