NC General Statutes
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-240 (2026)
Original civil jurisdiction generally
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NCLEGncleg.gov (official)
JustiaChapter 7A
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Except for the original jurisdiction in respect of claims against the State which is vested in the Supreme Court, original general jurisdiction of all justiciable matters of a civil nature cognizable in the General Court of Justice is vested in the aggregate in the superior court division and the district court division as the trial divisions of the General Court of Justice. Except in respect of proceedings in probate and the administration of decedents' estates, the original civil jurisdiction so vested in the trial divisions is vested concurrently in each division. (1965, c. 310, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 65
cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: Burgess v. Burgess, 698 S.E.2d 666 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010).
Burgess v. Burgess, 698 S.E.2d 666 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010). “*675 In order to determine the extent of the concurrent jurisdiction of the District Court and Superior Court, I must examine the applicable provisions from N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7A-240 et seq. in conjunction with Chapter 55 of the General Statutes.”
Harris v. Pembaur, 353 S.E.2d 673 (N.C. Ct. App. 1987). “” Subject matter jurisdiction is statutorily conferred on the trial divisions of the General Court of Justice in this state under N.C.G.S. § 7A-240 which states: *668 Original civil jurisdiction generally.”
Watson v. Joyner-Watson, 823 S.E.2d 122 (N.C. Ct. App. 2018). “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-240 et seq. (2017). Pursuant to N.”
Cunningham v. Selman, 689 S.E.2d 517 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). “§ 7A-240, which provides that: , Except for the original jurisdiction in respect of claims against the State which is vested in the Supreme Court, original general jurisdiction of all justiciable matters of a civil nature cognizable in the General Court of Justice is vested in…”
Simeon v. Hardin, 451 S.E.2d 858 (N.C. 1994). “N.C.G.S. § 7A-240 (1989); Harris v. Pembaur, 84 N.”
Keith v. Wallerich, 687 S.E.2d 299 (N.C. Ct. App. 2009). ““Except in respect of proceedings in probate and the administration of decedents’ estates, the original civil jurisdiction so vested in the trial divisions is vested concurrently” in the superior court division and the district court division.”
Matter of Est. of Adamee, 230 S.E.2d 541 (N.C. 1976). “2-1 (1969) and the enactment of G.S. 7A-240 and G.S. 7A-241 (1969) was “to take from the Clerk exclusive original jurisdiction of probate matters, to vest in the Clerk and the Superior Court concurrent jurisdiction of probate matters, and to provide for appeals from the Clerk…”
Hodge v. North Carolina Dep't of Transp., 528 S.E.2d 22 (N.C. Ct. App. 2000). “[i]njunctive relief to compel enforcement of any ... regulation." N.C.G.S. § 7A-245(a)(2).”
Foy v. Hunter, 418 S.E.2d 299 (N.C. Ct. App. 1992). “§ 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(3) (motion to dismiss for improper division); N.C.G.S. § 7A-240 (as a general rule, superior and district courts possess concurrent jurisdiction “of all justiciable matters of a civil nature”); N.”
Dalenko v. Stephens, 917 F. Supp. 2d 535 (E.D.N.C. 2013). “See N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7A-240 (“Except for the original jurisdiction in respect of claims against the State which is vested in the Supreme Court, original general jurisdiction of all justiciable matters of a civil nature cognizable in the General Court of Justice is vested in the…”
Guilford Cnty. Dep't of Emergency Servs. v. Seaboard Chem. Corp., 441 S.E.2d 177 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994). “N.C.G.S. § 7A-240 (1989). For these reasons, the trial court erred in determining that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Seaboard’s counterclaims.”
Ridge Cmty. Investors, Inc. v. Berry, 239 S.E.2d 566 (N.C. 1977). “G.S. 7A-240 confers jurisdiction in all civil matters upon the General Court of Justice, and which court within the General Court of Justice is to hear a civil matter is controlled by the venue provisions of Article 7, Chapter 1 of the General Statutes.”
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.