223 N.C. App. 413
N.C. Ct. App.2012Background
- DSS filed a petition in May 2008 alleging Hailey (H.J.A.) was a dependent juvenile and gained nonsecure custody the same day; mother was a juvenile in DSS custody.
- Hailey and mother were placed together in a maternity home; July 1, 2008 order adjudicated Hailey dependent with custody in DSS.
- In 2009, Tracy (T.M.A.) was born; DSS filed a petition alleging Tracy was dependent; paternity not established at adjudication.
- Permanency hearing on January 6, 2011: paternity for Hailey established, for Tracy not; court adopted a concurrent plan and ordered DSS to cease reunification efforts; mother preserved rights January 12, 2011.
- DSS filed petitions in April and August 2011 to terminate mother’s parental rights on grounds of neglect, willful failure to progress, and failure to pay costs; trial court terminated rights on February 7, 2012 and found best interests favored termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the §7B-907 findings sufficient to cease reunification? | Mother argues findings are insufficient. | DSS contends findings support cessation of reunification. | Findings insufficient; remand for proper §7B-907 findings. |
| Do the termination findings have proper factual basis to support termination? | Mother contends termination findings lack adequate reasoning. | DSS asserts evidence supports termination if proper findings are made. | Remand required due to insufficient §7B-907 findings; termination order unsettled. |
| Did the court distinguish appropriately between Hailey and Tracy’s situations in its order? | Mother alleges ambiguity from a single form order applying to both parents. | DSS argues the court’s intent was clear though jointly referencing both. | Order’s ambiguity requires remand for per-parent specific findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re J.S., 165 N.C. App. 509 (2004) (requires specific findings under §7B-907)
- In re Harton, 156 N.C. App. 655 (2003) (necessity of factual findings to support conclusions)
- In re O.W., 164 N.C. App. 699 (2004) (ultimate facts must be found from evidentiary facts)
- In re Ledbetter, 158 N.C. App. 281 (2003) (explanation that mere testimony recitals do not constitute findings)
- In re A.S., 190 N.C. App. 679 (2010) (references to relying on reports must be accompanied by specific findings)
- In re Anderson, 151 N.C. App. 94 (2002) (distinguishing evidentiary vs. ultimate facts)
- In re J.M.D., N.C. App. _, 708 S.E.2d 167 (2011) (remand when §7B-907 findings are incomplete)