NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-8 (2026)

Continuous violations separate offenses

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 75 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Where the things prohibited in this Chapter are continuous, then in such event, after the first violation of any of the provisions hereof, each week that the violation of such provision shall continue shall be a separate offense. (1913, c. 41, s. 7; C.S., s. 2566.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Richardson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 643 S.E.2d 410 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Richardson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 643 S.E.2d 410 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 16× “Plaintiffs argue that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-8 extended the statute of limitations in the present case because the alleged violations of the UDTP act were continuous in nature.”

Medicare Rentals, Inc. v. Advanced Servs., 460 S.E.2d 361 (N.C. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 6× “In addition, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-8 (1988) provides: Where the things prohibited in this Chapter are continuous, then in such event, after the first violation of any of the provisions hereof, each week that the violation of such provisions shall continue shall be a separate…”

Thomas v. Petro-Wash, Inc., 429 F. Supp. 808 (M.D.N.C. 1977). · cites it 2× “Additionally, North Carolina General Statute § 75-8 provides that continuing violations of the North Carolina antitrust laws, which continue into the future, shall result in a new cause of action in favor of the injured party each week during which the violation continues.”

Mills Int'l, Inc. v. Holmes (In re Mills Int'l, Inc.), 570 B.R. 169 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2017). · cites it 10× “” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-8 (1913). The court notes that the Johnston County District Court's award of weekly damages appears to be misguided.”

Karzo v. Matador Records, Inc. (M.D.N.C. 2022). · cites it 2× “) Plaintiff also alleges that Defendants violated the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act and seeks treble damages and attorney’s fees under N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 75-8 , 75-16., 75-16.1.”

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.