Setting the Standard

Attorneys

Kenneth Kyre, Jr.

Partner (Member)

Ken Kyre has been an attorney since 1977 and has engaged in civil litigation for most of those years. Prior to his entry into private practice in 1979, he was a law clerk for U.S. District Judge Hiram H. Ward in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He has a history of being involved in large, complex cases, especially products liability, although he does not limit his practice to such cases. He has generally represented defendants who have been sued, individuals as well as companies. A significant amount of his defense cases currently involve litigation arising from alleged negligence of companies and their employees. He practices in both the state and federal courts in North Carolina. He also is the Editor of The Defender, the periodical publication of the North Carolina Association of Defense Attorneys, and he is a past president of that Association. He has an AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell, and has been selected as a North Carolina Super Lawyer® in Civil Litigation Defense and as a North Carolina Super Lawyer® (Corporate Counsel) in Civil Litigation Defense. He also is a Certified Mediator, having received his certification from the North Carolina Dispute Resolution Commission.

Practice Areas:

Alternative Dispute Resolution (Certified Mediator)
Commercial Litigation
Construction Litigation
Insurance Defense
Personal Injury
Products Liability
Wrongful Death

Bar Admissions:

North Carolina
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina
U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina
U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina

Education:

Wake Forest University School of Law, Winston-Salem, NC, 1977 – J.D. (Cum Laude)
Wake Forest Law Review, Member, 1975–1977; Research Editor, 1976–1977
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian College, Laurinburg, NC, 1974 – B.A. (with High Honors)
Shenandoah University, Winchester, Va., 1972 – A.A. (Summa Cum Laude)

Sample Reported Cases:

Bennett v. Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc., ___ N.C. App. ____, 680 S.E.2d 271 (2009)
Cacha v. Montaco, Inc., 147 N.C. App. 21, 554 S.E.2d 388 (2001)
Albrecht v. Dorsett, 131 N.C. App. 502, 508 S.E.2d 319 (1998)
McFarland v. Cromer, 117 N.C. App. 678, 453 S.E.2d 527 (1995)
Foyle v. Lederie Laboratories, 674 F. Supp. 530 (E.D.N.C. 1987)

Membership in Law-Related Organizations:

Greensboro Bar Association
North Carolina Bar Association
       Joint Task Force on Judicial Selection, Member, 2008-2009
       E-Discovery Committee, Member, 2008-2010
North Carolina State Bar
American Bar Association
North Carolina Association of Defense Attorneys (NCADA)
       President, 2007-2008
       Board Member, 2003-2005
       Editor, The Defender (NCADA’s periodical publication)
North Carolina Defense Fund (NCADA’s PAC)
       Chair, 2009-2011
Defense Research Institute (DRI)
American Judicature Society

Miscellaneous:

AV rating from Martindale-Hubbell
North Carolina Super Lawyer® in Civil Litigation Defense, 2006–2010
North Carolina Super Lawyer® (Corporate Counsel) in Civil Litigation Defense, 2008-2009
Exceptional Performance Citation for 2007–2008 awarded by the Defense Research Institute

Legal Decisions of Interest

Plaintiff’s appointment as administratrix of a decedent’s estate the day after her complaint was filed and after the statute of limitations had run related back to the filing of the summons and therefore her wrongful death claim was not barred by the statute of limitations. Tallman v. City of Gastonia, No. COA08-1021 (N.C. App. Sept. 15, 2009). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Punitive damages upheld when Court believed there was sufficient evidence that defendant’s restaurant manager’s conduct was willful and wanton based upon his conduct toward plaintiff at the restaurant. Everhart v. O’Charley’s Inc., No. COA08-1454 (N.C. App. Oct. 6, 2009). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Plaintiff (representative of deceased employee) failed in her burden of forecasting evidence that a parent company affirmatively undertook to provide a safe working environment at the parent company’s subsidiary plant, beyond concern or minimal contact about safety matters, and the parent company did not assume primary responsibility for industrial safety at the subsidiary’s plant. Edwards v. GE Lighting Systems, Inc., No. COA09-247 (N.C. App. Nov. 3, 2009). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Plaintiff allowed to pursue claim to have “corporate veil” pierced of defendant company so that the obligation on a note by individual owning 99% of the stock of the defendant company could be satisfied from assets of defendant company, even though the company did not participate in the making of the note giving rise to the owner’s obligation. Fischer Investment Capital, Inc. v. Catawba Development Corp., No. COA08-1407 (N.C. App. Nov. 3, 2009). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Homeowners Association did not owe to a minor who was struck while riding his bike by a vehicular driver a legal duty to maintain the foliage in the common area of the housing subdivision. Fairbanks v. Brewington, No. COA09-237 (N.C. App. Jan. 19, 2010). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Plaintiff was contributorily negligent when she tripped over an end table at a hospital, and she presented no evidence that her attention was diverted as she was walking. Snow v. Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, No. COA09-189 (N.C. App. Jan. 19, 2010). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Where the Complaint was not frivolous based upon the facts and the law, but because Plaintiff had a history of filing frivolous pleadings in general and against Defendant in particular, the trial court could conclude that Plaintiff filed the Complaint for an improper purpose. Ward v. Jett Properties, LLC, No. COA08-1508 (N.C. App. Feb. 2, 2010). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
Where the plaintiff mother alleged that the city was negligent by failing to comply with safety statutes and city ordinances regulating the maintenance of city streets, obstructions to vision and traffic, and parking regulations, and she did not seek to recover damages for the death of her child based on a law enforcement agency's failure to exercise its general duty to protect the public, she was not barred by the public duty doctrine. Beckles-Palomares v. Logan, No. COA09-567 (N.C. App. Feb. 2, 2010). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.
The improvement-to-real-property statute of repose does not apply to a claim against a city for failing to maintain its streets because a city has the duty to exercise a continuing supervision over its streets in order that it may know their condition and it is held to have knowledge of a defect which such inspection would have disclosed to it. Beckles-Palomares v. Logan, No. COA09-567 (N.C. App. Feb. 2, 2010). Click here for a copy of the case opinion.

Office Location

Phone:: 336.282.8848
Fax:: 336.282.8409

3203 Brassfield Road Greensboro, NC 27410