Volume 89 — North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports

1. Damages 16.3 — lost profits — sufficiency of evidence Plaintiff presented sufficient evidence of lost profits so that defendant was not entitled to a directed verdict in plaintiffs breach of contract and unfair and deceptive trade practices action. 2. Damages 13.2 — lost profits — evidence of another company's sales — admissibility In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and unfair and deceptive trade practices, the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of another company's sales to show plaintiffs lost profits since defendant used those figures to induce plaintiff to enter into a distributorship agreement, and the other company's sales were made in the same geographic area and to the same customers as plaintiffs sales would have been but for the alleged breach. 3. Unfair Competition 1 — plaintiff promised sole distributorship — false representation — unfair or deceptive trade practice Evidence was sufficient to be submitted to the jury on plaintiff's claim for unfair or deceptive trade practices where it tended to show that defendant represented to plaintiff that it would be the only industrial distributor for defendant's pumps in the Carolinas; defendant represented that another company would handle the building trades part of the market; the other company was in fact never out of the industrial market; and plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to show that it was damaged. 4. Fraud 12 — false representations — no intent that statements be relied on — insufficient evidence of fraud The trial court did not err in directing a verdict for defendant with respect to plaintiffs claim for fraud where there was evidence that defendant made false representations to plaintiff, but there was no evidence that defendant made them with intent that they be relied on by plaintiff; moreover, plaintiff could not have recovery on both a fraud claim and a claim under N.C.G.S. <cross_reference>75-1.1</cross_reference> since they would arise from the same course of conduct. 5. Corporations 6 — right of shareholders to maintain action The individual plaintiffs lacked standing to sue since shareholders generally cannot maintain individual actions against third persons for wrongs or injuries to the corporation which result in depreciation or destruction of the value of their stock.