Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Campbell v. Campbell

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

June 2, 2015

PATRICK JOSEPH CAMPBELL, Plaintiff,
v.
VIRGINIA QUINN CAMPBELL, Defendant

Heard in the Court of Appeals April 6, 2015

Editorial Note:

This Decision is not final until expiration of the twenty-one day rehearing period. [North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure 32(b)]

Wake County, No. 13 CVD 15157.

Wake Family Law Group, by Marc W. Sokol, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Gailor, Hunt, Jenkins, Davis, & Taylor P.L.L.C., by Cathy C. Hunt and Jonathan S. Melton, for Defendant-Appellant.

McGEE, Chief Judge. Judges HUNTER, JR. and DIETZ concur.

OPINION

Page 94

Appeal by Defendant from preliminary injunction entered 23 April 2014 by Judge Michael Denning in District Court, Wake County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 6 April 2015.

McGEE, Chief Judge.

Virginia Quinn Campbell (" Defendant" ) appeals from a preliminary injunction, entered by the trial court on 23 April 2014 (" the 23 April 2014 order" ), as part of the equitable distribution action filed by her husband, Patrick Joseph Campbell (" Plaintiff" ). The preliminary injunction ordered: (1) Defendant to transfer assets belonging to Triangle Strategy Group, LLC (" TSG" ), a company owned by the parties; (2) ordered the parties to act on behalf of TSG to hire an interim controlling manager during the pendency of their equitable distribution action; and (3) ordered TSG to pay and indemnify the interim manager, post an unsecured bond, and implement a six-to-twelve month business plan, which would deplete all of TSG's finances in an effort to expand the business. The trial court also found that Defendant was not a manager of TSG. Because TSG was not a party to the equitable distribution action, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to exercise control over TSG's assets, operations, and management structure, and Defendant, an owner of TSG, had a substantial right affected thereby. Therefore, we must vacate the order of the trial court.

I. Background

Plaintiff and Defendant were married on 24 July 1999. In June 2007, they incorporated TSG in Delaware and established its principal office in Wake County. Plaintiff owns a fifty-one percent share of TSG, and Defendant owns the remaining forty-nine percent. TSG has been the parties' sole source of income since 2007, and it is uncontested that TSG is a marital asset.

TSG operates mainly as a consulting firm that focuses on " impulse marketing" for large corporations. Plaintiff is the primary operator of TSG, although Defendant has authority to sign checks, transfer funds, and conduct some transactions for TSG in the ordinary course of business. Plaintiff also has been developing and seeking patents for a new type of sensor technology for TSG over the last several years, which reportedly would allow companies ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.