Justia Family Law Opinion Summaries

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Respondents' parental rights in their three minor children, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.The trial court entered an order terminating Respondents' parental rights, concluding that grounds existed to terminate Respondents' parental rights based on neglect and willful failure to make reasonable progress and that termination of Respondents' parental rights was in the children's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in concluding that grounds existed to terminate Respondents' parental rights based on neglect and did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination of Father's parental rights was in the child's best interests. View "In re L.G.G." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her two children, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that it was in the children's best interests to terminate Mother's parental rights.After a hearing, the trial court entered orders adjudicating grounds for termination of Mother's parental rights, concluding that grounds existed pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1), (2), and (3) and that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that termination of Mother's parental rights in her children was in the children's best interests. View "In re N.C.E." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her minor daughter, holding that there was no error.After a hearing, the trial court entered an order terminating Mother's parental rights to her daughter, concluding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3) for neglect, willful failure to make reasonable progress, and willful failure to pay a reasonable portion of the child's cost of care. The court further concluded that termination was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights under section 7B-1111(a)(2). View "In re T.T." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court reversed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights on the grounds of neglect and willful abandonment, holding that the trial court erred.Petitioners filed a petition to terminate Mother's parental rights on several grounds. Following hearings, the trial court entered an order concluding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights based on neglect and willful abandonment. The trial court entered a separate order concluding that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court (1) erred in concluding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights based on willful abandonment, and (2) failed to make any findings regarding the likelihood of future neglect. View "In re B.R.L." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court vacated the trial court's order terminating Father's parental rights in his son, holding that the failure of the Transylvania County Department of Social Services (DSS) to verify its motion in the cause for termination, as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1104, deprived the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction.After conducting a hearing on the DSS' motion seeking termination of Father's parental rights, the trial court terminated Father's parental rights. On appeal, Father argued as his sole point that DSS' failure to verify its motion for termination deprived the trial court of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court agreed and vacated the trial court's order, holding (1) the requirement contained in subsection 7B-1104 is jurisdictional as applied to both a petition for termination and a motion for termination; and (2) DSS' failure to verify its motion in the cause deprived the trial court of subject matter jurisdiction. View "In re O.E.M." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court vacated the order of the trial court terminating Father's parental rights in his son, holding that the trial court failed to make proper findings on adjudication.Mother initiated this action seeking to terminate Father's parental rights, asserting that grounds existed to terminate Father's parental rights based on willful abandonment pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(7). After a hearing, the trial court terminated Father's parental rights. The Supreme Court vacated the order below, holding that the trial court failed to make proper findings on adjudication and remand was required for further factual findings. View "In re K.J.E." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her minor child, holding that Mother was not entitled to relief on her allegations of error.The trial court found that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (2) and that termination was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Mother failed to show prejudice from the trial court's denial of her counsel's motion to continue the termination hearing; and (2) the trial court sufficiently complied with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act as it pertained to the child. View "In re D.J." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's and Father's parental rights to their child, holding that the trial court properly adjudicated the existence of a ground for termination under N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(3).The Department of Social Services filed a petition to terminate Mother's and Father's parental rights on the grounds of neglect, willful failure to make progress, failure to pay for the cost of care for the juvenile, and dependency. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3), (6). After a hearing, the trial court determined that grounds existed to terminate the parents' parental rights as alleged in the petition and that it was in the child's best interest that the parents' parental rights be terminated. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court's conclusion that a ground for termination existed pursuant to subsection 7B-1111(a)(3) was sufficient in and of itself to support termination of the parents' parental rights. View "In re D.C." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights in her minor child, holding that one of the grounds outlined in N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a) existed to justify terminating Mother's parental rights.After a hearing, the trial court entered an order concluding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights to her child pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)91), (2), and (9) and that it was in the child's best interests that Mother's parental rights be terminated. Mother appealed the termination of her parental rights. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court's findings of fact challenged by Mother on appeal were supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence; and (2) the facts supported the trial court's legal conclusion that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a). View "In re T.M.B." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her minor daughters, holding that the evidence supported the trial court's adjudication of the existence of grounds for termination pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1).After a termination hearing, the trial court entered an order that adjudicated the existence of the three grounds for termination alleged in the motion to terminate Mother's parental rights, concluded that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interests, and terminated Mother's parental rights in the children. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence in the record supported the trial court's adjudication of the existence of grounds for termination pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1). View "In re L.H." on Justia Law