In re J.C.B., 233 N.C. App. 641

DSS filed petitions alleging R.R.N. was sexually abused by respondent-father during an overnight visit on Aug. 18, 2012; J.C.B., C.R.R., and H.F.R. were present in the home that night.
On Nov. 30, 2012, DSS filed neglect petitions for J.C.B., C.R.R., and H.F.R., alleging they lived in an environment injurious to their welfare because another juvenile in the home (R.R.N.) had been sexually abused.
DSS also alleged dependency for C.R.R. and H.F.R.; respondents (their aunts/uncles) had shared custody with the maternal grandmother and planned for the children to move to the grandmother’s home.
Adjudicatory hearings occurred in March 2013; the trial court found respondent-father abused R.R.N. and that J.C.B., C.R.R., and H.F.R. resided in the home at the time, and on July 22, 2013 adjudicated those three juveniles neglected.
The trial court left custody of J.C.B. with respondents, granted custody of C.R.R. and H.F.R. to the maternal grandmother, ordered no unsupervised contact between respondent-father and C.R.R./H.F.R., and issued an order initiating a Chapter 50 civil custody action as to C.R.R. and H.F.R.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether respondent-father may appeal the adjudication that R.R.N. was abused	DSS: finding of abuse supported by evidence	Father: trial court lacked adequate findings to support sexual-offense adjudication	Not reached on merits — father lacks statutory standing to appeal the abuse adjudication
Whether findings support adjudication that J.C.B., C.R.R., and H.F.R. were neglected	DSS: children lived in a home where another juvenile was abused, creating substantial risk	Respondents: court made virtually no findings tying abuse to risk to these children	Reversed — findings insufficient to support neglect adjudications
Whether the trial court erred by transferring C.R.R. and H.F.R. cases to Chapter 50 civil custody	Mother: transfer/civil custody order was erroneous	DSS: transfer appropriate under circumstances	Not reviewed — mother failed to file timely notice of appeal; petition for certiorari denied
Whether certiorari should cure mother’s late appeal of the civil custody order	Mother: late notice due to counsel’s failure; she intended to appeal	DSS: procedural rules require timely notice; record lacks clear intent to appeal that order	Denied — cannot infer intent to appeal from the timely notice filed; dismissal of that argument

In re T.H.T., 185 N.C. App. 337 (discussing standard of appellate review in neglect adjudications)
In re Gleisner, 141 N.C. App. 475 (same; legal framework for findings and conclusions)
In re N.G., 186 N.C. App. 1 (prior abuse alone insufficient to adjudicate neglect)
In re C.M., 198 N.C. App. 53 (affirming neglect where prior abuse plus other risk factors existed)
In re A.S., 190 N.C. App. 679 (affirming neglect based on intentional harm and related circumstances)
In re P.M., 169 N.C. App. 423 (affirming neglect where parent lacked acceptance of responsibility)
In re Safriet, 112 N.C. App. 747 (definition of substantial risk and necessity of supporting findings)
In re I.T.P-L., 194 N.C. App. 453 (timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional; counsel’s failure may justify certiorari)
In re I.S., 170 N.C. App. 78 (certiorari granted where intent to appeal could be fairly inferred)