N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 1
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56 (2026)

All other actions, 10 years

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 1 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, an action for relief not otherwise limited by this subchapter may not be commenced more than 10 years after the cause of action has accrued.

(b) A civil action for child sexual abuse is not subject to the limitation in this section. (C.C.P., s. 37; Code, s. 158; Rev., s. 399; C.S., s. 445; 1951, c. 837, s. 3; 2019-245, s. 4.3.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 80 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1946–2026 · leading case: Honeycutt v. Weaver, 812 S.E.2d 859 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Honeycutt v. Weaver, 812 S.E.2d 859 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 14× “First, Tommy argues that his claims for breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud are governed by the 10-year statute of limitations under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56 (2015), and that the statute did not begin running until Tommy had knowledge of the real property conveyance…”
Quality Built Homes Inc. v. Town of Carthage, 813 S.E.2d 218 (N.C. 2018). · cites it 15× “*222 On 30 December 2016, the Court of Appeals filed an unpublished opinion holding that plaintiffs' claims against the Town were subject to the ten-year statute of limitations set out in N.”
Toomer v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 614 S.E.2d 328 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “However, “[a] claim of constructive fraud based upon a breach of fiduciary duty falls under the ten-year statute of limitations contained in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56 [2003].” 2 Nationsbank of N.”
Amward Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary, 698 S.E.2d 404 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 8× “In light of the above principles, we turn to plaintiffs' claim that all their claims are governed by the ten-year statute of limitations contained in N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1-56 (2009). B. Claims under 42 U.”
Stratton v. Royal Bank of Canada, 712 S.E.2d 221 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “2d 858, 861 (2009); see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56 (2009) (stating that claims for relief not covered by other limitation periods “may not be com *92 menced more than 10 years after the cause of action has accrued”).”
Piles v. Allstate Ins., 653 S.E.2d 181 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “§ 1-52(1) (three years for an action "[u]pon a contract, obligation or liability arising out of a contract, express or implied"); § 1-52(5) (three years "for any other injury to the person or right of another, not arising on contract and not hereafter enumerated"); § 1-52(9)…”
Tommy Davis Constr., Inc. v. Cape Fear Pub. Util. Auth., 807 F.3d 62 (4th Cir. 2015). · cites it 3× “They contend that the district court incorrectly concluded that the catchall 10-year statute of limitations provided by N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1-56 applies to Davis Construction’s ultra vires claim.”
Babb v. Graham, 660 S.E.2d 626 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× ““However, ‘[a] claim of constructive fraud based upon a breach of fiduciary duty falls under the ten-year statute of limitations contained in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56 [2003].’” Id. at 67, 614 S.”
Baars v. Campbell Univ., Inc., 558 S.E.2d 871 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “To support their claim for constructive fraud, plaintiffs alleged facts and circumstances which created a relationship of trust and confidence between Mrs.”
Speck v. North Carolina Dairy Found., Inc., 307 S.E.2d 785 (N.C. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 10× “Because the record contains evidence supporting plaintiffs' allegations of a breach of fiduciary duty, we hold that their claim may fall under the ten-year limitations period *789 of G.S. 1-56 and therefore summary judgment was not proper.”
Bruce v. Bruce, 339 S.E.2d 855 (N.C. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 7× “The sole issue on appeal is whether the ten year statute of limitations, G.S. 1-56, applies in an action for absolute divorce under G.”
Point S. Props., LLC v. Cape Fear Pub. Util. Auth., 778 S.E.2d 284 (N.C. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “" Defendants do not cite to any allegations of plaintiffs' complaint for their position, and we conclude that plaintiffs do not maintain that defendants were obligated to provide them with water and sewer service either "immediately" or within some other time limit, but that…”
Show all 80 citing cases →
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-56(a) — 6 cases
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. v. Marilley, 2026 NCBC 7 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2026).
Chisum v. Campagna (N.C. 2021).
Chisum v. Campagna (N.C. 2021).
Charles Schwab & Co. v. Marilley, 2026 NCBC 7 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2026).
Lafayette Vill. Pub, LLC v. Burnham, 2025 NCBC 8 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.