In re J.D.O., 381 N.C. 799 (2022)
Held:
Affirmed
- Facts: In 2019, the juveniles were adjudicated neglected based on circumstances created by mother’s substance use. In 2020, DSS filed TPR petition, which was granted. Mother appeals, raising a lack of subject matter jurisdiction and challenging the grounds.
- G.S. 7B-1101 addresses jurisdiction in TPR actions. Mother argues the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the order did not include findings to establish it had jurisdiction under the UCCJEA. This argument has been rejected by the supreme court in In re K.N., 378 N.C. 450 (2021), which was not incorrectly decided. As previously held, “[t]he 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.” 381 N.C. at 804 (citation omitted). The record shows NC was the children’s home state. The order’s statement that this court has jurisdiction over the parents and subject matter is sufficient.
Category:
Termination of Parental RightsStage:
Subject Matter JurisdictionTopic:
Exercising Jurisdiction