In re A.S.M.R., 375 N.C. 539 (2020)

  • Facts: Respondent challenges the underlying neglect adjudication order for alleged evidentiary errors and insufficient findings, arguing that the defects in that order make the order invalid and result in DSS not having custody of the juvenile. Respondent’s additionally raise the failure to include findings addressing UCCJEA subject matter jurisdiction in the underlying adjudication order is a jurisdictional defect such that the order is void. Based on these errors, respondent argues DSS lacks standing to file a TPR.
  • Quoting a previous opinion, In re L.T., 374 N.C. 567, 569 (2020), “the trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact demonstrating its jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, but the record must reflect that the jurisdictional prerequisites of the Act were satisfied when the court exercised jurisdiction.” Sl.Op. at 11. “[T]he lack of explicit findings establishing jurisdiction under the UCCJEA does not constitute error because the record unambiguously demonstrates that ‘the jurisdictional prerequisites in the Act were satisfied.” Id. Here, the record reflects NC was the children’s home state at all relevant times and NC had jurisdiction in the adjudication proceeding.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Click on a term below for additional case summaries tagged with the same term.