Articles related to guardianship - Page 3 of 4

Britney Spears and the details of her conservatorship—the California equivalent of incompetency and guardianship in North Carolina—have recently been front page news, leading people to reach out to me with questions. While the case is remarkable, in part because of Ms. Spears’ fame and the massive amounts of wealth involved, the themes and central issues are familiar to those who handle these types of cases. Allegations of abuses of power, bitter family disputes, and pleas for autonomy and a return to normalcy, are not uncommon in incompetency and guardianship proceedings. Still, there are important lessons in Ms. Spears’ case for attorneys who handle guardianship work in North Carolina, including guardian ad litem attorneys in Chapter 35A proceedings.

READ POST "The Conservatorship of Britney Spears and a Ward’s Right to Petition for Restoration of Competency (July 7, 2021)"

I received an interesting question recently when I taught about the intersection of criminal defense and Chapter 35A incompetency. Suppose a person is adjudicated incompetent in a Chapter 35A proceeding and a guardian is appointed. Suppose that same person had been convicted of a crime requiring registration as a sex offender and compliance with the other obligations of Chapter 14, Article 27A. The person is required to register changes to their address (including providing notice to law enforcement of an intention to move out-of-state), to their academic and employment status, and to notify the State of changes to their name or online identifiers, including e-mail addresses. G.S. 14-208.7; G.S. 14-208.9. What effect does declaration of incompetency have on these registration requirements? Who is responsible for ensuring that the incompetent adult complies with these registration obligations—the adult or their guardian?

READ POST "Incompetent Wards and the Sex Offender Registry (June 16, 2021)"

A heightened level of service is required on a respondent to an incompetency proceeding in North Carolina.  G.S. 35A-1109 requires copies of the petition (SP-200) and the notice of hearing (SP-201) to be personally served on the respondent (the alleged incompetent adult).  As my colleague, Ann Anderson, discussed in an earlier post, because the use of private process servers is very limited in North Carolina, personal service is completed on the respondent by the sheriff in most cases.  Under the version of G.S. 35A-1109 in effect prior to May 4, 2020, service was not proper if the notice and petition were sent by FedEx, UPS, or regular mail or left with a family member at the respondent’s home or with a caregiver at a facility where the respondent resides. This heightened requirement of service on the respondent ensures that the respondent knows of the proceeding and knows the location, date, and time of the hearing. It reflects the significant impact an adjudication of incompetency has on a person’s rights to make decisions about his or her life and property.

Financial exploitation of an older adult is a type of elder abuse.  It occurs in many forms.  A door-to-door home repairman defrauds an older adult out of her life savings.  […]

My colleague, Sara DePasquale, and I were excited to release a new Juvenile Law Bulletin two weeks ago—Delinquency and DSS Custody without Abuse, Neglect, or Dependency: How Does that Work? We were also exhausted. While the laws that allow for courts to order juveniles into DSS custody in a delinquency proceeding are short, their implications are broad and complex. Sara’s blog announcing the bulletin, Extra! Extra! Read All About It! New Juvenile Law Bulletin – Delinquency and DSS Custody without Abuse, Neglect, or Dependency: How Does that Work?, provides some suggestions about reading the bulletin in bite-sized chunks. Now that readers have had a chance to do that, let’s focus on a few of the key points for delinquency practitioners.

• the proceeding remains a delinquency proceeding although the juvenile is in the custody of DSS;
• the only attorney who will represent a juvenile placed in DSS custody through a delinquency proceeding is the juvenile’s counsel in the delinquency matter;
• termination of probation does not automatically terminate DSS custody; and
• implementation of the Juvenile Justice Reinvestment Act (a.k.a. “raise the age”) could result in a new challenge for DSS placements.

Did you know that in a juvenile delinquency court case the juvenile may be placed in the custody of a county’s child welfare department (usually a department of social services (DSS))? A DSS placement through a delinquency action may happen in one of three ways:

• a nonsecure custody order (G.S. 7B-1902 through -1907),
• a dispositional order after the juvenile has been adjudicated delinquent (G.S. 7B-2506(1)c.), and/or
• an order appointing DSS as the juvenile’s guardian of the person (G.S. 7B-2001).

With each of these types of delinquency orders, there is not an allegation, substantiation, or adjudication that the juvenile is abused, neglected, or dependent (see my last blog post, here, discussing  delinquency as it relates to abuse, neglect, or dependency). Instead, the juvenile’s court involvement is a result of his or her alleged acts of delinquency rather than circumstances created by a parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker. Each of these three custody orders is a type of delinquency order and not an order related to a juvenile’s abuse, neglect, or dependency. However, at times, as a result of the order placing the juvenile in DSS custody, pieces of abuse, neglect, and dependency law apply in the delinquency case.

The legal implications of placing a juvenile into DSS custody and resulting foster care as part of a delinquency mat­ter are complex – so complex, that a blog post will not do. Instead, my colleague, Jacquelyn (Jacqui) Greene and I wrote a new extensive juvenile law bulletin discussing these orders and the issues that arise with each type of order. You can access the bulletin, Delinquency and DSS Custody without Abuse, Neglect, or Dependency: How Does that Work? here.

Yesterday, the application period opened for a free workshop we will be hosting September 26-27, 2019 at the School of Government in Chapel Hill.* The purpose of the workshop is to bring together stakeholders from around North Carolina to create and grow multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) to address elder abuse in their respective communities.  You can learn details about the workshop and apply here.  Only teams will be accepted to attend the workshop.  This post provides additional information to consider if you and others in your community are interested in forming a team and submitting an application.

In connection with an upcoming class on guardianship, I recently surveyed a number of clerks of superior court (judicial officials who preside over guardianship cases in NC) about common post-appointment […]

A guardian of the estate for any unemancipated minor may be appointed under G.S. Chapter 35A to receive and administer property on the minor’s behalf.  G.S. 35A-1221; G.S. 35A-1251; G.S. […]

I previously wrote about an agent’s authority to make gifts under the new North Carolina Uniform Power of Attorney Act (NCUPOAA) that went into effect in North Carolina on January 1, 2018.  There are two additional points to keep in mind if you are an agent, a third party, or a court examining the agent’s authority granted by the principal to make gifts under a POA.