N.C. Gen. Stat. » Chapter 90
NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-1 (2026)

North Carolina Medical Society incorporated

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Oct. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 90 CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The association of regularly graduated physicians, calling themselves the State Medical Society, is hereby declared to be a body politic and corporate, to be known and distinguished by the name of The Medical Society of the State of North Carolina. The name of the society is now the North Carolina Medical Society. (1858-9, c. 258, s. 1; Code, s. 3121; Rev., s. 4491; C.S., s. 6605; 1981, c. 573, s. 1.)

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1877–2025 · leading case: Tatham v. Hoke, 469 F. Supp. 914 (W.D.N.C. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tatham v. Hoke, 469 F. Supp. 914 (W.D.N.C. 1979). · cites it 3× “See N.C.G.S. §§ 90-1 to 90-21.5 (1975 & Cum.Supp.”
Hoke v. Bd. of Med. Examiners of State of NC, 445 F. Supp. 1313 (W.D.N.C. 1978). · cites it 3× “A hearing was conducted on December 13, 1977, and the parties were given until January 20, 1978, to file such further briefs or evidence as they wished.”
State v. . Ross, 76 N.C. 242 (1877). “The rule is thus laid down in Wheaton, § § 90-1. “A contract valid by the law of the place where it is made is generally speaking valid everywhere; The general comity and mutual convenience of nationshave established the rule, that the law of that place governs in everything…”
Hoke v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 445 F. Supp. 1313 (W.D.N.C. 1978). · cites it 3× “See N.C.G.S. §§ 90-1 et seq. Defendants correctly contend, therefore, that the Board is not a “person” within the meaning of 42 U.”
Happel v. Guilford Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 913 S.E.2d 174 (N.C. 2025). · cites it 3× “Congress clearly weighed its need to encourage a fulsome response to nationwide medical emergencies against the possibility of wrongdoing, and it thus did not immunize covered persons from the comparatively greater punishments of deprivations of liberty and livelihood.”
Powell v. Duke Univ., Inc., 197 S.E.2d 910 (N.C. Ct. App. 1973). “G.S. 90-1, et seq. G.S. 90-12 provides for the issuance of a “limited license” to practice medicine within a defined district.”
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.