N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 75
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-2 (2026)

Any restraint in violation of common law included

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 75 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any act, contract, combination in the form of trust, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce which violates the principles of the common law is hereby declared to be in violation of G.S. 75-1. (1913, c. 41, s. 2; C.S., s. 2560.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2022 · leading case: Sykes v. Health Network Solutions, Inc., 828 S.E.2d 467 (N.C. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sykes v. Health Network Solutions, Inc., 828 S.E.2d 467 (N.C. 2019). · cites it 4× “Defendants have restrained trade, committed unfair trade practices, and monopsonized the market for chiropractic services in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 75-2 and 75-2.1. -16- SYKES V.”
United Roasters, Inc. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 485 F. Supp. 1041 (E.D.N.C. 1979). · cites it 15× “Any restraint in violation of common law included. — Any act, contract, combination in the form of trust, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce which violates the principles of the common law is hereby declared to be in violation of G.”
Mckinnon v. Cv Indus., Inc., 713 S.E.2d 495 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-2 (2009) (“Any act, contract, combination in the form of trust, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce which violates the principles of the common law is hereby declared to be in violation of G.”
Knutton v. Cofield, 160 S.E.2d 29 (N.C. 1968). · cites it 3× “Any such act, contract, combination or conspiracy which violates the principles of common law is declared to be illegal by G.S. § 75-2. Numerous particular acts are prohibited by G.”
Rose v. Vulcan Materials Co., 194 S.E.2d 521 (N.C. 1973). “However, G.S. 75-2 says that “[a]ny . . . contract .”
Wilmar, Inc. v. Liles, 185 S.E.2d 278 (N.C. Ct. App. 1971). “” G.S. 75-2 provides: “Any act, contract, combination in the form of trust, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce which violates the principles of the common law is hereby declared to be in violation of § 75-1.”
Forrest Paschal Mach. Co. v. Milholen, 220 S.E.2d 190 (N.C. Ct. App. 1975). “This State, however, has long recognized the rule that a covenant not to compete is enforceable in equity if it is “(1) in writing, (2) entered into at the time and as a part of the contract of employment, (3) based on valuable considerations, (4) reasonable both as to time and…”
DiCesare v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hosp. Auth. (N.C. 2020). · cites it 6× “§ 75-1 (2019) (providing that “[e]very contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce in the State of North Carolina is hereby declared to be illegal”) and N.C.G.S. § 75-2 (providing that “[a]ny act, contract, combination…”
Davis v. Hca Healthcare, Inc., 2022 NCBC 52 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2022). · cites it 6× “9 N.C.G.S. § 75-2 states that “[a]ny act, contract, combination in the form of trust, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce which violates the principles of the common law is hereby declared to be in violation of G.”
Thompson Installations, Inc. v. Stock Bldg. Supply, LLC, 2012 NCBC 12 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2012). · cites it 10× “Liability Under G.S. 75-2 [40] Plaintiff also argues that Defendant's liability is not limited to a claim under G.”
Sykes v. Health Network Sols., Inc., 2017 NCBC 72 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2017). · cites it 5× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-2 prohibits “[a]ny .”
Sitelink Software, LLC v. Red Nova Labs, Inc., 2016 NCBC 43 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “§ 75-2 (prohibiting restraints of trade that violate common-law principles).”
Show all 16 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.