Young, In re
| Citation | 346 N.C. 244, 485 S.E.2d 612 |
| Case Date | August 06, 1992 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina |
Page 612
Page 614
[346 N.C. 246] David G. Crockett Law Offices by Jerry D. Rhoades, Jr., Southern Pines, guardian ad litem.
Lapping & Lapping by Stephan Lapping, Carthage, for petitioner-appellee James Daniel Young.
Brown & Robbins, L.L.P. by Carol M. White, Pinehurst, for respondent-appellant Dawn Hayward.
FRYE, Justice.
This case involves proceedings terminating parental rights based on neglect and abandonment. We conclude that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the grounds for termination of the mother's parental rights. Accordingly, we must reverse the Court of Appeals and remand for further proceedings.
The evidence presented at trial tended to show the following facts and circumstances. Petitioner, James Daniel Young, and respondent, Dawn Christian Hayward, are the parents of Eric James Miguel Young (Eric). Eric was born on 6 August 1992. Respondent had previously given birth to a child that she gave up for adoption. Petitioner and respondent never married but lived together for approximately two months following Eric's birth. After petitioner moved out, Eric stayed with respondent in her apartment in Aberdeen, North Carolina, and later in a house in Pinebluff, North Carolina.
On 17 August 1993, respondent gave physical custody of Eric to Kay Harris, petitioner's sister. On 22 September 1993, petitioner went to Harris' home and took custody of Eric. Jamie Bransford (Bransford), petitioner, and various family members of petitioner cared for Eric until February 1994 when petitioner gave physical custody of Eric to Alvina Street (Street).
In October 1993, respondent was diagnosed with breast cancer requiring surgery, radiation treatment, and chemotherapy.
In May 1994, Street told respondent that Eric was living with her, and respondent began to visit Eric. On 13 May 1994, upon a motion filed by Street, an ex parte temporary custody order was filed granting custody of Eric to Street and her husband. An order was filed continuing the temporary custody order and granting visitation to respondent on 2 June 1994.
On 6 May 1994, petitioner filed a petition for termination of respondent's parental rights on the basis that respondent neglected [346 N.C. 247] and abandoned Eric. After a trial in District Court, Moore County, Judge Michael E. Beale entered an adjudication order on 10 April 1995 nunc pro tunc 1 November 1994, finding grounds to terminate respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.32(2) and (8) for neglect and abandonment. Judge Beale entered a disposition order on 10 April 1995 nunc pro tunc 3 November 1994, finding that it was in the best interest of the child to terminate respondent's parental rights. In addition, the trial court concluded that petitioner's parental rights should be terminated and that a termination proceeding would be instituted if petitioner did not voluntarily release his rights by 5:00 p.m. on 4 November 1994. Petitioner filed a stipulation for termination of his parental rights on 4 November 1994.
Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals, in a divided panel, affirmed the trial court's termination of respondent's parental rights. Respondent appealed to this Court based on Judge Wynn's dissent, and this Court allowed her petition for discretionary review as to additional issues.
Respondent makes three arguments on appeal. After careful review and consideration of the record, transcript, briefs, and oral arguments of counsel, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.
The termination of parental rights statute provides for a two-stage termination proceeding: N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.30 governs the adjudication stage, and N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.31 governs the disposition stage. In re Montgomery, 311 N.C. 101, 110, 316 S.E.2d 246, 252 (1984). At the adjudication stage, the party petitioning for the termination must show by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that grounds authorizing the termination of parental rights exist. N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.30(d), (e) (1995). The grounds for terminating parental rights are listed in
Page 615
N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.32. Upon determining that one or more of the grounds for terminating parental rights exist, the court moves to the disposition stage to determine whether it is in the best interests of the child to terminate the parental rights. N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.31 (1995).In her first argument, respondent contends that the finding of neglect or the probability of its repetition at the time of the termination proceeding was not based on clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. We agree.
N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.32 lists neglect as one of the grounds for terminating parental rights, and provides in pertinent part:
[346 N.C. 248] The court may terminate the parental rights upon a finding of one or more of the following:
....
(2) The parent has abused or neglected the child. The child shall be deemed to be ... neglected if the court finds the child to be ... a neglected child within the meaning of G.S. 7A-517(21).
N.C.G.S. § 7A-289.32(2) (1995). N.C.G.S. § 7A-517(21) defines neglect in pertinent part as follows:
Neglected juvenile.--A juvenile who does not receive proper care, supervision, or discipline from the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker; or who has been abandoned; or who is not provided necessary medical care; or who is not provided necessary remedial care; or who lives in an environment injurious to the juvenile's welfare; or who has been placed for care or adoption in violation of law.
N.C.G.S. § 7A-517(21) (1995).
A finding of neglect sufficient to terminate parental rights must be based on evidence showing neglect at the time of the termination proceeding. In re Ballard, 311 N.C. 708, 716, 319 S.E.2d 227, 232 (1984).
During a proceeding to terminate parental rights, the trial court must admit and consider evidence, find facts, make conclusions and resolve the ultimate issue of whether neglect authorizing termination of parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7A-289.32(2) and 7A-517(21) is present at that time. N.C.G.S. 7A-289.30(d). The petitioner seeking termination bears the burden of showing by clear, cogent and convincing evidence that such neglect exists at the time of the termination proceeding. N.C.G.S. 7A-289.30(e).
In re Ballard, 311 N.C. at 716, 319 S.E.2d at 232. (citations omitted) (emphasis added). Termination of parental rights for neglect may not be based...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re K.J.L., No. COA08-284-2.
...sufficient to terminate parental rights must be based on evidence showing neglect at the time of the termination proceeding." In re Young, 346 N.C. 244, 248, 485 S.E.2d 612, 615 (1997). However, "a prior adjudication of neglect may be admitted and considered by the trial court in ruling upo......
-
In re J.T.C., No. COA19-252
...whether it is in the best interests of the child to terminate the parental rights." Id. at 471, 619 S.E.2d at 548 (quoting In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 247, 485 S.E.2d 612, 615 (1997) ). "We review whether the trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear and convincing evidence and ......
-
In re J.A.J., 269A21
...a willful determination to forego all parental duties and relinquish all parental claims to the child." Id. (quoting In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 251, 485 S.E.2d 612 (1997) ). We have noted that abandonment is evident when a parent "withholds his presence, his love, his care, the opportunity......
-
In re G.G.M., Nos. 248A20
...a willful determination to forego all parental duties and relinquish 855 S.E.2d 482 all parental claims to the child." In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 251, 485 S.E.2d 612 (1997) (quoting In re Adoption of Searle , 82 N.C. App. 273, 275, 346 S.E.2d 511 (1986) ). "[I]f a parent withholds his pres......
-
In re K.J.L., No. COA08-284-2.
...sufficient to terminate parental rights must be based on evidence showing neglect at the time of the termination proceeding." In re Young, 346 N.C. 244, 248, 485 S.E.2d 612, 615 (1997). However, "a prior adjudication of neglect may be admitted and considered by the trial court in ruling upo......
-
In re J.T.C., No. COA19-252
...whether it is in the best interests of the child to terminate the parental rights." Id. at 471, 619 S.E.2d at 548 (quoting In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 247, 485 S.E.2d 612, 615 (1997) ). "We review whether the trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear and convincing evidence and ......
-
In re G.G.M., Nos. 248A20
...a willful determination to forego all parental duties and relinquish 855 S.E.2d 482 all parental claims to the child." In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 251, 485 S.E.2d 612 (1997) (quoting In re Adoption of Searle , 82 N.C. App. 273, 275, 346 S.E.2d 511 (1986) ). "[I]f a parent withholds his pres......
-
In re B.R.L., 460A20
...which manifests a willful determination to forego all parental duties and relinquish all parental claims to the child." In re Young , 346 N.C. 244, 251, 485 S.E.2d 612 (1997) (quoting In re Adoption of Searle , 82 N.C. App. 273, 275, 346 S.E.2d 511 (1986) ). "To find that a parent has willf......