NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 19-4 (2026)

Violation of injunction; punishment

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 19 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In case of the violation of any injunction granted under the provisions of this Chapter, the court, or, in vacation, a judge thereof, may summarily try and punish the offender. A party found guilty of contempt under the provisions of this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than two hundred ($200.00) or more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not less than three or more than six months, or by both fine and imprisonment. (Pub. Loc. 1913, c. 761, s. 28; 1919, c. 288; C.S., s. 3183.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1979–1985 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Andrews v. Chateau X, Inc., 250 S.E.2d 603 (N.C. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State Ex Rel. Andrews v. Chateau X, Inc., 250 S.E.2d 603 (N.C. 1979). · cites it 9× “00) or more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not less than three or more than six months, or by both fine and imprisonment." Thus, an injunction such as this one is in effect nothing more than a personalized criminal statute against…”

Chateau X, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Andrews, 275 S.E.2d 443 (N.C. 1981). · cites it 4× “…by imprisonment in the county jail for not less than three or more than six months, or by both fine and imprisonment. G.S. § 19-4 (1978).”

State ex rel. Utils. Comm'n v. Nantahala Power & Light Co., 333 S.E.2d 217 (N.C. 1985). “Tapoco has failed to establish that the Commission abused its discretion in ordering Tapoco joined as a party in the instant proceedings.”

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.