In re H.B., 384 N.C. 484 (2023)
Held:
Affirmed
There is a dissent
by Morgan, J. joined by Earls, J.
- Facts: In 2019, the juveniles were adjudicated neglected and dependent due to circumstances created by mother’s substance use, mental health, housing, and lack of appropriate supervision. The juveniles were placed in DSS custody. In 2021, DSS filed a TPR petition to terminate mother’s parental rights of H.B. The TPR was granted and mother appeals both the grounds and disposition. Regarding the adjudication, mother argues the court’s reliance on an exhibit created by DSS as a timeline of mother’s lack of progress to support the ground of failure to make reasonable progress to correct the conditions was error and the reference to the exhibit in the order was an insufficient finding of fact to support the conclusion that the ground existed. The court of appeals affirmed the TPR and there was a dissent. Mother appealed to the supreme court.
- The finding of fact states “the Court relies on and accepts into evidence the Timeline, marked DSS Exhibit’__”, in making these findings and finds the said report to [be] both credible and reliable.” Sl.Op. at 5. There was no objection to the admission of the Timeline in evidence. The Timeline showed H.B. was in DSS custody for more than one year, mother continually missed her visits and failed to attend her substance use and mental health appointments. Because the order was found to be “both credible and reliable,” the finding is more than a reference of evidence in the record but is an indication that the court determined this evidence was credible and is a proper evidentiary finding.
- The majority opinion states “We stress that our holding today is not an endorsement of this sort of fact finding.” Sl. Op. at 9. The better practice is to have express, specific findings of the facts rather than recite or reference evidence that it finds to be credible. The court could have found the mother missed visits on specific dates as well as missed appointments for substance use and mental health treatment without an explanation for why she missed those visits.
- Dissent: The trial court did not find facts specially as required by Rule 52 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. The findings are insufficient to support the TPR grounds. The findings do not state what happened in space and time. The majority has relaxed the standard for appellate review and augments the trial court’s insufficient findings of fact. The order should be vacated and remanded for findings.
Category:
Termination of Parental RightsStage:
AdjudicationTopic:
Findings