In re: N.X.A., B.R.S.A-D.
254 N.C. App. 670
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In April 2014 Wilkes County DSS filed verified juvenile petitions alleging three children were neglected/dependent after mother’s arrest and discovery of methamphetamine lab conditions; petitions were verified by attorney Paul W. Freeman on DSS’s behalf.
- District Court adjudicated the children neglected and placed them in DSS custody in July 2014; DSS later filed petitions to terminate parental rights in January 2016.
- On 26 October 2016 the trial court terminated mother’s and father’s parental rights; father appealed and mother sought certiorari to the Court of Appeals.
- Respondents argued the trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the initial petitions were not properly verified (used language “upon information and belief”).
- Mother also challenged termination grounds, especially under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(3) for willful failure to pay a reasonable portion of the cost of care while the children were in DSS custody.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: (1) verification by Freeman, as a State agent "acquainted with the facts," satisfied Rule 11(d) and conferred jurisdiction; (2) termination was proper on the nonsupport ground because findings showed mother had the ability to pay some amount but paid nothing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DSS) | Defendant's Argument (Respondents) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction via petition verification | Verification by DSS attorney/agent (Freeman) who was acquainted with the facts satisfies statutory/Rule 11(d) requirement | Verification insufficient because petitions used "upon information and belief," lacking personal knowledge required by Rule 11(b)/(c) | Held: Freeman was a State agent "acquainted with the facts"; verification under Rule 11(d) was sufficient to vest jurisdiction |
| Termination for nonsupport under § 7B-1111(a)(3) | Mother was financially able to pay some reasonable portion (income and tax refunds) but willfully paid nothing | Mother argued trial court failed to make specific finding of ability to pay a "reasonable portion" | Held: Findings that mother had income and received tax refunds but paid no support established ability to pay some amount greater than zero; termination on nonsupport ground affirmed |
| Need to reach alternative termination grounds | DSS: one valid ground is sufficient to affirm termination | Mother challenged multiple grounds (neglect, failure to correct circumstances) | Held: Because one statutory ground (nonsupport) is supported, court need not address other grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- In re T.R.P., 360 N.C. 588 (2006) (verified petition requirement and jurisdictional consequences if verification lacking)
- In re Ballard, 311 N.C. 708 (1984) (parental ability to pay is essential to nonsupport termination)
- In re Huff, 140 N.C. App. 288 (2000) (trial court must find parent could pay some amount greater than paid; no specific dollar required)
- Vaughn v. N.C. Dep't of Human Res., 296 N.C. 683 (1979) (county director of social services as agent of state agency for certain functions)
- McKoy v. McKoy, 202 N.C. App. 509 (2010) (standard of review for subject-matter jurisdiction questions)
- Gaskill v. State ex rel. Cobey, 109 N.C. App. 656 (1993) (requirements for attorney verification and reasons affidavit not made by party)