choice-of-law clause (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

choice-of-law clause in North Carolina

20 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1982–2026 4 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (10)

CaseFollowedCited
Corbin Russwin, Inc. v. Alexander's Hardware, Inc.green
ncctapp · 2001 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2002–2019
2 sentences

2013In summary, “a forum selection clause designates the venue, a consent to jurisdiction clause waives personal jurisdiction and venue, and a choice of law clause designates the law to be applied.” Corbin Russwin, Inc. v. Alexander’s Hardware, Inc., 147 N.C.

2012In light of this precedent, this Court summarized the distinction: “[A] forum selection clause designates the venue, a consent to jurisdiction clause waives personal jurisdiction and venue, and a choice of law clause designates the law to be applied.” Corbin Russwin, Inc. v. Alexander’s Hardware, Inc., 147 N.C.

44
Boudreau v. Baughmangreen
nc · 1988 · cited in 4 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1989–2021
2 sentences

2021See Boudreau v. Baughman, 322 N.C. 331, 333 , 368 S.E.2d 849, 852 (1988).

2021See Boudreau v. Baughman, 322 N.C. 331, 333 , 368 S.E.2d 849, 852 (1988).

34
Johnston County v. R. N. Rouse & Co.green
nc · 1992 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1992–2001
2 sentences

2001Rouse & Co., Inc., 331 N.C. 88, 92 , 414 S.E.2d 30, 33 (1992).

2001Rouse & Co., Inc., 331 N.C. 88, 92 , 414 S.E.2d 30, 33 (1992).

12
Cable Tel Services, Inc. v. Overland Contracting, Inc.green
ncctapp · 2002 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026Cable Tel Servs., Inc. v. Overland Contr., Inc., 154 N.C.

11
Harco National Insurance v. Grant Thornton LLPgreen
ncctapp · 2010 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017App. 687, 692 , 698 S.E.2d 719, 722 (2010) (“Our Supreme Court has made clear that lex loci delicti . . . is the appropriate choice of law test to apply to tort claims.”).

11
State v. Adcockgreen
nc · 1983 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013In this state, “ [t]he law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence.” State v. Adcock, 310 N.C. 1, 36 , 310 S.E.2d 587, 607 (1984).

2013In this state, “ [t]he law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence.” State v. Adcock, 310 N.C. 1, 36 , 310 S.E.2d 587, 607 (1984).

11
Associated Packaging, Inc v. Jackson Paper Mfg. Co.green
ncbizct · 2012 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013Co., 2012 NCBC 13 ¶ 25 (N.C.

11
Gravquick A/S v. Trimble Navigation International Limitedgreen
ca9 · 2003 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008The Court disagreed, noting that plaintiff did “not *795 present any evidence that the IFDA was intended to apply outside Illinois,” and concluding that “the IFDA was enacted for the protection of Illinois residents only.” See also, e.g., Gravquick A/S v. Trimble Navigation Int'l, 323 F.3d 1219 , 1222 (9th Cir. Ct. App. 2003) (“The contract’s choice of law clause states that the [contract] is to ‘be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Califomia[.]’ . . .

11
Patten Securities Corp., Inc. v. Diamond Greyhound & Genetics, Inc.green
ca3 · 1987 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
1 sentence

1992See, e.g., Patten Sec. v. Diamond Greyhound & Genetics, Inc., 819 F.2d 400 (3d Cir. 1987) (describing a provision combining a choice of law clause and a consent to jurisdiction clause as a forum selection clause).

11
Tatham v. Hokegreen
ncwd · 1979 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982
1 sentence

1982See Tatham v. Hoke, 469 F. Supp. 914 (W.D.N.C. 1979).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter green
scotus · 2013
1 sentence

2026The dispositive issue under 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(4) is “whether the arbitrator (even arguably) interpreted the parties’ contract, not whether he got its meaning right or wrong.” Oxford Health Plans, 569 U.S. at 569 , 186 L.

12026–2026
Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter green
scotus · 2013
1 sentence

2026The dispositive issue under 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(4) is “whether the arbitrator (even arguably) interpreted the parties’ contract, not whether he got its meaning right or wrong.” Oxford Health Plans, 569 U.S. at 569 , 186 L.

12026–2026
Tanglewood Land Co., Inc. v. Byrd green
nc · 1980
1 sentence

2011Nevertheless, they maintain that North Carolina’s restrictive blue pencil rule is an entrenched public policy tenet that voids a choice-of-law clause naming a state with a less restrictive remedy. 7 Defendants rely on one North Carolina appellate case and one opinion from a sister state as indirect 261 S.E.2d at 656 .

12011–2011
Inspirational Network, Inc. v. Combs green
ncctapp · 1998
1 sentence

2001In support of this argument, Corbin cites a section of Inspirational Network, Inc. v. Combs, 131 N.C.

12001–2001
Petrea v. Ryder Tank Lines, Inc. neutral
nc · 1965
1 sentence

1984Petrea v. Tank Lines, 264 N.C. *225 230, 141 S.E. 2d 278 (1965).

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 (5) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-82 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

TX 119 (1968–2025) CA 96 (1969–2026) IL 94 (1968–2026) NY 86 (1962–2025) DE 74 (1987–2026) NJ 48 (1958–2026) PA 41 (1964–2025) LA 32 (1969–2022) CT 30 (1965–2026) WA 29 (1981–2025) FL 23 (1982–2025) OH 23 (2000–2026) MA 23 (1975–2017) NC 20 (1982–2026) OK 19 (1977–2018) NM 19 (1976–2021) MN 19 (1973–2024) MD 19 (1985–2020) WI 18 (1964–2025) IN 17 (1980–2026) AL 16 (1991–2024) TN 13 (1999–2018) MI 12 (1978–2020) GA 11 (2012–2022) AZ 10 (1986–2019) NH 9 (1974–2018) MO 9 (1976–2016) UT 9 (2001–2024) DC 9 (1967–2025) RI 8 (2008–2022) SC 8 (2011–2024) ME 7 (1979–2026) WV 7 (1981–2022) CO 6 (1978–2026) MT 6 (1984–2016) ND 6 (1972–2004) VT 6 (1997–2022) SD 4 (1992–2022) ID 4 (1985–2009) MS 4 (1988–2010) WY 4 (2002–2020) NE 4 (2006–2018) KS 4 (2002–2025) OR 3 (1967–2022) VA 3 (2017–2023) AR 3 (2006–2014) HI 3 (2002–2025) NV 3 (2010–2020) AK 3 (1968–2001) KY 2 (2006–2009)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check