Articles in the Uncategorized category - Page 7 of 8

In connection with an upcoming class on guardianship, I recently surveyed a number of clerks of superior court (judicial officials who preside over guardianship cases in NC) about common post-appointment […]

It’s the annual GiveUNC day. If you value the work of the School of Government, like our many blogs including “On the Civil Side,” please consider making a donation today. We would really appreciate your support.

Below is a message from the School’s Dean, Mike Smith.

Spend a fall Friday in Chapel Hill with us for practical legal education and 6.25 hours of live CLE.  Civil and criminal updates, Supreme Court case review, a land use […]

This November, North Carolina voters will be asked to vote for or against a “Constitutional amendment to implement a nonpartisan merit-based system that relies on professional qualifications instead of political influence when nominating Justices and judges to be selected to fill vacancies that occur between judicial elections.” If voters approve the amendment, what will change about the way judges are selected in North Carolina?

READ POST "How the Proposed Constitutional Amendment Would Change Judicial Appointments (August 2, 2018)"

Today is the UNCGive Campaign. Please consider making a donation in support of the work we at the School of Government do (for example, this blog). Below is a message […]

[This post is co-authored with my colleague, Margaret Henderson]. It was originally posted on the Coates’ Canons: NC Local Government Law blog on March 29, 2018 but is relevant to readers of On the Civil Side as well.

In 2017, the North Carolina General Assembly established the Social Services Regional Supervision and Collaboration Working Group (SSWG) and directed it to develop recommendations related to the social services system (see legislative summary here). The legislation directed the UNC School of Government to convene the group, facilitate the meetings, and provide staff support to the project.

The SSWG’s work is divided into two stages. The group just released the final report for Stage One and is scheduled to present its recommendations to the legislature on April 10, 2018. Stage Two will get underway in May. All of the meeting materials, minutes, and recordings are available online.

There have been quite a few different conversations about social services system reform over the last year or so. As a result, there has been some confusion about the role of the SSWG. This blog post is intended to shed some light on the group’s charge and connect some dots between the work of the SSWG and other elements of system reform that are underway.

Friday night I had the privilege of joining a dinner to honor four retiring (or recently retired) superior court judges who have devoted many years of extraordinary service to the […]

This is a bittersweet post as it is a goodbye to my friend and colleague, LaToya Powell, who has decided to leave the School of Government (SOG). Tomorrow is her last day, and I hope you will join me in wishing her well.

The following post was written by my colleague Jamie Markham and published on the North Carolina Criminal Blog on August 11, 2016.

One of the first posts I wrote on this blog was about the punishment for criminal contempt. The post included a discussion about whether sentences for contempt could be run consecutively—something our appellate courts hadn’t yet ruled on at the time. In State v. Burrow, the court of appeals approved a trial court’s orders sentencing a defendant to six consecutive 30-day terms of imprisonment for contempt.

READ POST "Consecutive Sentences for Criminal Contempt (November 3, 2017)"

A district court judge may require a juvenile to pay restitution to a victim as part of the juvenile’s disposition. The court’s authority to order restitution depends on the juvenile’s disposition level and whether the amount of restitution is supported by evidence in the record. The restitution order also must be supported by sufficient findings of fact. This post outlines the required findings and other rules that apply to juvenile restitution orders.