As a native North Carolinian, I feel pretty strongly that North Carolina is the best state in the country, and based on tourism statistics, everyone else in the country wants to know what makes us so special. In 2024, North Carolina was the fifth most visited state for domestic travel and direct visitor spending added $36.7 billion to our economy. All of those visitors need somewhere to stay, and many of them choose short-term rental options on internet platforms such as Airbnb and VRBO. But what happens when problems arise? What is the remedy for property owners who think they are renting their residential property to a nice couple through VRBO for a quiet weekend away, only to learn the couple decided to host a house party with thirty of their closest friends? What happens when a traveling nurse books an Airbnb for three months for work and refuses to leave? This post will explore how the law addresses these situations, and some areas that remain unclear.

Navigating the legal requirements applicable to adult protective services (APS) court proceedings can be challenging, given the expedited nature of the cases, the different types of orders the court may issue, and the varying legal standards and timelines that apply to each order. The urgent and often emergency-driven nature of APS cases adds further complexity to the process. That’s why we developed a new resource designed to assist county department of social services (DSS) directors, social workers, and attorneys—along with court officials and other professionals involved in APS —better understand the essential steps in a court proceeding to obtain an order for APS protective and emergency services.

This post was written by Brittany Bromell. She can be contacted at bwilliams@sog.unc.edu.

North Carolina General Statute 50B-3.1 provides that, under certain circumstances, a person who is subject to a DVPO must be ordered to surrender to the sheriff “all firearms, machine guns, ammunition, permits to purchase firearms, and permits to carry concealed firearms that are in the care, custody, possession, ownership, or control of the defendant.”

Derek was twenty years old when he suffered a stroke. He lost and then subsequently regained his ability to speak and to perform simple tasks; however, he cannot manage important matters like his medical care and finances. Derek’s mom, Greta, successfully petitioned under G.S. Chapter 35A to have her son adjudicated incompetent and was appointed as Derek’s guardian.

Recently, Derek was at a store and put candy he had not paid for in his pocket. When an employee intervened, Derek pushed the employee and ran home with the candy. Criminal charges were filed, and Derek was appointed counsel. This post explores difficult questions that arise when a criminal defendant is adjudicated incompetent and has a court-appointed guardian, including the effect those circumstances have on criminal case decisions, client confidentiality, and the allocation of authority between the attorney and client.

Continue Reading

The provisions in the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (the UCCJEA), N.C. Gen Stat., Chapter 50A, define a trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction to enter a child custody determination. This means that if the requirements of the Act are not followed, a custody determination will be void ab initio.

The UCCJEA allows communication between courts in different states when a judge determines communication is necessary for a court to determine whether and how it can exercise jurisdiction. The Act requires communication between courts in different states in two specific circumstances, and the Act sets out the procedure to be followed whenever a court communicates with a court in another state.