Legal Question in Civil Litigation in North Carolina

Re: Criminal charges dismissed by D.A, Do I have a civil action accusing parties

We really need more facts to thoroughly address this inquiry. It sounds, however, as if your potential claims would be for malicious prosecution and/or abuse of process. Regarding malicious prosecution, a Plaintiff must establish four elements to support a malicious prosecution claim: (1) defendant initiated the earlier proceeding; (2) malice on the part of defendant in doing so; (3) lack of probable cause for the initiation of the earlier proceeding; and (4) termination of the earlier proceeding in favor of the plaintiff. A plaintiff in a malicious prosecution case has shown a favorable termination of a criminal proceeding when he shows that the prosecutor voluntarily dismissed the charges against him. The MP claim would therefore seem to depend primarily on the basis for the charges against you, and the existence of "probable cause" and "malice." There are not enough facts in your question to determine these elements. Even though you have good exculpatory evidence, it is conceivable that the accusers in good faith believed you made a threat.

Regarding abuse of process, abuse of process is the misuse of legal process for an ulterior purpose. It consists in the malicious misuse or misapplication of that process after issuance to accomplish some purpose not warranted or commanded by the writ.

Again, the merit to an AP claim is not clear unless we know the intent of the accusers.

If you were to prevail, your damages would be as follows: Damages for malicious prosecution include loss of business, injury to reputation, mental suffering, and expenses reasonably necessary in defending the charge against plaintiff, together with any other loss proximately resulting from defendant's malicious prosecution, and, if actual malice is established, the jury may also allow punitive damages.

As for the D&O policy, you would first have to sue the accusers. It is not clear whether there would be coverage, but my guess is the D&O carrier would at least defend the action.