When any federal court or state court in the United States shall have awarded custody of a child under the age of 16 years, it shall be a felony for any person with the intent to violate the court order to take or transport, or cause to be taken or transported, any such child from any point within this State to any point outside the limits of this State or to keep any such child outside the limits of this State. Such crime shall be punishable as a Class I felony. Provided that keeping a child outside the limits of the State in violation of a court order for a period in excess of 72 hours shall be prima facie evidence that the person charged intended to violate the order at the time of taking. (1969, c. 81; 1979, c. 760, s. 5; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 47; 1981, c. 63, s. 1, c. 179, s. 14; 1983, c. 563, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 1234; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
§ 14-321. Failing to pay minors for doing certain work.
Whenever any person, having a contract with any corporation, company or person for the manufacture or change of any raw material by the piece or pound, shall employ any minor to assist in the work upon the faith of and by color of such contract, with intent to cheat and defraud such minor, and, having secured the contract price, shall willfully fail to pay the minor when he shall have performed his part of the contract work, whether done by the day or by the job, the person so offending shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. (1893, c. 309; Rev., s. 3428a; C.S., s. 4446; 1993, c. 539, s. 224; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case:
Clayton v. Clayton, 284 S.E.2d 125 (N.C. Ct. App. 1981).
Clayton v. Clayton, 284 S.E.2d 125 (N.C. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 8× “That order, in addition to changing the custody of the child, also ordered that a bench warrant be issued for plaintiff's arrest for violating N.C. Gen.Stat. § 14-320.1 and ordered plaintiff to appear before the court to show why she should not be held in contempt for violating…”
Newsome v. Newsome, 256 S.E.2d 849 (N.C. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff's counsel responded that the allegations in the motion were unsubstantiated hearsay.”
Fungaroli v. Fungaroli, 276 S.E.2d 521 (N.C. Ct. App. 1981).
“Fungaroli, secretly left the State of North Carolina with the said minor child for the purpose of defeating the plaintiffs right to the custody and control of he"r said minor child; that the defendants, acting independently and jointly, did abduct said child and remove him from…”
Westlake v. Westlake, 753 S.E.2d 197 (N.C. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “5A-23, § G.S. 14-320.1, § G.S. 50-13.1.” In his motion, Defendant referenced the “Order for Permanent Custody and Temporary Child Support” entered 22 March 2010 and made the following allegations: 3.”
Bossian v. Chica (N.C. Ct. App. 2024).
“They allegedly removed the child from this State for the purpose of defeating plaintiff’s right to custody and in violation of G.S. 14-320.1. Thereafter, plaintiff allegedly went to the State of Virginia where defendants were residing with the child and demanded that they…”
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.