NCLAWYERSWEEKLY.COM Part of the
VOLUME 34 NUMBER 5 ■
network
FEBRUARY 28, 2022 ■ $8.50
AG’s deal over hog farm fines blessed again ■ BY CORREY E. STEPHENSON BridgeTower Media Newswires
Since 2020, Brown has incorporated information on calendar fraud into cybersecurity presentations and continuing legal education, though he admits that it may only be one small part of a comprehensive discussion cover-
An appeals court erred when it allowed a party to amend its complaint to assert violations of a law that wasn’t in existence when the initial complaint was filed, the North Carolina Supreme Court has unanimously ruled, reversing a divided appellate panel decision in a case involving payments to the state. In 2000, then-Attorney General Michael F. Easley entered into an agreement with Smithfield Foods, the state’s largest hog farming operation, to undertake immediate measures for enhanced environmental protection and commit $50 million to environmental enhancement activities. The state established the Environmental Enhancement Grants Program, which awarded millions to various organizations using the money from Smithfield for many years. In 2016, Francis X. De Luca filed a complaint alleging that the Smithfield payments constituted penalties for purposes of article IX, section 7 of the North Carolina Constitution, which requires that the “proceeds of all penalties and forfeitures and of all fines collect-
See Phishing Page 6 ►
S e e Pe n a l t i e s P a g e 6 ►
Hackers are finding a new weak point in calendar invites ■ BY HEATH HAMACHER hhamacher@nclawyersweekly.com When COVID-19 struck, calendar software and videoconferencing became a viable, popular means of doing business. Unfortunately, cybercriminals got the memo and have begun pursuing a new and particularly dangerous line of attack. In recent years, internet bad guys have increasingly targeted law firms and their valuable corporate and customer data, looking to profit by weaseling into networks and injecting themselves into others’ financial affairs. Email attacks have long been the hacker’s preferred modus ope-
randi, and remain so even today. But most people have become rightly more suspicious of emails, so today’s hackers, like the savvy businesspeople they are, are casting wider nets and chasing multiple revenue opportunities. Calendar fraud attacks started appearing a few years ago, but particularly since the pandemic started, these efforts to infiltrate platforms such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, WebEx, and Google Calendar are wreaking havoc on unwitting victims. “We’re on these [videoconferences] a lot more than we used to be, and if something’s on our calendar, we just kind of trust that we put it there or that someone in
our office or someone else who had access put it there,” said Patrick Brown, vice president of Enterprise and Operational Risk Management at Lawyers Mutual of North Carolina. Unfortunately, that may not always be the case.
You don’t want to be in the room where this happens
Therapeutic use limited time for med-mal suit ■ BY CORREY E. STEPHENSON BridgeTower Media Newswires A surgeon’s decision to leave a fabric barrier in a patient’s body permanently had a therapeutic purpose at the time the barrier was implanted, and so a subsequent lawsuit couldn’t benefit from the longer statute of limitations for medical malpractice cases involving foreign objects left in the body, the North Carolina Court of Appeals has ruled. Dr. Mehmet Tamer Yalcinkaya performed surgery on Kimberly D. Bryant to remove non-cancerous growths on her uterus in 2007. During the procedure, Yalcinkaya implanted a breathable fabric
membrane—which the court referred to by its trade name, Gore-Tex, a substance also commonly used to waterproof jackets—to prevent adhesions forming at the surgical incision site, and used sutures to keep it in place permanently. Yalcinkaya documented the use of the barrier, listing it under the “Implants” section of the file with the serial number, lot number and model number. Although he noted that Bryant’s prognosis regarding fertility required continuing post-operative treatment, she discontinued her treatment. Ten years later, during surgery for treatment of a large pelvic mass, the barrier was removed. Bryant sued Yalcinkaya and his employers, al-
leging that the Gore-Tex barrier caused her infertility. Her standard of care expert testified that barriers “can” have a therapeutic purpose if they are properly used, but that it was improperly used in Bryant’s case. Forsyth County Superior Court Judge Eric C. Morgan granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, and Bryant appealed. She argued that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether the Gore-Tex barrier had a therapeutic purpose or effect at the time it was implanted, which would extend the time period for her lawsuit. See Med-Mal Page 7 ►
INSIDE VERDICTS & SETTLEMENTS
VERDICTS & SETTLEMENTS
COMMENTARY
Overdose death in custody leads to $1.8M settlement
Estate of hit-and-run victim settles for $1M
Early intervention in litigation
Page 3
Page 3
Page 4