In re A.J., ___ N.C. ___ (August 23, 2024)
Held:
Reversed and Remanded
- Facts and procedural history: This appeal involves the adjudication of three children as neglected, and also the two older children as dependent, based on three incidents reported to DSS. The reported incidents involved interactions between Mother and one of the older children. The first incident alleged an altercation between Mother and the older child, where the child refused to exit the car; Mother attempted to remove the child from the car; the child locked herself in the car; Mother broke the car window to unlock the car, slapped and hit the child with a belt, and choked and threatened to kill the child. A second incident alleged Mother choked the child and threw her out of the car. The third incident alleged Mother locked the child out of the house following an argument; when a social worker arrived, law enforcement had handcuffed Mother to calm her down, which was witnessed by the youngest juvenile who was visibly upset, while the older child sought safety at a neighbor’s. The trial court based some of its findings on inadmissible hearsay consisting of statements made by the child to the social workers. The trial court also made findings about mother’s mental and emotional health, some of which was based on mother’s behavior during the adjudicatory hearing. The court of appeals disregarded the trial court’s findings of fact based on the inadmissible hearsay statements of the child and held the unsupported findings were insufficient to conclude the children neglected and the two older children dependent. The court of appeals reversed the order with instructions to the trial court to dismiss the petitions. DSS and the Guardian ad litem jointly petitioned the supreme court for discretionary review.
- Appellate review: An adjudication order is reviewed to determine “whether the trial court’s conclusions of law are supported by adequate findings and whether those findings, in turn, are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence.” Sl. Op. at 4 (citation omitted). “Assuming an evidentiary objection is properly preserved, a party may argue on appeal that any findings supported solely by inadmissible evidence are infirm and cannot support the trial court’s conclusion of law.” Sl. Op. at 5. The reviewing court must disregard a finding that lacks sufficient support in the record and examine whether the remaining findings support the trial court’s determination. If the remaining findings are insufficient, the court must determine “whether there is sufficient evidence in the record that could support the necessary findings.” Sl. Op. at 5 (emphasis in original). If there is sufficient evidence in the record that could support the necessary findings, the reviewing court must vacate the order and remand the case for entry of a new order. “This permits the trial court, as fact finder, to decide whether to enter a new order with sufficient findings based on the record or to change the court’s conclusions because the court cannot make the necessary findings.” Sl. Op. at 2. “An appellate court may remand for entry of an order dismissing the matter only if the trial court’s findings are insufficient and the evidentiary record is so lacking that it cannot support any appropriate findings on remand.” Sl. Op. at 6.
- The court of appeals did not complete the full appellate analysis of the trial court’s findings before determining the findings did not support the adjudications and reversing and remanding the case for dismissal. After disregarding several findings as unsupported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence (due to the findings being based on the inadmissible hearsay statements of the child), the court of appeals failed to determine whether the remaining findings of fact were sufficient to support either adjudication, and if not, whether there was sufficient evidence in the record that could support the necessary findings.
Category:
Abuse, Neglect, DependencyStage:
AppealTopic: