1. Home
  2. Amicus Briefs
  3. Morris v. Rodeberg, et al

Morris v. Rodeberg, et al

https://www.tinfulton.com/

Gagan Gupta

Gagan Gupta joined Tin Fulton Walker & Owen in 2022. After graduating from Stanford Law School, Gagan began his legal career as a clerk to the Honorable Pierre N. Level on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan. Following his clerkship, Gagan returned to his home state of North Carolina to practice law.

Gagan’s practice includes trial and appellate work in state and federal courts in broad areas of civil rights, including wrongful convictions, police misconduct, employment discrimination, eminent domain and personal injury. Gagan also maintains an active commercial and class action practice, most notably in the areas of insurance and products liability. Gagan’s most notable insurance case – captioned North State Deli v. The Cincinnati Insurance Company, No. 20-cvs-02569 (Durham County, North Carolina) – sought coverage on behalf of North Carolina businesses for Covid-related losses and was the first among thousands of such cases across the nation to achieve a summary judgment ruling in favor of policyholders. This landmark victory was a powerful win for small businesses during an era of economic devastation everywhere (read more about the case, which is currently on appeal, here and here).

Earlier in his career, Gagan worked for a large national law firm where he handled commercial litigation on behalf of Fortune 500 clients with a focus on technology disputes and federal appeals. This experience included a $1 billion jury trial between two technology giants in Silicon Valley which resulted in a favorable settlement for his client during the middle of trial.

Gagan has regularly been recognized by both Super Lawyers and by North Carolina Lawyers Weekly as a North Carolina Rising Star. He is currently a member of North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper’s Board of Science, Technology, and Innovation, and currently serves on the board of the nonprofit North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services. Gagan is also an active member of the NC Advocates for Justice and is an alum of NCAJ Next, the organization’s leadership fellowship program.

Gagan grew up in Belmont, NC and went on to receive his undergraduate degree from Davidson College, where he received a full merit scholarship. Prior to law school, Gagan received a masters degree from The London School of Economics, served as White House political appointee in President Obama’s administration, and spent a year assisting with the disaster recovery effort following Hurricane Katrina.

Gagan lives in Durham with his wife Erika Larson and their young son who he drags to pickleball tournaments and art museums with equal fervor.

sam@ncaj.com
https://www.wilderlawgroup.com/

Sam McGee

Legal Affairs Counsel

Sam McGee is of counsel at the Wilder Pantazis Law Group. Since beginning law practice in 1998, he has recovered over $100 million for his clients, including multiple seven figure verdicts. McGee serves as Legal Affairs Counsel for the North Carolina Advocates for Justice, where he oversees the amicus briefs and moot courts programs. He has also served on the Amicus Committee of the American Association for Justice and is on the Board of Directors of the Southern Trial Lawyers Association. 

Sam is a member of the Nursing Home Litigation Section and Professional Negligence Section.

Sam earned his law degree from Yale and has been a member of NCAJ since 2007.

Case Link View Now
Opinion Filed Pending
Attorney for the Case Matthew D. Ballew James A. Barnes IV Ryan D. Oxendine
Amicus Brief Writers Gagan Gupta Sam McGee
Court NC Supreme Court
Docket No. 296A22

A 13-year-old child was injured during an appendectomy. He filed suit after his 18th birthday pursuant to the tolling provisions of N.C.G.S. § 1-17(b). Defendants moved to dismiss the case, arguing that N.C.G.S. § 1-17(c) required Plaintiff to file suit within three years of his injury. Effectively, Defendants’ argument was that the statute of limitations expired while Morris was still a minor. The Court of Appeals majority agreed, and Plaintiff appealed pursuant to the dissent.

NCAJ filed an amicus brief, arguing that the majority opinion of the Court of Appeals violates longstanding protections of children under North Carolina law, and essentially prevents minors of a certain age from bringing medical malpractice cases at all, given that the statute of limitations will run while said children are under the disability of age and not legally competent to file suit. Moreover, the brief argues that the statutory interpretation in the majority opinion leads to serious constitutional questions with regard to the equal protection and open courts provisions of the North Carolina Constitution. Where two reasonable statutory interpretations are presented, courts should follow the rule of construction which mandates adoption of the interpretation that avoids serious constitutional issues like those presented here.