Recent blog posts - 23 of 70

In the last two years, the North Carolina Supreme Court has published two opinions that answer questions raised about whether a North Carolina district court has personal and/or subject matter jurisdiction to terminate the parental rights of a parent who lives outside of North Carolina. Both opinions are cases of first impression. Both opinions held that the district court had personal jurisdiction over the respondent parent. One opinion held the district court also had subject matter jurisdiction in the TPR action. Both opinions affirmed the challenged TPR orders. Both opinions overturn previous court of appeals opinions on the issues raised. Here’s what you need to know.

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 […]

Today is GiveUNC, the University’s annual day of giving. As Dean Mike Smith is set to step down as Dean at the end of this year, today we are celebrating […]

Today is GiveUNC, the University’s annual day of giving. As Dean Mike Smith is set to step down as Dean at the end of this year, today we are celebrating […]

The Juvenile Code requires the court to select the most appropriate disposition for the delinquent juvenile. G.S. 7B-2501(c). Under this statute, the disposition must be designed to protect the public and to meet the needs and best interests of the juvenile based on offense severity, the need for accountability, the importance of protecting public safety, the juvenile’s degree of culpability, and the rehabilitative and treatment needs of the juvenile. There are many different statutory pathways available to the court to structure individualized dispositions targeted to meet the needs of the juvenile and reduce their risk of reoffending. This post explores some of those options, with an emphasis on alternatives outside of standard terms and conditions for probation or placement in out-of-home settings.

I’m excited to announce the launch of two major things today. First, the new North Carolina Clerk of Superior Court Manual Series website is now available at www.sog.unc.edu/clerksmanual. We took […]

Appropriate service of process is one of the necessary elements for personal jurisdiction—meaning the documents used to initiate a civil lawsuit, a summons and complaint, must be served on the […]

It is with great joy and enthusiasm that I am announcing these two updated resources for those of you who work in the area of child welfare. Abuse, Neglect, Dependency, […]

On October 1, 2021, two laws went into effect that pertain to parents who test positive for controlled substances while involved in juvenile abuse, neglect, or dependency (A/N/D) proceedings. Together, the laws

• dictate what happens to a parent’s court ordered visits following a positive test,
• clarify that participation in Medication-Assisted Treatment is not a violation of an order prohibiting substance use, and
• implicitly acknowledge that parents who may use drugs still have roles to play.

Were the constitutional rights of defendants who were prosecuted as adults in criminal court for offenses that they committed at ages 16 or 17, and prior to December 1, 2019, violated because the jurisdictional changes under raise the age were not retroactive? The North Carolina Court of Appeals does not think so. The decision in State v. Garrett, 2021-NCCOA-591, answers this question.