Supreme Court Opinions
Signup For Email Notification
Court of Appeals Opinions
Headnote Index for 2021
Case Summaries/Headnotes
Mandate: 16 September 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 27 August 2021
Case Title / Description
Whether the trial court erred in adjudicating grounds to terminate respondent's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1).
Termination of parental rights; whether the termination petition was filed by an individual or entity with standing; whether the trial court improperly relied solely on the termination petition when determining grounds existed to terminate respondent's parental rights; whether the trial court's findings of fact supported its conclusion that grounds for termination existed under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3), (6).
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction over a petition to terminate parental rights where an order had previously been entered in another county establishing petitioner's guardianship of the child; whether the trial court failed to exercise its discretion to appoint the children a guardian ad litem under N.C.G.S. 7B-1108(c).
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to enter termination order; whether the trial court operated under a misapprehension of law that post-petition facts were irrelevant and unnecessary in terminating parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2).
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2), (5)-(7); no-merit review pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 3.1(e).
Appeal from order terminating respondent's parental rights; termination of respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1), neglect.
Appeal from order terminating respondent's parental rights; termination of respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2); willful failure to make reasonable progress.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3), (6); no-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Order eliminating reunification from the children's permanent plan and subsequent order terminating father's parental rights for failure to make reasonable progress to correct the conditions which led to the removal of the children, pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2), are affirmed where competent evidence supports the findings of fact and the findings support the conclusions of law.
Compliance with N.C.G.S. 7B-1104(2); appeal from order terminating respondents' parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(4), (7).
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court made sufficient findings to eliminate reunification from the permanent plan; whether DSS undertook reasonable efforts toward reunification; whether the evidence and the trial court's findings show respondent-mother willfully failed to pay a reasonable portion of the children's cost of care under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(3).
Order terminating parental rights; whether the trial court's findings support its conclusion that grounds existed to terminate respondent's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2); whether the trial court complied with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Mandate: 2 September 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 13 August 2021
Case Title / Description
Whether a criminal defendant forfeits their Fifth Amendment right to silence when they give pretrial notice of an affirmative defense under N.C.G.S. 15A-905(c)(1); whether the State is permitted to elicit testimony on a defendant's silence during its case-in-chief for the purposes of impeachment based solely on the defendant's pretrial notice of an affirmative defense.
When a cause of action accrues for reformation of a deed of trust based on mutual mistake and whether the parties intended a deed of trust to secure a promissory note.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Property Tax Commission's conclusion that the County met its shifted burden of proving that its tax appraisal methodologies produced true values for the taxpayer's business personal property.
Whether the North Carolina Railroad Company is an agency or subdivision of the North Carolina government as that term is defined in the Public Records Act, N.C.G.S. 132-1.
Whether reasonable suspicion--necessary to justify a warrantless Terry search of defendant and the area of his vehicle under his direct control--existed where the responding officer testified that, during a traffic stop in a high-crime area at night for a non-moving violation, defendant (1) held his hands outside the driver's window as officers approached his vehicle, (2) appeared nervous in his interactions with the officer, (3) was 'blading' his body when retrieving documentation from the center console, and (4) possessed a criminal record with violent crime and weapons charges.
Whether the Financial Responsibility Act permits a North Carolina resident who entered into an insurance contract in North Carolina to stack her own underinsured motorist coverage limits with the underinsured motorist coverage limits provided to the tortfeasor under an out-of-state insurance policy.
Whether the defendant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on any of the claims asserted in his post-conviction motion for appropriate relief that were summarily dismissed by the trial court. Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant's other claims after conducting a limited evidentiary hearing on certain claims and a full evidentiary hearing on other claims.
Whether State employees are entitled to sovereign immunity against claims of negligence, gross negligence, and wrongful death brought against them in their individual capacities, and whether complaint stated cause of action.
Whether an out-of-state defendant's phone calls to the cell phone of a person he had no reason to know was physically present in North Carolina establish the minimum contacts sufficient to vest jurisdiction over defendant in North Carolina courts.
Failure to provide name of co-conspirator in jury instructions; plain error review of jury instructions; overwhelming evidence to support guilt without naming co-conspirator in jury instructions.
Review of Court of Appeals' decision addressing judgment entered after a bench trial pursuant to N.C.G.S. 1A-1, Rule 52(a)(1).
Defendant appeals from a judgment based on the trial court's alleged insertion of judicial opinion during its jury instructions which defendant argues prejudiced the jury enough to result in a new trial.
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE LISTED OPINIONS, THE COURT CONSIDERED 209 OTHER MATTERS. THE OTHER MATTERS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, NOTICES OF APPEALS BASED UPON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN DEATH CASES, DEATH STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI IN OTHER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF SUPERSEDEAS, MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF, AND DIRECT APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION AND THE UTILITIES COMMISSION. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERS MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND MOTIONS TO AMEND ON A DAILY BASIS. SUCH "ROUTINE" MOTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PETITION LIST PUBLISHED BY THE COURT EACH MONTH.
Mandate: 8 July 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 18 June 2021
Case Title / Description
Termination of parental rights; no-merit brief.
Appeal from an order terminating respondent's parental rights; whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to sua sponte conduct an inquiry into whether respondent should be appointed a guardian ad litem under Rule 17 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure; whether the evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support its conclusion that respondent's parental rights should be terminated pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1) (2019); whether the trial court abused its discretion in concluding that it was in the children's best interests that respondent's parental rights be terminated.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7) on the ground of willful abandonment.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining that termination of respondents' parental rights was in the children's best interests.
Termination of parental rights; ineffective assistance of counsel.
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court erred in concluding that respondent's parental rights were subject to termination under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(3) (2019).
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing respondent-father's counsel to withdraw; whether the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that terminating respondent-mother's parental rights would be in the best interests of the juveniles.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2); no-merit review.
Mandate: 1 July 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 11 June 2021
Case Title / Description
Whether the prosecutor's improper commentary during the State's closing arguments highlighting defendant's choice to plead not guilty prejudiced defendant; whether the Court of Appeals erred in ordering a new trial for defendant.
Whether an individual may bring a claim under the North Carolina Constitution for a school board's deliberate indifference to continual student harassment.
Whether the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 12 bar a lawsuit for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage based upon defendants' petitioning activity.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-27(a)(3) from an order and opinion on defendants' Rule 12(b)(2) and Rule 12(b)(3) motions to dismiss.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-27(a)(3) from an order and opinion on Window World defendants' motions to compel and motion to strike plaintiffs' objections to third-party subpoenas, from an order and opinion on Window World, Inc.'s motion to compel net worth information, from an order and opinion on Window World defendants' motion for reconsideration, and from an order and opinion on plaintiffs' privilege motions, Window World defendants' motion to strike, and the parties' Rule 53(g) exceptions to the special master's report.
Whether the trial court properly granted defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint.
Order of censure for conduct that undermines public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary; for allowing personal relationships to influence official judgment and conduct; for abuse of the prestige of judicial office; for improper ex parte communications; and for failure to diligently discharge judicial duties in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Whether a gaming enterprise constitutes an unlawful sweepstakes in violation of N.C.G.S 14-306.4.
Sufficiency of the evidence to show that starvation proximately caused the decedent's death; whether a separate showing of malice is necessary to support a conviction for first-degree murder on the basis of starvation; and whether there was a fatal variance between an indictment charging negligent child abuse and the evidence upon which defendant's conviction rested.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the charge of possession with intent to sell or deliver methamphetamine based upon the sufficiency of the evidence offered at trial.
Impermissible vouching regarding a child's credibility/believability; continued use of the word 'disclose' constituting impermissible vouching; admission of domestic violence evidence; plain error.
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly held that the trial court did not commit reversible error by finding by clear and convincing evidence that respondent acted inconsistently with his constitutionally protected status as a parent.
Respondent-parents appeal the termination of their parental rights.
Defendant petitions for review of the Court of Appeals decision holding that there was no error in his conviction of possession of a firearm by a felon arguing that the trial court failed to intervene ex mero motu to the State's misstatements during closing arguments.
Defendant was charged with speeding under N.C.G.S. 20-141(j1). Defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals arguing his waiver of his right to a jury trial was not knowing and voluntary under N.C.G.S. 15A-1201. Defendant appeals to this Court arguing the Court of Appeals erred when it held that he was not prejudiced by the trial court's error and that his waiver was knowing and voluntary.
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE LISTED OPINIONS, THE COURT CONSIDERED 125 OTHER MATTERS. THE OTHER MATTERS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, NOTICES OF APPEALS BASED UPON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN DEATH CASES, DEATH STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI IN OTHER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF SUPERSEDEAS, MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF, AND DIRECT APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION AND THE UTILITIES COMMISSION. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERS MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND MOTIONS TO AMEND ON A DAILY BASIS. SUCH "ROUTINE" MOTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PETITION LIST PUBLISHED BY THE COURT EACH MONTH.
Mandate: 13 May 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 23 April 2021
Case Title / Description
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); whether the trial court erred in denying respondent's counsel's motion to continue; whether the trial court erred in adjudicating the existence of neglect as a ground for termination.
Appeal from separate orders terminating respondent-father's parental rights to two children; whether the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to conduct termination proceedings related to respondent-father's daughter while respondent-father appealed the adjudication and disposition orders in the underlying juvenile case; review of the no-merit brief and respondent-father's pro se arguments concerning the termination of respondent-father's parental rights to his son; termination pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(3); ineffective assistance of counsel.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2); No-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2); no-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2) (2019); No-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Termination of parental rights; willful failure to make reasonable progress to correct conditions leading to the juvenile's removal from the home; reasonableness of respondent's progress.
Appeal from orders terminating respondents' parental rights; termination of respondents' parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); neglect; whether respondent-father received ineffective assistance of counsel.
Termination of parental rights; permanency planning; elimination of reunification from the permanent plan; failure to make findings required by N.C.G.S. 7B-906.2(d).
Termination of parental rights; whether the district court's findings of fact supported the termination of respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7).
Termination of parental rights; whether findings of fact were sufficient to support a ground for termination of parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2), failure to make reasonable progress; and whether the trial court abused its discretion by determining termination of parental rights was in the children's best interests.
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence; whether the trial court complied with the requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1) on the grounds that there was a likelihood of future neglect.
Termination of parental rights; willful failure to make reasonable progress to correct the conditions which led to the children's removal from the home; trial court must consider parent's progress up to the date of the termination hearing; evidence did not show parent's failure to correct conditions was solely due to poverty.
Appeal from an order adjudicating juvenile a neglected and dependent juvenile; whether the trial court erred in failing to make reunification a part of the juvenile's permanent plan; appeal from an order terminating respondent-mother's parental rights based on neglect.
Mandate: 6 May 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 16 April 2021
Case Title / Description
Whether a landlord had a duty to protect a third party from harm caused by his tenants' dog.
Appeal based on a dissent seeking review of the trial court's review and permanency planning order which eliminated reunification.
Order of suspension for improperly serving as executor for non-relatives' estates, collecting substantial fees for such service, and failing to properly report the income, in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Whether the evidence showed that defendant committed both assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury and assault by strangulation.
Whether the trial court violated defendant's due process rights when it failed to hold a second hearing to examine his competency to proceed immediately prior to trial.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that two purchasers, the first of whom purchased a tract of real property at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale and the second of whom purchased the property from the initial purchaser, were not good faith purchasers for value.
Termination of parental rights; whether the district court made adequate findings of fact to support a termination of respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2); whether the district court properly determined that termination of respondent-parents' parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1110(a) was in the best interests of the children.
In armed robbery case where co-defendants sought to sever trial, Court of Appeals erred by applying standard of error preservation for severance of offenses rather than severance of defendants.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred by not applying the standard for determining the existence of and showing of prejudice for a violation of the defendant's rights under the Constitution of the United States.
Defendant appeals the Court of Appeals' decision finding the trial court did not err in denying defendant's request for an instruction on voluntary intoxication.
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE LISTED OPINIONS, THE COURT CONSIDERED 112 OTHER MATTERS. THE OTHER MATTERS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, NOTICES OF APPEALS BASED UPON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN DEATH CASES, DEATH STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI IN OTHER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF SUPERSEDEAS, MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF, AND DIRECT APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION AND THE UTILITIES COMMISSION. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERS MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND MOTIONS TO AMEND ON A DAILY BASIS. SUCH "ROUTINE" MOTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PETITION LIST PUBLISHED BY THE COURT EACH MONTH.
Mandate: 8 April 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 19 March 2021
Case Title / Description
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court made adequate findings of fact to support a termination of respondent-mother's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1).
Termination of parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1), (2), (9); whether the trial court's failure to hold a termination hearing within the timing requirements of N.C.G.S. 7B-1109 constitutes reversible error.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7) (2019). No-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1), (3) (2019). No-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court made adequate findings of fact to support a termination of respondent-mother's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2).
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); incarceration as an indicator of future neglect.
Denial of motion to continue; whether the trial court erred by eliminating reunification as a permanent plan; whether the trial court erred in determining grounds existed to terminate parental rights related to neglect pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); whether the trial court abused its discretion by concluding that terminating respondent's parental rights was in the best interests of the juveniles.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(3); No-merit review.
Whether the trial court erred in adjudicating grounds to terminate respondent's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7); whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining termination of respondent's parental rights was in the children's best interests; whether respondent received ineffective assistance of counsel.
Whether the trial court erred in adjudicating grounds to terminate respondent's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7); whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining termination of respondent's parental rights was in the children's best interests; whether respondent received ineffective assistance of counsel.
Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2) on the grounds of respondent-mother willfully leaving the juveniles in foster care or placement outside the home for more than twelve months without showing to the satisfaction of the court that she had made reasonable progress under the circumstances in correcting those conditions which led to the juveniles' removal.
Private termination; appeal from an order terminating respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(7) (2019); whether the trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence; whether the trial court's findings of fact support its conclusion of law that grounds existed to terminate respondent-father's parental rights on the basis of willful abandonment.
Mandate: 1 April 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 12 March 2021
Case Title / Description
Appeal from order terminating respondent-mother's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1), (2), (3), (6), and (7).
Whether a series of local acts provided the City of Concord with the authority to levy water and wastewater connection fees for services to be furnished; whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment for the City of Concord.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-27(a)(3) from an order and opinion on plaintiffs' verified motion for order to show cause and second motion for sanctions and contempt and an order and opinion on plaintiffs' petition for reasonable expenses resulting from plaintiffs' second motion for sanctions.
Whether the Court of Appeals employed the proper standard of review; whether plaintiff established disability; whether plaintiff was capable of suitable employment.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing and remanding the opinion and award of the North Carolina Industrial Commission dismissing plaintiff's workers' compensation claim with prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Whether the Court of Appeals' majority erred in affirming the trial court's order ruling that the record contained no evidence of the Arbitration Agreement between the parties; whether the Court of Appeals' majority erred in affirming the trial court's order ruling that the Admission Agreement and the Arbitration Agreement were in conflict with each other.
Contempt of court; whether the trial court abused its discretion in imposing conditions of probation it deemed reasonably necessary for defendant's rehabilitation.
Notice requirement for accrual of statute of limitations period for breach of contract; applicability of statute of limitations to declaratory judgment actions; whether nominal damages supported punitive damages and claims for breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud; notice and hearing requirements prior to judicial dissolution; derivative claims.
Whether the record contained sufficient evidence that defendant acted with deceit and an intent to defraud to support her conviction for felonious obstruction of justice.
Appeal from an order terminating respondent-father's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1) and (7) (2019); whether the evidence supports the trial court's findings of fact and whether the findings of fact support its conclusions of law that respondent-father's parental rights were subject to termination on the basis of both grounds for termination.
Whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction under N.C.G.S. 7B-1101 in a termination of parental rights proceeding.
Whether the trial court erred in excluding testimony relevant to defendants' claim that they acted in self-defense.
Whether a notice of lease termination provided to a tenant of public housing by a public housing authority stated specific grounds for termination as required by 24 C.F.R. 966.4(l)(3)(ii) (2019).
Defendant appeals the Court of Appeals' opinion affirming the trial court's sex offender registration order under N.C.G.S. 14-202(l) arguing that the evidence failed to show he was a 'danger to the community.'
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE LISTED OPINIONS, THE COURT CONSIDERED 315 OTHER MATTERS. THE OTHER MATTERS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, NOTICES OF APPEALS BASED UPON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN DEATH CASES, DEATH STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI IN OTHER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF SUPERSEDEAS, MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF, AND DIRECT APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION AND THE UTILITIES COMMISSION. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERS MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND MOTIONS TO AMEND ON A DAILY BASIS. SUCH "ROUTINE" MOTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PETITION LIST PUBLISHED BY THE COURT EACH MONTH.
Mandate: 25 February 2021
Zip File of Published Opinions
Headnote Index: 5 February 2021
Case Title / Description
Whether a statute which created a private right of action confers standing to sue for that statutory 'injury.'
Termination of parental rights; whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining termination was in the juvenile's best interests.
Termination of parental rights; neglect under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); probability of future neglect; sufficiency of findings.
Appeal from an order terminating respondent's parental rights; termination of respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1), (4), (6); neglect; willful failure to pay child support; dependency.
Trial court did not err by permitting respondent's guardian ad litem, an attorney, to assist respondent's appointed attorney at trial by conducting some examinations and performing similar acts.
Termination of parental rights; no-merit review.
IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE LISTED OPINIONS, THE COURT CONSIDERED 143 OTHER MATTERS. THE OTHER MATTERS MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, NOTICES OF APPEALS BASED UPON CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI IN DEATH CASES, DEATH STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI IN OTHER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF SUPERSEDEAS, MOTIONS FOR TEMPORARY STAYS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS, PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS, MOTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF, AND DIRECT APPEALS FROM DECISIONS OF THE JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION AND THE UTILITIES COMMISSION. THE COURT ALSO CONSIDERS MOTIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND MOTIONS TO AMEND ON A DAILY BASIS. SUCH "ROUTINE" MOTIONS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE PETITION LIST PUBLISHED BY THE COURT EACH MONTH.