In Re Cim
715 S.E.2d 247
N.C. Ct. App.2011Background
- DSS became involved with respondent-father and respondent-mother in 2002 due to underage mother living with much older father and later admitted care concerns.
- In 2009, DSS investigated improper supervision after an older child was caught previously engaging in a sexual act; kinship placements followed.
- In 2009, DSS filed neglect/dependency petitions; juveniles were adjudicated dependent/neglected with DSS custody in an Oct 2009 consent order, and the father was ordered to complete assessments, attend counseling, and pay child support.
- By July 2010, the court found father did not complete required services, had few visits, and had minimal contact with the children since 2009.
- DSS filed a TPR petition in July 2010; the trial court found grounds under several subsections but ultimately terminated rights under a subset, determining best interests favored termination.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed termination of parental rights, focusing on willful abandonment as a basis and concluding the best interests supported termination; other grounds need not be addressed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there were statutory grounds to terminate father's rights | Father abandoned the juveniles willfully. | Challenge to grounds beyond abandonment; other grounds questioned. | Yes; abandonment ground established. |
| Whether termination was in the juveniles' best interests | Best interests favored termination due to lack of contact and permanency needs. | Best interests not adequately shown; potential alternatives exist. | Yes; termination was in the juveniles' best interests. |
| Effect of 2005 amendment to § 7B-1110 on best-interest review | Amendment does not require reweighing grounds cumulatively when one is upheld. | amendment requires cumulative consideration of all grounds for termination. | Amendment does not require remand; one valid ground supports termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 546 S.E.2d 169 (2001) (clear, cogent evidence standard for termination findings)
- In re Montgomery, 311 N.C. 101, 316 S.E.2d 246 (1984) (binding effect of supported findings on appeal)
- In re J.D.L., 199 N.C.App. 182, 681 S.E.2d 485 (2009) (abandonment standard and court discretion)
- In re P.L.P., 173 N.C.App. 1, 618 S.E.2d 241 (2005) (multiple grounds; if any valid ground exists, termination affirmed)
- In re Taylor, 97 N.C.App. 57, 387 S.E.2d 230 (1990) (any one of the enumerated grounds can support termination)
- In re S.C.H., 199 N.C.App. 658, 682 S.E.2d 469 (2009) (statutory factors for best interests under §7B-1110(a)(1)-(6))
- White v. White, 312 N.C. 770, 324 S.E.2d 829 (1985) (abuse of discretion standard for best interests determinations)