I hear this question frequently. Despite much effort, I have yet to find a case or a statute indicating that a custody order from another state must be registered before it can be enforced or modified. Of course, an action must be initiated to invoke the jurisdiction of our courts; something that can be done with a complaint, service of process and the normal rules of civil procedure. It is clear from UIFSA, Chapter 52C, that support orders from other states must be registered before a North Carolina court can enforce or modify the support order and UIFSA provides a clear statutory procedure for registration. There is no similar statutory requirement for child custody orders.
-
-
Pattern Jury Instructions – New, free format at the SOG
This week the School of Government announced that it has made a free, PDF version of the North Carolina Pattern Jury Instructions available on the SOG Web site. All three sections—civil, criminal, and motor vehicle—are included. Here’s the announcement, which also includes information about where to get the paper and software versions:
North Carolina Pattern Jury Instructions now available, for free, in PDF format from UNC Chapel Hill School of Government
Continue Reading -
Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency (A/N/D) Petitions: Sign and Verify
Who signs an A/N/D/ petition and whether it is properly verified determines if the court has subject matter jurisdiction over the proceeding. Without subject matter jurisdiction, the court has no authority to act and any judgment entered is void. In re T.R.P., 360 N.C. 588 (2006). Because subject matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time, even for the first time on appeal, and it cannot be waived or consented to, a county could discover weeks, months, or years after the action is commenced that all its orders in the action are void. This is problematic for many reasons.
-
Custody When A Military Parent Deploys
Since I discussed service members in my recent post about the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, it’s a good time to review North Carolina’s Uniform Deployed Parents Custody and Visitation Act, GS 50A-350, et. seq, effective since October 1, 2013. The Act is important for military families and for judges struggling to resolve custody issues when a military parent must deploy.
-
Appointed Counsel in Child Support Cases: How Far Do You Go?
An indigent parent in a child support case is entitled to appointed counsel only for contempt proceedings. But child support cases can be complex. Where should appointed counsel draw the line when representing these parents? Should they limit representation to the actual contempt proceeding or do they delve further? Is the underlying order valid? Is there a good cause to adjust the arrears or is there a change of circumstances justifying a modification of support? Judges must approve the fee applications for the time spent on cases, so counsel should take care to act within the scope of their representation.
-
Review of Evidence during Jury Deliberations
During deliberations in a motorcycle accident trial, the jury asks to view and discuss some exhibits in the jury room: a series of admitted photos depicting part of the accident scene. May the judge allow the jury to take the photos into the jury room? As with most things, it depends.
This question used to be governed by the “well-settled” rule in Nunnery v. Baucom, 135 N.C. App. 556 (1999), that “trial exhibits introduced into evidence may not be present in the jury room during deliberations unless both parties consent.” For civil cases, the “consent required” rule was replaced in October 2007 by G.S. 1-181.2, which governs both open-court and jury room evidence review. Although this statute is now a few years old, it is perhaps not as widely-known as it could be. For a recent case in point, see Redd v. Wilcohess, LLC, 745 S.E.2d 10 (N.C. App. 2013). So, here’s a review of the standards established by G.S. 1-181.2.
-
Can Probation Be Revoked in Juvenile’s Absence?
Suppose you are a North Carolina district court judge presiding over a probation revocation hearing in the case of a juvenile who was adjudicated delinquent for a serious or violent offense. Present at the hearing are the juvenile’s counsel, the juvenile’s parent(s), the prosecutor, and the juvenile court counselor. In other words, everyone is present, except for the juvenile, who received notice but failed to appear. To complicate things, the juvenile’s maximum 2-year probation term expires today. Can you proceed? And, if so, can you revoke the juvenile’s probation and commit the juvenile to a youth development center (YDC)? Surprisingly, there doesn’t appear to be a clear answer. Here’s why.
-
Access to Records in Financial Exploitation Cases
It will now be much easier for county social services agencies and law enforcement officials to investigate reports of suspected financial exploitation of disabled adults and older adults. The Administrative Office of the Courts just approved a new form (AOC-SP-630) that officials can use to ask a district court judge to issue a subpoena directing a financial institution to provide copies of the adult’s financial records. This new subpoena authority was authorized in legislation (S.L. 2014-115, s. 44) that went into effect October 1, 2014.
Continue Reading -
Servicemembers’ Civil Relief Act Applies to Family Cases Too
In January we were reminded by the North Carolina Supreme Court in In Re J.B. that:
1) We have military personnel living throughout our state, not just in districts with military facilities, and
2) The federal Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. app. sec. 501, et. seq., (SCRA) applies to all non-criminal judicial and administrative proceedings involving service personnel, including domestic and juvenile cases.
The Act contains no exception for any civil proceeding. So it covers custody, divorce, support, equitable distribution, 50B and 50C cases, abuse, neglect and dependency proceedings and termination of parental rights.
-
The Things Judges Say! Judges’ Comments in Jury Trials
In Lacey v. Kirk, (COA14-688; Dec. 31, 2014), the Court of Appeals considered whether a judge’s statements in the jury’s presence entitled defendant to a new trial. Defendant took issue with several things the judge said while defendant testified, including instructing her to “tell the truth” when she was evasive; that she had “a problem” if she couldn’t prove a point without hearsay; and to “answer the question first” before explaining. The court held that—considered cumulatively and in context—these comments were an attempt to aid the flow of evidence and were not prejudicial. Also, the judge’s instructions to counsel to move faster and avoid repetition “exhibited a certain degree of impatience” but were “meted out” to both sides and were appropriate to preserve court time. Lacey is a fresh example our courts’ basic analysis of judge statements in front of a jury: Neutrality is paramount, but context and cumulative impact determine whether questionable remarks taint a party’s case.