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

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-84 (2026)

Removal for fair trial

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Oct. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 1 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In all civil actions in the superior and district courts, when it is suggested on oath or affirmation on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant, that there are probable grounds to believe that a fair and impartial trial cannot be obtained in the county in which the action is pending, the judge may order a copy of the record of the action removed for trial to any adjacent county, if he is of the opinion that a fair trial cannot be had in said county, after hearing all the testimony offered on either side by oral evidence or affidavits. (1806, c. 693, s. 12, P.R.; 1879, s. 45; Code, s. 196; 1899, cc. 104, 508; Rev., s. 426; 1917, c. 44; C.S., s. 471; 1957, c. 601; 1969, c. 44, s. 1; 1971, c. 268, s. 2; 1977, c. 12.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1949–2025 · leading case: Carolina Forest Ass'n v. White, 678 S.E.2d 725 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Carolina Forest Ass'n v. White, 678 S.E.2d 725 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 24× “§ 1-84, provides for a change of venue in another set of circumstances: In all civil actions in the superior and district courts, when it is suggested on oath or affirmation on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant, that there are probable grounds to believe that a fair and…”
State v. Hood, 239 S.E.2d 802 (N.C. 1978). · cites it 17× “On 2 July 1975, Edith Philyaw moved for a change of venue pursuant to G.S. 1-84 (amended, Chapter 12, 1977 Session Laws, to apply only to civil actions).”
State v. Jarrette, 202 S.E.2d 721 (N.C. 1974). · cites it 3× “Two days later, these criminal offenses occurred and the victim of the kidnapping and rape identified the defendant as the perpetrator of all four of them. These circumstances attracted the attention of all the news media of the State.”
Zetino-Cruz v. Benitez-Zetino, 791 S.E.2d 100 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “We have been able to find only two cases addressing a trial court's power to change venue ex mero motu , at least in dicta, under a related statute, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-84 , in cases in which a party is unable to have a "fair and impartial trial" in the county where the action…”
State v. Speller, 53 S.E.2d 294 (N.C. 1949). · cites it 2× “ding judge, acting on his own motion and without any notice to them, would enter an order subsequent to the convening of the term at which the case was calendared for trial *352 calling a special venire from a distant and unfamiliar county to serve as jurors in the cause,…”
State v. Harding, 230 S.E.2d 397 (N.C. 1976). · cites it 2× “2d 916 (1955); G.S. § 1-84 (Cum. Supp. 1975). Where the record discloses, as it does in the instant case, that the presiding judge conducted a full inquiry, examined the press releases and the affidavits in support of the motion, and where the record fails to show that any juror…”
State v. Jackson, 215 S.E.2d 123 (N.C. 1975). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 1-84 and G.S. 9-12, defendant filed a pretrial motion for a change of venue from Union County or, in the alternative, for a special venire for the retrial of his case.”
Everett v. Town of Robersonville, 174 S.E.2d 116 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 4× “G.S. 1-84; State v. Porth, 269 N.C. 329 , 153 S.”
State v. Porth, 153 S.E.2d 10 (N.C. 1967). “Before pleading to the indictment the defendant filed a written, duly verified motion requesting, in the alternative, that the cause be removed to, or that a jury be drawn from, another county as contemplated by G.S. 1-84 and G.S. 1-86. In support of the motion the defendant…”
Godley Const. Co. v. McDaniel, 253 S.E.2d 359 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979). “, Annot., 74 A.L.R. 2d 16 (1960). Nevertheless, we believe them to apply in this jurisdiction.”
State v. Ray, 164 S.E.2d 457 (N.C. 1968). “After defendant’s motion to quash the indictment had been denied, he made a motion, pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 1-84, that his case be transferred to some adjacent county for trial.”
State v. Mitchell, 196 S.E.2d 736 (N.C. 1973). “G.S. 1-84; G.S. 9-12. The motion is supported by an affidavit of defendant’s attorney which states that because of publicity received as a result of the mistrial granted in the first trial defendant could not receive a fair and impartial trial.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
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.