In re N.B

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. NO. COA13-419 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 20 August 2013 IN RE: N.B., N.C., N.B. Robeson County Nos. 11 JT 13 15 Appeal by respondent mother from order entered 3 January 2013 by Judge Herbert L. Richardson in Robeson County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 5 August 2013. J. Hal Kinlaw, Jr., for petitioner appellee, Robeson County Department of Social Services. Keith Karlsson, for Guardian ad Litem. Joyce L. Terres, Assistant respondent appellant mother. Appellate Defender, for terminating her MARTIN, Chief Judge. Respondent mother appeals from an order parental rights to her children N.B. ( Ned ), N.C. ( Neil ) and N.B. 1 ( Nash )1. Because the trial court failed to make Pseudonyms are being used to protect the children s identities. -2sufficient findings of fact to support its conclusions of law, we reverse and remand for further findings of fact. On 19 January 2011, the Robeson County Department of Social Services ( DSS ) filed juvenile petitions alleging that mother neglected Ned, born September 2004, Neil, born August 2007, and Nash, born February 2009, by failing to provide proper care, supervision or discipline. After a hearing, the trial court adjudicated the children neglected. The trial court awarded custody of the children to DSS and authorized placement with family friends. On 20 June 2012, DSS filed separate petitions to terminate mother s parental rights. termination: DSS alleged the following grounds for failure to make reasonable progress pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(2), failure to pay reasonable cost of care pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(4), and dependency pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(6). On 3 December 2012, the trial court conducted a hearing on the termination petitions. Daniels, a foster care DSS offered the testimony of Jeneene social worker assigned to this case. Daniels testified that mother had substance abuse and mental health issues, that she signed a family service case plan but did not work on the plan, that she had a job but did not pay any -3support, and that she had visited the children only once. The trial court also admitted into evidence DSS s document entitled Time Line which set out DSS s efforts in the case. By order entered 13 January 2013, the trial court concluded that all three grounds existed to terminate mother s parental rights. The trial court further concluded that it was in the best interest of the children to terminate mother s parental rights. Mother appeals. _________________________ On appeal, mother contends that the court erred by failing to include adequate conclusions of law. In reviewing findings of fact in support court s order terminating of its We agree. a trial parental rights, this Court must determine whether the findings of fact are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, and whether those findings support the conclusions of law. In re S.N., X.Z., 194 N.C. App. 142, 146, 669 S.E.2d 55, 58 59 (2008) (internal quotation marks omitted), aff'd per curiam, 363 N.C. 368, 677 S.E.2d 455 (2009). The trial court s conclusions of law are fully reviewable de novo by the appellate court. at 146, 669 S.E.2d at 59 (internal quotation marks omitted). Id. -4N.C.G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1) provides that [i]n all actions tried upon the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury, the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon and direct the entry of the appropriate judgment. 52(a)(1) (2011). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule [T]he trial court must, through processes of logical reasoning, based on the evidentiary facts before it, find the ultimate facts essential to support the conclusions of law. In re O.W., 164 N.C. App. 699, 702, 596 S.E.2d 851, 853 (2004) (quoting In re Harton, 156 N.C. App. 655, 660, 577 S.E.2d 334, 337 (2003)). The trial court s findings must be sufficiently specific to enable an appellate court to review the decision and test the correctness of the judgment. Quick v. Quick, 305 N.C. 446, 451, 290 S.E.2d 653, 657 (1982). Here, the trial court made ten findings of fact to support its determination parental rights. that grounds existed to terminate mother s The first five findings of fact detail the names of the children, where they currently procedural history of the case. reside, and the The next three findings amount to conclusions of law, merely reciting N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(2), (4) and (6), respectively. Specifically, those findings state that mother willfully left the children in the care of the -5Robeson County Department of Social Services for more than 12 consecutive months, that the mother has not willingly paid child support for the children, and that mother is incapable of providing for the proper care and supervision of the children, such that the children are dependent and there is reasonable probability that such incapability will continue for the foreseeable future. Those findings amount to bare recitals of the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights. The only specific findings made by the trial court merely establish that the children were in DSS s care for more than twelve months, and that the social worker saw mother one time since the children were in DSS custody. not reflect any of the other The findings of fact do evidence admitted during the termination of parental rights hearing. Standing alone, these evidentiary three findings grounds for are insufficient termination alleged in the petitions. of to support parental any rights of the that DSS We conclude that the trial court s findings of fact are not sufficiently specific for this Court to evaluate the trial court s decision and test the correctness of its judgment. 657. The court See Quick, 305 N.C. at 451, 290 S.E.2d at order lacks any real specificity, findings say little or nothing about the conduct of and the mother. -6Furthermore, the trial court failed to make the required written findings at disposition regarding the relevant criteria under N.C.G.S. § 7B-1110(a). Accordingly, we hold that the findings are inadequate to support termination of mother s parental rights. We reverse the order terminating those rights, and remand for entry of a proper order supported by the necessary findings of fact. Reversed and remanded. Judges STEELMAN and DILLON concur. Report per Rule 30(e).

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.