Articles in the Civil Practice category

Child welfare records maintained by a department of social services (DSS) contain sensitive information that parties in various proceedings are often interested in seeing. A complex web of state and federal law governs the disclosure of these records – more than I can cover here. For purposes of this post, it’s sufficient to know that G.S. 108A-80 is a broadly applicable confidentiality statute that applies to DSS and covers client information generally. Absent limited statutory exceptions, G.S. 108A-80(a) prohibits disclosure of information related to individuals who apply for or receive public assistance or social services, including child welfare services.

Child welfare information is also subject to an additional set of confidentiality restrictions under Chapter 7B of the North Carolina General Statutes. For example, G.S. 7B-302 makes information that is obtained by DSS related to a juvenile’s alleged abuse, neglect, or dependency (A/N/D) confidential. Similarly, G.S. 7B-2901(b) requires DSS to maintain confidential records of juveniles it has in its custody. Both statutes provide exceptions to the confidentiality requirement.

This post explores how the exceptions in G.S. 7B-302 and 7B-2901(b) apply when a party—either in a North Carolina civil case where DSS is not a party or in a criminal or delinquency matter—wants DSS child welfare records about someone other than themselves. Note that in this post I use the term ‘DSS records’ to refer to child welfare records maintained by DSS, including those from juvenile A/N/D proceedings.

It is a common question: when the court issues an order to show cause for contempt, how is that order served on a respondent? Is the order required to be […]

Back in 2015, my former colleague Ann Anderson, wrote about legislation amending provisions in Rule 26(b)(4) dealing with expert witnesses in this post https://civil.sog.unc.edu/north-carolinas-expert-witness-discovery-rule-changes-and-clarifications/. S.L. 2015-153, in an effort “to […]

Trial court judgments in bench trials must contain findings of fact and conclusions of law. Orders disposing of motions, on the other hand, normally only need findings and conclusions if […]

Civil orders and judgments frequently are not entered immediately upon the conclusion of an evidentiary trial or hearing; judges often need time to consider complicated or extensive evidence to decide […]

This blog post considers yet another aspect of personal jurisdiction, or the authority of a court over the parties before it. One of the elements of personal jurisdiction is effective […]

Service of process—service of the documents initiating a civil lawsuit—is a frequent issue of concern for judicial officials and practitioners. Typically, we are concerned about service of process because it […]

Although the vocabulary of preclusion can be convoluted, the core concept is not: preclusion prevents relitigation of matters that have already been decided. The doctrine is intended to protect both […]

Personal jurisdiction, as the name implies, refers to the authority of a court over a particular person. In order for a court to have authority over someone in a civil case, three things must exist: (1) effective service of process, (2) a statute allowing the exercise of personal jurisdiction in the case (G.S. 1-75.4, North Carolina’s long-arm statute, is the relevant statute in our state), and (3) compliance with the due process clause of the federal constitution.

The School of Government and the North Carolina Judicial College are excited to announce the addition of Emily Turner to the faculty. Emily joined the School in July 2021 and […]