NC General Statutes
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5 (2026)
Definitions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NCLEGncleg.gov (official)
JustiaChapter 1D
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this Chapter:
(1) "Claimant" means a party, including a plaintiff, counterclaimant, cross-claimant, or third-party plaintiff, seeking recovery of punitive damages. In a claim for relief in which a party seeks recovery of punitive damages related to injury to another person, damage to the property of another person, death of another person, or other harm to another person, "claimant" includes any party seeking recovery of punitive damages.
(2) "Compensatory damages" includes nominal damages.
(3) "Defendant" means a party, including a counterdefendant, cross-defendant, or third-party defendant, from whom a claimant seeks relief with respect to punitive damages.
(4) "Fraud" does not include constructive fraud unless an element of intent is present.
(5) "Malice" means a sense of personal ill will toward the claimant that activated or incited the defendant to perform the act or undertake the conduct that resulted in harm to the claimant.
(6) "Punitive damages" means extracompensatory damages awarded for the purposes set forth in G.S. 1D-1.
(7) "Willful or wanton conduct" means the conscious and intentional disregard of and indifference to the rights and safety of others, which the defendant knows or should know is reasonably likely to result in injury, damage, or other harm. "Willful or wanton conduct" means more than gross negligence. (1995, c. 514, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 55
cases (20 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc., 655 S.E.2d 875 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc., 655 S.E.2d 875 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(5). Here, Mr. Scarborough argues that the jury could have inferred ill will from evidence of a prior difficulty between Mr.”
Hart v. Brienza, 784 S.E.2d 211 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). “*436 In his claim for relief seeking punitive damages, Plaintiff alleged: 26. That, upon information and belief, at the aforementioned time and place, Defendant Brienza fired shots on the Plaintiff, who was unarmed with arms raised, on three separate occasions and intentionally…”
LeCann v. Cobham (In re Cobham), 551 B.R. 181 (E.D.N.C. 2016). “” N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(7). The “conscious and intentional” standard supports the conclusion that defendant knew her behavior challenged in the Business Court was improper at the time it occurred.”
Scarborough v. Dillard's, Inc., 693 S.E.2d 640 (N.C. 2009). “" N.C.G.S. § 1D-5(5) (2007). Plaintiff argues that malice can be evidenced by his previous reprimand by Mr.”
Desmond v. The News & Observer Publ'g Co., 823 S.E.2d 412 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018). “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5 (2015). On appeal, defendants attempt to distinguish the "malice" and "willful or wanton" behavior as required by North Carolina General Statute § 1D-5 from the standards required in the liability phase of the trial, which included that the jury must find…”
Qwest Servs. Corp. v. Blood, 252 P.3d 1071 (Colo. 2011). “001 (West) ("rights or safety of others"); N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 1D-5 (West) ("rights and safety of others"); Okla.”
Crain v. Butler, 419 F. Supp. 2d 785 (E.D.N.C. 2005). “§ 1D-10 that this “[c]hapter prevails] over any other law to the contrary” and the definition of “defendant” in N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(3) are inadequate to constitute a rejection of Long .”
Harrell v. Bowen, 655 S.E.2d 350 (N.C. 2008). “Section 1D-5 provides definitions applicable to the Chapter.”
Geraldine VanDevender v. Blue Ridge of Raleigh, LLC, 901 F.3d 231 (4th Cir. 2018). “"Willful or wanton conduct" is defined as "the conscious and intentional disregard of and indifference to the rights and safety of others, which the defendant knows or should know is reasonably likely to result in injury, damage, or other harm.”
Miller v. B.H.B. Enter., Inc., 568 S.E.2d 219 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002). “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(7). Here, plaintiff presented Ms.”
Babb v. Graham, 660 S.E.2d 626 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). “” Appellant argues as follows: The trial court committed reversible error in directing verdict of liability for punitive damages, and in submitting the issue of the amount of punitive damages, when there was conflicting evidence sufficient to go to the jury, including…”
Jones v. City of Durham, 622 S.E.2d 596 (N.C. 2005). “However, we note that N.C.G.S. § 1D-5(7) defines "willful and wanton conduct" and establishes that such conduct, necessary for the recovery of punitive damages, see N.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5(3) — 1 case
Crain v. Butler, 419 F. Supp. 2d 785 (E.D.N.C. 2005). “§ 1D-10 that this “[c]hapter prevails] over any other law to the contrary” and the definition of “defendant” in N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(3) are inadequate to constitute a rejection of Long .”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5(4) — 3 cases
Babb v. Graham, 660 S.E.2d 626 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). “” Appellant argues as follows: The trial court committed reversible error in directing verdict of liability for punitive damages, and in submitting the issue of the amount of punitive damages, when there was conflicting evidence sufficient to go to the jury, including…”
Potts v. Kel, LLC, 2021 NCBC 72 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2021).
Ironman Med. Props., LLC v. Tanvir Chodri (N.C. Ct. App. 2019).
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5(5) — 8 cases
Hart v. Brienza, 784 S.E.2d 211 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). “*436 In his claim for relief seeking punitive damages, Plaintiff alleged: 26. That, upon information and belief, at the aforementioned time and place, Defendant Brienza fired shots on the Plaintiff, who was unarmed with arms raised, on three separate occasions and intentionally…”
Scarborough v. Dillard's, Inc., 693 S.E.2d 640 (N.C. 2009). “" N.C.G.S. § 1D-5(5) (2007). Plaintiff argues that malice can be evidenced by his previous reprimand by Mr.”
Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc., 655 S.E.2d 875 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(5). Here, Mr. Scarborough argues that the jury could have inferred ill will from evidence of a prior difficulty between Mr.”
Edgewater Servs., Inc. v. Epic Logistics, Inc., 2009 NCBC 20 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2009).
Desmond v. News & Observer Publ'g Co. (N.C. 2020).
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5(6) — 1 case
Harrell v. Bowen, 655 S.E.2d 350 (N.C. 2008). “Section 1D-5 provides definitions applicable to the Chapter.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1D-5(7) — 41 cases
LeCann v. Cobham (In re Cobham), 551 B.R. 181 (E.D.N.C. 2016). “” N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(7). The “conscious and intentional” standard supports the conclusion that defendant knew her behavior challenged in the Business Court was improper at the time it occurred.”
Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc., 655 S.E.2d 875 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). “" N.C. Gen.Stat. § 1D-5(5). Here, Mr. Scarborough argues that the jury could have inferred ill will from evidence of a prior difficulty between Mr.”
Scarborough v. Dillard's, Inc., 693 S.E.2d 640 (N.C. 2009). “" N.C.G.S. § 1D-5(5) (2007). Plaintiff argues that malice can be evidenced by his previous reprimand by Mr.”
Hart v. Brienza, 784 S.E.2d 211 (N.C. Ct. App. 2016). “*436 In his claim for relief seeking punitive damages, Plaintiff alleged: 26. That, upon information and belief, at the aforementioned time and place, Defendant Brienza fired shots on the Plaintiff, who was unarmed with arms raised, on three separate occasions and intentionally…”
Geraldine VanDevender v. Blue Ridge of Raleigh, LLC, 901 F.3d 231 (4th Cir. 2018). “"Willful or wanton conduct" is defined as "the conscious and intentional disregard of and indifference to the rights and safety of others, which the defendant knows or should know is reasonably likely to result in injury, damage, or other harm.”
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.