NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 (2026)

Right to judicial intervention when final decision unreasonably delayed

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 150B CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Failure of an administrative law judge subject to Article 3 of this Chapter or failure of an agency subject to Article 3A of this Chapter to make a final decision within 120 days of the close of the contested case hearing is justification for a person whose rights, duties, or privileges are adversely affected by the delay to seek a court order compelling action by the agency or by the administrative law judge. (1973, c. 1331, s. 1; 1985, c. 746, s. 1; 1985 (Reg. Sess., 1986), c. 1022, s. 1(17); 1987, c. 878, ss. 5, 27; 1991, c. 35, s. 9; 2000-190, s. 9; 2008-168, s. 5(b); 2011-398, s. 23; 2014-120, s. 59(b).)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 20 cases, 1990–2013 · leading case: Albemarle Mental Health Ctr. v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 582 S.E.2d 651 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Albemarle Mental Health Ctr. v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 582 S.E.2d 651 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 120× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 150B-44 (1999). [1] Respondent is an Article 3 agency and thereby subject to the mandates of section 150B-44.”

Occaneechi Band of the Saponi Nation v. North Carolina Comm'n of Indian Affairs, 551 S.E.2d 535 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 55× “From this order, petitioner now appeals. In the record on appeal, petitioner sets forth five assignments of error.”

Cnty. of Wake v. North Carolina Dep't of Env't & Nat. Resources, 573 S.E.2d 572 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 28× “DENR had 90 days from that date to render its final agency decision under N.C. Gen.Stat. § 150B-44. [2] On 1 February 2000, a few days before the final agency decision was due, DENR unilaterally declared "good cause" shown for an extension of time to render its final agency…”

Teague v. North Carolina Dept. of Transp., 628 S.E.2d 395 (N.C. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 41× “Teague first assigns error to the trial court's determination that the ALJ's recommended decision became the final decision of the Commission pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 150B-44. The statute provides that "[i]f an agency subject to Article 3 of [Chapter 150B] has not made a…”

North Carolina Forestry Ass'n v. North Carolina Dept. of Env't & Nat. Resources, Div. of Water Quality, 571 S.E.2d 602 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 40× “Timeliness Petitioner argues that: (1) the final agency decision of the EMC was not issued in a timely manner as required by N.C.G.S. § 150B-44 and (2) the NPDES Committee does not have statutory authority to render a final agency decision for the EMC.”

HCA Crossroads Residential Centers, Inc. v. North Carolina Dep't of Human Resources, 398 S.E.2d 466 (N.C. 1990). · cites it 16× “N.C.G.S. § 150B-44 also provides a source of relief.”

Holland Grp., Inc. v. North Carolina Dep't of Admin., 504 S.E.2d 300 (N.C. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 33× “The Department contends the trial court erred by (1) concluding the Decision was not issued in a timely fashion under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 (1995); and (2) ordering “that the recommended decision of the Administrative Law Judge .”

Gordon v. North Carolina Dep't of Corr., 618 S.E.2d 280 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 27× “*26 N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 (2003) provides in part: Unreasonable delay on the part of any agency or administrative law judge in taking any required action shall be justification for any person whose rights, duties, or privileges are adversely affected by such delay to seek a…”

Walton v. N.C. State Treasurer, 625 S.E.2d 883 (N.C. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 17× “The trial court found that the Board had failed to render a final decision within sixty days as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 and ordered that the AU’s decision was the final decision in this matter.”

North Carolina Forestry Ass'n v. North Carolina Dep't of Env't & Nat. Resources, 591 S.E.2d 549 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 13× “Failure of an agency subject to Article 3A of this Chapter to make a final decision within 180 days of the close of the contested case hearing is justification for a person whose rights, duties, or privileges are adversely affected by the delay to seek a court order compelling…”

North Carolina State Bd. of Educ. v. North Carolina Learns, Inc., 751 S.E.2d 625 (N.C. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 11× “Assuming that a party is in fact aggrieved, a party aggrieved by a state agency can seek relief under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 (2011). Unreasonable delay on the part of any agency or [AU] in taking any required action shall be justification for.”

Fearrington v. Univ. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 487 S.E.2d 169 (N.C. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “Finally, petitioner argued in his brief that the Commission’s decision was arbitrary and capricious because it was not filed within the time limitations specified in the 1991 amendment to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44, requiring that agency decisions be rendered within specified…”

Show all 20 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.