Articles related to Incompetency - Page 4 of 4

The United Nations declared tomorrow as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day.  In North Carolina, Governor Cooper declared the time period spanning from Mother’s Day to Father’s Day Vulnerable Adult and […]

In my last post, I wrote about the office of the clerk of superior court and the clerk’s judicial authority.  I provided a basic framework for this authority and noted that that the clerk’s non-criminal authority falls into three main categories:

1. estates and trusts,
2. civil, and
3. special proceedings.

Betty is 75 years old and lives alone.   She was recently diagnosed with dementia.  Betty’s daughter, Pam, helps look after her mother and pay her monthly bills, but has noticed a decline in Betty’s memory and ability to communicate.  Upon reviewing Betty’s monthly bank statement, Pam noticed three large payments to companies Pam did not recognize.  After some investigation, Pam discovered that the drafts were the result of a telemarketer scam.  To stop future drafts, Pam went to the bank and asked them to close Betty’s account. However, the bank refused to close the account without Betty’s authorization and told Pam that she would need to obtain guardianship of Betty to be able to close the account.  Betty refused to consent to close the account as she was afraid Pam was trying to take too much control over her life.

Pam went online, did some research, and decided to seek interim guardianship of her mother so that she can quickly block the telemarketers from accessing her mom’s account.   What are some things Pam should keep in mind about interim guardianship before heading down to the courthouse?

** UPDATE: On October 4, 2016, the N.C. Court of Appeals published a decision, In re Dippel, in which the court applied G.S. 35A-1115 and G.S. 1-301.2 to hold that an aggrieved party has the right to appeal from the clerk’s order dismissing an incompetency proceeding. In that case, the court determined that the petitioner was an aggrieved party and could appeal from the clerk’s order. However, the court did not provide any analysis as to how the petitioner is aggrieved by the clerk’s order dismissing the incompetency proceeding pertaining to the respondent’s competency. The opinion therefore provides limited guidance going forward as to whether a person that is entitled to notice and is not the petitioner has a right to appeal the clerk’s order dismissing the incompetency proceeding as an aggrieved party. **

Bob and Mary have been married for 60 years.  They live at home together but recently Mary’s health has started to decline significantly.  Due to a concern over Mary’s ability to care for herself, a friend of Mary’s makes a report to the county department of social services (DSS).   After an investigation, DSS decides to file a petition to adjudicate Mary incompetent and an application to have a guardian appointed on her behalf.   DSS sends notice of the proceeding to both Bob and Jane, their daughter, as Mary’s next of kin.   After a hearing, the clerk of superior court finds that Mary is incompetent and appoints Jane as her general guardian.

Bob comes to you as his attorney and states that he wants to appeal the clerk’s decision.  Does he have standing to appeal?

After receiving a report and finding a need for protective services, the county department of social services (DSS) requests the DSS attorney file a petition with the court to adjudicate Jane Doe an incompetent adult under G.S Chapter 35A.  The matter is heard by the clerk of superior court.  DSS, as the petitioner, has the burden of proof.  Through the presentation of testimony and other evidence at the hearing, including a multidisciplinary evaluation ordered by the clerk and prepared by DSS, the clerk determines that there is clear, cogent and convincing evidence that Jane is incompetent and that her best interests will be served by appointing DSS as her guardian of the person.

What is an LME/MCO?

 It often feels like the mental health, developmental disabilities, and substance abuse (MH/DD/SA) fields and acronyms go hand in hand.  These acronyms can be confusing and intimidating to people who are not intimately familiar with this area of the law and practice.  This confusion is exacerbated by the fact that over the last few decades, there have been a number of changes to the delivery of public MH/DD/SA services in North Carolina.  One of the major changes was the creation of local management entities/managed care organizations (LME/MCOs).

The purpose of the LME/MCO is to deliver MH/DD/SA services by using primarily state and federal resources appropriated to them by state government to authorize, pay for, manage, and monitor services provided by their network of private providers.  See Mark F. Botts, Mental Health Services, in County and Municipal Government in North Carolina Ch. 40, at 683 (Frayda S. Bluestein ed., 2014).   As of today, there are eight LME/MCOs under contract with the NC Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to provide public MH/DD/SA services in North Carolina.

What is an MDE?

LME/MCOs overlap with the world of incompetency and adult guardianship proceedings filed before the clerk of superior court when it comes to the preparation and assembly of multidisciplinary evaluations (MDEs).  An MDE is an important tool in an incompetency proceeding under G.S. Chapter 35A that is used to assist the court in determining: