If any person, agent, company or corporation, after having discharged any employee from his or its service, shall prevent or attempt to prevent, by word or writing of any kind, such discharged employee from obtaining employment with any other person, company or corporation, such person, agent or corporation shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00); and such person, agent, company or corporation shall be liable in penal damages to such discharged person, to be recovered by civil action. This section shall not be construed as prohibiting any person or agent of any company or corporation from furnishing in writing, upon request, any other person, company or corporation to whom such discharged person or employee has applied for employment, a truthful statement of the reason for such discharge. (1909, c. 858, s. 1; C.S., s. 4477; 1993, c. 539, s. 235; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
§ 14-356: Repealed by Session Laws 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 767, s. 30(16).
§ 14-357: Repealed by Session Laws 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 14, s. 72(19).
§ 14-357.1. Requiring payment for medical examination, etc., as condition of employment.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any employer, as defined in subsection (b) of this section, to require any applicant for employment, as defined in subsection (c), to pay the cost of a medical examination or the cost of furnishing any records required by the employer as a condition of the initial act of hiring.
(b) The term "employer" as used in this section shall mean and include an individual, a partnership, an association, a corporation, a legal representative, trustee, receiver, trustee in bankruptcy, and any common carrier by rail, motor, water, air, or express company, doing business in or operating within the State.
Provided that this section shall not apply to any employer as defined in this subsection who employs less than 25 employees.
(c) The term "applicant for employment" shall mean and include any person who seeks to be permitted, required or directed by any employer, as defined in subsection (b) hereof, in consideration of direct or indirect gain or profit, to engage in employment.
(d) Any employer who violates the provisions of this section shall be liable to a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100.00) for each and every violation. It shall be the duty of the Commissioner of Labor to enforce this section. (1951, c. 1094.)
Article 46.
Regulation of Landlord and Tenant.
Notes of Decisions
Houpe v. City of Statesville, 497 S.E.2d 82 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 7× “Blacklisting Plaintiff further asserted Chief Warshaw intentionally interfered with plaintiff’s employment opportunities by written and oral publication of false and erroneous information in violation of N.C.G.S. § 14-355 (1993). The section authorizes a cause of action for…”
Holroyd v. Montgomery Cnty., 606 S.E.2d 353 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 6× “§ 14-355 (2003) which defines both the offense and an affirmative defense to the charge: If any person, agent, company or corporation, after having discharged any employee from his or its service, shall prevent or attempt to prevent, by word or writing of any kind, such…”
Friel v. Angell Care Inc., 440 S.E.2d 111 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 9× “Plaintiff alleged that Angell and Angell Care had breached the settlement contract; committed slander per se; maliciously interfered with her contractual rights; and blacklisted her in violation of N.C.Gen.Stat. § 14-355. Defendants moved for summary judgment on all the claims.”
Joiner v. Revco Disc. Drug Centers, Inc., 467 F. Supp. 2d 508 (W.D.N.C. 2006).
· cites it 8× “See N.C. Gen.Stat. § 14-355 (2006). As stated above, the FCRA preempts individuals from bringing state statutory claims against parties acting as furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies.”
Cortes v. McDonald's Corp., 955 F. Supp. 531 (E.D.N.C. 1996).
· cites it 9× “§ lb-855 Plaintiffs third cause of action is based upon the defendants alleged violation of the North Carolina blacklist statute, codified as N.C.Gen.Stat. § 14-355. Plaintiff states in his complaint, “[a]fter termination plaintiff has attempted to use his exemplary employment…”
Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Tech., LLC, 964 N.E.2d 806 (Ind. 2012).
“Laws 1259 (codified as amended at N.C. Gen.Stat. § 14-355 (2011)). 9 . This same privilege, permitting a past employer to provide truthful information concerning the employee's discharge, is found in many other state statutes, including ours.”
Kingsdown, Inc. v. Hinshaw, 2015 NCBC 28 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 5× “Ray contends that Kingsdown has prevented or attempted to prevent her from “seeking or otherwise obtaining employment,” (Ray’s Cclaims ¶ 23), in violation of the North Carolina blacklisting statute, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-355 . In particular, she claims that Kingsdown violated the…”
Baqir v. Principi, 288 F. Supp. 2d 706 (W.D.N.C. 2003).
· cites it 4× “Plaintiff also alleged causes of action under North Carolina common law for breach of contract, wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, and defamation and under North Carolina General Statutes § 14-355 for blacklisting.”
Friel v. Angell Care Inc., 440 S.E.2d 111 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 9× “Plaintiff alleged that Angelí and Angelí Care had breached the settlement contract; committed slander per se; maliciously interfered with her contractual rights; and blacklisted her in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-355 . Defendants moved for summary judgment on all the…”
Cortes v. McDonald's Corp., 955 F. Supp. 541 (E.D.N.C. 1996).
“§ 14-355, by providing negative references to plaintiffs prospective employers.”
Wilson v. Forsyth Med. Grp., LLC (M.D.N.C. 2020).
· cites it 6× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-355 . To violate the statute, the statements made to the prospective employer must have been unsolicited.”
Miller v. North Carolina State Univ. (E.D.N.C. 2019).
· cites it 4× “N.C. Gen. Stat.§ 14-355. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Jane Doe provided an unfavorable reference; however, there is no indication this communication was unsolicited or not “a truthful statement of the reason for such discharge.”
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.