When a magistrate has heard evidence in a case and makes a decision based on that evidence, the formal document reflecting that decision is a judgment of the court. Form judgments for each kind of small claims case are provided by the AOC (designated as CVM forms), and they provide a valuable guide to the finding and conclusions required for a proper judgment. While the AOC forms are convenient, the law does not require their use, and some counties routinely utilize different forms. The AOC forms do reflect thoughtful decisions about what should be included in a judgment, however, and a small claims magistrate is advised to investigate further before deciding to routinely deviate from or ignore some portion of the judgment form.
-
-
Children in Foster Care, “Normal Childhood Activities,” and the “Reasonable and Prudent Parent” Standard
On October 1, 2015, several new statutes affecting abuse, neglect, and dependency cases went into effect. Three new statutes specifically address decision-making standards related to social and cultural activities for children who are placed in a county department’s custody because of abuse, neglect, or dependency. The new statutes were created by S.L. 2015-135 and are
- G.S. 131D-10.2A: Reasonable and Prudent Parent Standard,
- G.S. 7B-903.1: Juvenile Placed in Custody of Department of Social Services, and
- G.S. 48A-4: Certain Minors Competent to Contract.
-
It’s Only Juvenile Court, Is an Expunction Necessary?
In discussing my experience as a juvenile defender with non-lawyers, I have learned that many people believe that juvenile proceedings are completely confidential and under no circumstances can anyone learn about the case or access the records. They also think juvenile matters are not very significant and have no real consequences beyond the juvenile court process.
-
New(ish) Protections for Tenants Occupying Foreclosed Property
UPDATE: The federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act was restored without expiration, effective June 23, 2018. This federal law must be read in conjunction with G.S. 45-21.29 and G.S. 45-21.33A provisions. The full text of the PTFA is available here.
UPDATE #2: In response to the restoration of the federal PTFA, Session Law 2019-53 repealed G.S. 45-21.33A and references to G.S. 45-21.33A in G.S. 45-21.29.
The protections afforded to tenants in foreclosure proceedings under the federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act (PTFA) of 2009 ended on December 31, 2014. The act expired and Congress did not extend it. Effective October 1, 2015, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted a law that partially fills the hole left by the expiration of the PTFA. This post covers some of the key changes and protections resulting from a new section G.S. 45-21.33A created by S.L. 2015-178 (H 174). Continue Reading
-
Imputing Income: So What is Bad Faith?
In my last post, Imputing Income: Voluntary Unemployment is Not Enough, I wrote about the bad faith rule; the long-established rule that child support and alimony orders must be based on the actual present income of the parties unless there is cause to impute income. When income is imputed, a support order is based on earning capacity rather than actual income. The bad faith rule provides that earning capacity can be used only when a party is intentionally depressing actual income in deliberate disregard of a support obligation.
So what findings of fact are sufficient to establish bad faith?
-
Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Actions for Summary Ejectment
For hundreds of years, the law has provided a procedure for landlords to obtain assistance from the justice system in ousting a tenant and taking back rental property. In North Carolina in the late 19th Century, just as today, “proceedings in ejectment” were one of the most common types of civil cases filed. I recently spent some time reading many older landlord-tenant cases in an effort to trace the development of the law pertaining to subject matter jurisdiction in summary ejectment cases. I began with some reservations about the continued relevance of these cases. After all, North Carolina’s entire court system was revised – and the Rules of Civil Procedure adopted– after many of these cases were decided. Justices of the peace no longer hold court, and appeal from small claims court is to district—not superior—court today. What I found striking in doing this research was actually how little has changed. The questions in the late 1800s may have used different legal terminology, but would be familiar to any small claims magistrate. One of the most common issues, for example, was whether a seller/landlord could regain possession of property subject to a rent-to-own agreement by way of summary ejectment. Another was whether a buyer by way of foreclosure could use summary ejectment to oust the former owner. What I found is that the rules governing jurisdiction in ejectment cases have remained remarkably consistent in application, although the underlying rationale for the rules has, from the beginning, been considerably more variable. This post attempts to summarize those procedural rules where they are clear. In my next post, I’ll discuss some troublesome areas in which clarity is lacking. Continue Reading
-
What Is the Role of a Foster Parent in the A/N/D Court Action?
A foster parent provides substitute care for a child who has been separated from his or her family because of abuse, neglect or dependency. G.S. 131D-10.2(9a);10A NCAC 70B.0101. When a parent, relative, guardian, or custodian is unable to care for a child, a foster parent is a critical part of a county department’s plan for arranging for the child’s immediate and temporary safety. Foster parents are likely to have relevant information that will assist a court in determining what is in the child’s best interests. Foster parents may also be interested in adopting a child who has been placed in their care. Does a foster parent have a right to participate in the court proceeding?
Continue Reading -
A/N/D, ICPC, and Out-of-State Parents: Say What?
If the juvenile court or county department intends to place a child in an abuse, neglect, and dependency (A/N/D) case with a parent who lives outside of North Carolina, does the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) apply? Continue Reading
-
Standby Me: New Legislation on Standby Guardianship
Vern and Jane are divorced and have one son, Teddy, who has severe intellectual and developmental disabilities. When Teddy turns 17 ½ years old, Vern files a petition with the clerk of superior court of Unreal County to have Teddy adjudicated incompetent and an application to be appointed as Teddy’s guardian. G.S. 35A-1105; G.S. 35A-1210. After a hearing, the clerk finds clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of Teddy’s incapacity and enters an order adjudicating Teddy incompetent. G.S. 35A-1112(d). The clerk appoints Vern as Teddy’s guardian of the person and Jane, who also filed an application to be Teddy’s guardian, as his guardian of the estate.
Continue Reading -
Imputing Income: Voluntary Unemployment is Not Enough
Beware. A child support or alimony order should never contain the word “capacity” or the words “ability to earn” unless it also contains the words “bad faith.”
Maybe that statement is a little extreme, but it is intended to make a point. Alimony and child support obligations must be determined based on actual present income. Earning capacity rather than actual income can be used only when a party is intentionally depressing actual income in deliberate disregard of a support obligation. In other words, it is not appropriate for an order to be based on what a person should be earning- or on minimum wage – rather than on what that person actually is earning unless evidence shows the party is acting in bad faith and the court actually includes that conclusion of law in the order.