The North Carolina General Assembly recently addressed family law issues in several pieces of legislation. This post addresses legislation effective on or before October 1, 2025. Changes effective on later dates will be addressed in subsequent posts.
Child Support
Accrual of child support arrears and DSS custody.
S.L. 2025-16, sec. 1.21.(a).
Amends G.S. 50-13.10 (which governs establishment and modification of past due child support) to include subdivision (5), to provide that a child support payment is not past due and no arrears accrue for foster care assistance that is owed to the state by the supporting party during any period when the child is in DSS custody.
Effective October 1, 2025, and applies to all actions pending on or filed after that date.
Child Custody
Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act.
S.L. 2025-25, Part IV, sec. 45.(a) through 45.(d).
Amends the title of Chapter 50A to Uniform Acts on Children and adds a new Article 4, Uniform Child Abduction Prevention Act, beginning G.S. 50A-411.
Who can seek relief.
G.S. 50-414 authorizes the court, on its own motion, to order abduction prevention measures as set forth in the statute in a child custody proceeding if the court finds that evidence establishes a credible risk of abduction of the child. Factors indicating a risk of abduction are set out in the statute, and include among other things, previous abductions by the respondent or threats to abduct, domestic violence, and activities by respondent that may indicate a planned abduction such as the abandonment of employment, selling a primary residence or terminating a lease, closing bank accounts or liquidating assets, and applying for a passport or other travel documents for themself or the child.
A party to a child custody determination or an individual or entity with the right to seek a child custody determination may also file a petition seeking abduction prevention measures.
Jurisdiction.
If a district court has jurisdiction pursuant to Chapter 50A, the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act to make a custody determination as to the child, then the district court has jurisdiction to hear a petition filed pursuant to this Article.
Procedure.
A petition filed under this Article must be verified and include a copy of any existing child custody determination, if available. The petition must describe the risk factors for abduction, as set out in G.S. 50A-417. The remaining contents which must be included in the petition are set out in G.S. 50A-416 and include information regarding domestic violence arrests.
Relief.
The extensive relief that a court is authorized to order is set out in G.S. 50A-418. If the court finds a credible risk of abduction of the child, the court must enter an abduction prevention order. The court’s order must include “measures and conditions” that are
“reasonably calculated to prevent abduction of the child, giving due consideration to the custody and visitation rights of the parties. The court must consider the age of the child, the potential harm to the child from an abduction, the legal and practical difficulties of returning the child to the jurisdiction if abducted, and the reasons for the potential abduction, including evidence of domestic violence, stalking, or child abuse and neglect.”
Authorized relief includes, among other things, various travel restrictions, conditions on the exercise of custody or visitation, and an order that a respondent register the custody order in a foreign jurisdiction or obtain an identical custody order from the foreign jurisdiction as a prerequisite of travel with the child. The court also is specifically authorized to require respondent to provide an authenticated copy of the order to the US Department of State Office of Children’s Issues and to a relevant foreign consulate or embassy.
Warrant to take physical custody of child.
If petitioner alleges and the court finds that there is a credible risk that the child is imminently likely to be wrongfully removed, the court is authorized to issue an ex parte warrant for law enforcement to take physical custody of the child. Respondent must be afforded an opportunity to be heard at the earliest possible time, but no later than the end of the next day that the district court is in session, unless a hearing on that day is impossible. If that is the case, then the hearing must be held on the first day possible. G.S. 50A-419(c) details the requirements of the warrant. After a hearing, if the court finds that petitioner sought an ex parte warrant for the purpose of harassment or in bad faith, the court may award respondent reasonable attorney fees, costs, and expenses.
Effective October 1, 2025.
Civil Domestic Violence Protective Orders
Responsibilities of Clerks of Court for Service of Process in Chapter 50B Proceedings.
S.L. 2025-54 (H629). sec. 9.(a) and 9.(b).
Amends G.S. 50B-2 and G.S. 50B-4 to remove the requirement that the clerk of court effect service of process for a self-represented litigant when the court has issued an ex parte DVPO or when the self-represented litigant has filed a motion requesting defendant be held in contempt for violation of a DVPO, if the service of process does not occur within the state of North Carolina.
Effective June 30, 2025, and applies to service of process occurring on or after that date.
Equitable Distribution
Restrictions on agreements in conveyances between spouses.
S.L. 2025-25 (HB 40), sec. 48.(d), amends G.S. 50-20(b)(2) and 50-20(d), and G.S. 39-13.3(a).
GS 50-20(b)(2) provides that property acquired by gift from a spouse is marital property unless the intent that the property be separate property is expressly stated. This amendment specifies that the intent that the property be separate property must be stated in writing (was in the conveyance). For real property, the writing must be in a document separate from the conveyance.
The amendment also states that the act of acquiring the property does not in itself establish the intent that the property be separate property. This is consistent with case law. See McLean v. McLean, 323 NC 543 (1988)(anytime separate property is the consideration for property held by tenancy by the entirety, there is presumption that a gift has been made and the property is therefore marital property, unless the intent that the property be separate property is stated at the time of the conveyance); Walter v. Walter, 149 NC App 723 (2002)(same).
That statute also provides that property acquired in exchange for separate property during the marriage is separate property unless a statement is made in writing (was in the conveyance) that the property is intended to be marital property. This amendment also states that the act of acquiring the property does not in itself state the intent that the property be marital, even if the property is taken in the name of both spouses. This also is consistent with case law. See Manes v. Harrison-Manes, 79 N.C. App. 170, 338 S.E.2d 815 (1986) (annuity and bank account funded with husband’s separate funds from an inheritance remained his separate property, even though he titled both jointly).
GS 50-20(d) allows parties to make agreements regarding the distribution of marital and divisible property in written agreements that are properly executed. This amendment specifies that parties may not provide for the distribution of property in a conveyance of real property.
GS 39-13.3(a)(2) also is amended to specify that the right to an equitable distribution cannot be released or waived in an instrument of conveyance and specifies that a conveyance of real property between spouses does not waive or release any claim by a spouse for equitable distribution.
The legislation states that the amendments are effective October 1, 2025. This probably means they apply to acquisitions and conveyances made on or after Oct. 1, 2025. See Warren v. Warren, 75 NC App 509 (2006)(change to the equitable distribution statute made effective October 1, 2002, applied to payments made on or after that date), and Lund v. Lund, 244 NC App 279 (2015)(change to the equitable distribution statute made effective Oct 1, 2013, applies to payments made on or after that date).
Civil No-Contact Orders
Workplace Violence Prevention Act amendments to cover mass picketing and permit employers to bring an action.
S.L. 2025-71, Part III, sec. 3.
Effective July 9, 2025, the Workplace Violence Prevention Act (G.S. 95-260 et seq.) (WVPA) was amended to include mass picketing, obstructing or interfering with the entry to a place of employment, and obstructing or interfering with roads, streets, and other ways of travel to the definition of unlawful conduct. Amended G.S. 95-260 and other provisions throughout the WPVA also now provide that an employer who has suffered unlawful conduct may bring an action for a no-contact order. G.S. 95-262 is amended to clarify that an action is commenced under this Act by filing a verified complaint in the county where the unlawful conduct took place.
The legislation also amends G.S. 95-271 to clarify that the WVPA does not apply to union organizations or activities, labor disputes, and activities protected by the National Labor Relations Act “provided such activity does not involve violence, threats, or intentional obstruction of any place of employment’s access points.” Similarly, new G.S. 95-271(d) is added to clarify that nothing in the WVPA applies to peaceful demonstrations, informational picketing, or labor activity protected by National Labor Relations Act or the N.C. Constitution “provided such activity does not involve violence, threats, or intentional obstruction of any place of employment’s access points.” New G.S. 95-271(b) specifies that nothing in the WPVA is intended to or should be construed to violate rights protected by the N.C. and U.S. Constitutions.