Justia Family Law Opinion Summaries

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Father's parental rights to Alice, a minor child, holding that the issues identified by Father's counsel as arguably supporting an appeal were meritless.Specifically, the Supreme Court held (1) the trial court did not err in deciding to discontinue reunification efforts; (2) the evidence and findings of fact supported the trial court's determination that grounds existed to substantiate the termination of Father's parental rights to Alice; and (3) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that it would be in Alice's best interests for Father's parental rights to be terminated. View "In re A.K." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court that terminated the parental rights of Father to Ronnie, a minor child, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.After a hearing, the trial court concluded that two grounds for termination existed under N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (2) and that termination of Father's parental rights was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) at least one of the grounds found by the trial court for the termination of Father's parental rights was supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence; and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the child's best interests would be served by the termination of Father's parental rights. View "In re J.R.F." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Father's parental rights to his daughter, holding that the trial court's order terminating Father's parental rights was supported by clear, cogent and convincing evidence and was based on proper legal grounds.Respondent, the father of the child in this case, had not seen his daughter since she was a year and a half old and never pursued legal action to legitimate the child. Petitioner filed a petition alleging a ground existed to terminate Respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(5), failure to legitimate. The trial court concluded that a ground existed to terminate Respondent's parental rights and that termination was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that there was no error. View "In re K.M.S." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Respondent's parental rights, holding that the purported issues addressed by counsel in support of the appeal were meritless.After a hearing, the trial court concluded that grounds existed to terminate Father's parental rights based on willful abandonment and willful failure without justification to pay for the child's care. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(4) and (7). The trial court further concluded that termination was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court affirmed after reviewing the issues identified by Father's counsel in a no merit brief, holding that the trial court's order was supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and was based on proper legal grounds. View "In re J.I.T." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her juvenile child, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that termination was in the child's best interests.After a hearing, the trial court terminated Mother's parental rights on the grounds of abuse, neglect, and dependency. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2). The court further found that it was in the child's best interests to terminate Mother's parental rights. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Mother's challenges to the court's findings of fact were unavailing; and (2) the court did not abuse its discretion in making its best interests determination. View "In re N.B." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order entered by the district court terminating Father's parental rights in his five minor children, holding that there was no error.After a termination hearing, the trial court concluded that grounds existed to terminate Father's parental rights on the grounds of neglect, willful failure to make reasonable progress, and willful failure to pay a reasonable portion for the cost of caring for the juveniles. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3). The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court's findings were sufficient to support its conclusion that grounds existed to terminate Father's parental rights on the basis of neglect. View "In re S.J." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Father's parental rights in his child, holding that there was no error.After a termination hearing, the trial court concluded that grounds existed to terminate Mother's and Father's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (2) and that termination of the parents' parental rights was in the child's best interests. Father was the only party to this appeal. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Father's challenges to the trial court's findings of fact were unavailing; and (2) the trial court did not err in adjudicating neglect as a ground for termination of Father's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1). View "In re R.G.L." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating the parental rights of Mother and Father in their daughter, holding that the trial court did not err or abuse its discretion.After a hearing, the trial court entered an order concluding that both parents' parental rights in the child were subject to termination on the basis of neglect and failure to make reasonable progress, N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2), and that Father's parental rights were subject to termination for failure to pay a reasonable portion of the child's cost of care, N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(3). The trial court further concluded that termination was in the child's best interests. The Supreme Court, held that the termination motion in this case substantially complied with the verification requirement in N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1104 and sufficed to give the trial court subject matter jurisdiction to terminate the parents' parental rights in the child. View "In re C.N.R." on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights in her child, holding that the findings of fact contained in the trial court's termination orders had ample record support and that the court did not otherwise err.After a hearing, the trial court entered an adjudication order finding that Mother's parental rights in her child were subject to termination on the basis of neglect and failure to make reasonable progress. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2). The trial court further concluded that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the child's best interests. On appeal, Mother's counsel filed a no-merit brief on Mother's behalf. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in determining that Mother's parental rights were subject to termination and that the termination of her parental rights was in the child's best interests. View "In re S.G.S" on Justia Law

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the district court terminating Mother's parental rights, holding that the district court did not err.After a hearing, the trial court entered an order concluding that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights based on neglect and failure to make reasonable progress. The court further concluded that it was in the child's best interest that Mother's parental rights be terminated. On appeal, Mother challenged several of the trial court's findings of fact and its conclusions of law. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) competent evidence supported the challenged findings of fact; and (2) the trial court's findings of fact supported its conclusion that a ground existed to terminate Mother's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 7B-1111(a)(1). View "In re A.L.A." on Justia Law