When children are removed from their home through a court order in an abuse, neglect, or dependency (A/N/D) action, a county department of social services (DSS) is required to provide reasonable efforts for reunification. See G.S. 7B-507(a)(2); 7B-903(a3). “Reasonable efforts” are defined in part as “[t]he diligent use of preventive or reunification services by a department of social services when a juvenile’s remaining at home or returning home is consistent with achieving a safe, permanent home for the juvenile within a reasonable period of time” G.S. 7B-101(18). “Return home or reunificati ..read more

Session Law 2024-17 contains several changes to delinquency law and new penalties for soliciting a minor to commit an offense. I covered the changes related to juvenile jurisdiction and the transfer process in last month’s blog. This blog explains the remaining changes. They include modifications to the timelines for secure custody hearings and for a victim or a complainant to request prosecutor review of a decision not to file a petition, school notification of the filing of a felony delinquency petition, restitution as a dispositional alternative, and the crime of soliciting a minor to comm ..read more

In North Carolina, a juvenile who is the subject of an abuse, neglect, or dependency petition may be placed in the custody of a Department of Social Services (DSS). When DSS has a court order of custody, it places a child outside of the child’s home, often in a licensed foster home or in the home of a relative or other placement provider. Here at the School of Government (SOG), we are often asked whether North Carolina law authorizes foster parents (or the child’s placement providers) to consent to health services for the children in DSS custody who are placed in providers’ homes. Spoiler: th ..read more

Imagine a case involving a juvenile who lives in North Carolina and is in secure custody because of a charge of an act of delinquency in New York comes across your desk. You look to the Juvenile Code to read the statute that governs interstate issues. You find Article 40 of Chapter 7B, “Interstate Compact for Juveniles.” But, after reading Article 40, you realize that there is no statutory guidance regarding the actual procedure in the case.  Where do you turn? The law regarding interstate matters in juvenile justice cases is perhaps the best kept secret in juvenile law. The actual subst ..read more

One of the central differences between delinquency matters and criminal matters is that juvenile records are not subject to public inspection. This includes juvenile court records (G.S. 7B-3000(b)); all law enforcement records and files concerning juveniles, unless jurisdiction has been transferred to superior court (G.S. 7B-3001(b)); and all records and files maintained by the Division of Juvenile Justice (G.S. 7B-3001(c)). Part II of Session Law 2023-114 adds a new G.S. 7B-3103 to the Juvenile Code to establish a limited exception to the confidentiality of juvenile records. It allows the re ..read more

When Session Law (S.L.) 2024-17 takes effect next Sunday, December 1, cases in which a Class A – E felony offense is alleged to have been committed at age 16 or 17 will originate under criminal jurisdiction. This means that the juveniles involved in these cases will be processed as defendants in criminal proceedings and not under the procedure for initiating a juvenile delinquency proceeding. At first blush, it may seem that this change will bring local procedure back to what it was before most offenses committed at ages 16 and 17 were brought under original juvenile jurisdiction (with the im ..read more

In Klein v. Klien, filed October 3, 2023, husband argued on appeal that the trial court erred in failing to include in the calculation of wife’s income for the purpose of setting child support amounts she received when she withdrew funds from a retirement account. Wife testified that she “cashed in an annuity in order to pay off some of [her] bills and credit card debt that [she] had as mostly legal fees and some other purchases.” She withdrew the funds in 2020. The child support hearing was held in June 2021 ..read more

In Wenninger v. Wenninger, decided May 7, 2024, the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that an equitable distribution judgment was void for lack of a necessary party because the parties in the equitable distribution proceeding stipulated in a pre-trial order that certain items of property were held in a revocable Trust and further stipulated that some of the property held by the Trust was marital property. The court of appeals held that the Trust was a necessary party, even though the trial court refused to distribute the items in the Trust because they were not owned by either party ..read more

*This post was written by Adult Protection Network Director Kristy Preston. Earlier this year, the UNC School of Government’s Adult Protection Network held six training events known as the “2024 Adult Protection Multidisciplinary Team Booster Shot Series” in regional locations across North Carolina including Transylvania, Alexander, Guilford, Robeson, Onslow, and Beaufort counties. The series aimed to foster collaboration, share resources, and address common challenges faced by adult protection multidisciplinary teams (MDTs). An MDT is a group of professionals in a geographic region who commi ..read more

Hurricane Helene caused historic flooding in Western North Carolina, destroying or damaging approximately 126,000 residential properties. Many of those properties were occupied by tenants who now find themselves in unfit or uninhabitable properties. The owners of affected rental properties face the difficulty and expense of either rebuilding or making major repairs to return the properties to a fit and habitable condition. In addition to housing issues, many tenants have been left unemployed either temporarily or permanently due to damage or destruction of businesses. Loss of employment leads ..read more