In Matter of Ejt
This text of 683 S.E.2d 790 (In Matter of Ejt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE MATTER OF: E.J.T.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
Robert S. Pleasant for petitioner-appellee.
Windy H. Rose for respondent-mother appellant.
ROBERT N. HUNTER, JR., Judge.
Respondent-mother ("Isabella")[1] appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to E.J.T ("Cooper"). We remand for additional findings of fact.
Petitioner ("Olivia") and Isabella are the great-aunt and mother, respectively, of Cooper. Cooper was conceived as the result of Isabella's non-consensual sexual encounter with an unknown male person.[2] At the time of the sexual encounter, Isabella was enrolled in high school and living in her parents' home in Durham County. When Isabella learned of her pregnancy, she disclosed the details of the incident to her parents. Together, they decided to ask Olivia, who is Isabella's maternal aunt and former childhood confidant, to take custody of Cooper at birth to rear as her own.[3] Olivia, who was not married and did not have any children of her own, agreed to the arrangement and prepared a nursery for Cooper at her home, which was also located in Durham County.
When Cooper was born, Isabella, who was then seventeen years old, decided that she wanted to breast feed him, which was contrary to her initial agreement with Olivia. Instead of leaving the hospital with Olivia as planned, Cooper returned with Isabella to her parents' home. There, Cooper remained in Isabella's care for approximately six weeks until Isabella finally delivered Cooper to Olivia as planned. After delivering Cooper to Olivia, Isabella visited Cooper a few times at the home of Olivia. Isabella also visited Cooper at church and during the family gatherings that followed. However, when Isabella made requests of Olivia to visit with Cooper unsupervised, Olivia declined those requests because she believed it was not in the best interests of Cooper. Specifically, Olivia felt that Isabella's lifestyle was unstable and was concerned about possible drug use by Isabella.[4] Also, Olivia was concerned about incidents of domestic violence in Isabella's parents' home.
Thereafter, a dispute arose concerning Isabella's visitation rights. The parties participated in counseling to try to resolve their disagreement about visitation. When an agreement was not reached, Olivia filed an action for custody of Cooper in Johnston County District Court, which was granted on 18 May 2007. After that custody determination, Isabella sought visitation rights with Cooper through counsel, but the request was denied. Then, almost a year later, on 2 May 2008, Olivia filed a petition to terminate Isabella's and the unknown father's parental rights.
Hearings were held on the petition to terminate Isabella's and the unknown father's parental rights on 22 October 2008, 5 and 26 November 2008, and 10 December 2008. The trial court found that prior to her filing the petition for termination of parental rights, Cooper had resided with Olivia in excess of two years. In that time, the trial court found that Olivia had provided a safe and fit home for Cooper. Moreover, the trial court found that other than a few items of clothing, Olivia had been the sole financial provider for Cooper. However, the trial court also noted that Olivia never requested support from Isabella, who is currently enrolled in high school and unemployed. Finally, the trial court found that Olivia intended to adopt Cooper before he was born and continues to intend to adopt Cooper in the event that he is cleared for adoption by termination of Isabella's and the unknown father's parental rights.
Based on these findings, the trial court concluded that grounds existed pursuant to section 7B-1111(a)(5) (2007)[5] of our General Statutes to terminate the unknown father's parental rights. The trial court also concluded that grounds existed pursuant to sections 7B-1111(a)(1)[6] and (7)[7] of our General Statutes to terminate both Isabella's and the unknown father's parental rights. The court further concluded that it was in Cooper's best interest to terminate both Isabella's and the unknown father's parental rights. Isabella appeals.
"On appeal, the standard of review from a trial court's decision in a parental termination case is whether there existed clear, cogent, and convincing evidence of the existence of grounds to terminate respondent's parental rights." In re Oghenekevebe, 123 N.C. App. 434, 439, 473 S.E.2d 393, 398 (1996) (citing In re Becker, 111 N.C. App. 85, 92, 431 S.E.2d 820, 825 (1993). The trial court's findings in this regard are binding on appeal "even though there may be evidence to the contrary." In re Williamson, 91 N.C. App. 668, 674, 373 S.E.2d 317, 320 (1988) (citing In re Montgomery, 311 N.C. 101, 112-13, 316 S.E.2d 246, 252-53 (1984)). "[I]t is the duty of the trial judge to consider and weigh all of the competent evidence, and to determine the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony." In re Gleisner, 141 N.C. App. 475, 480, 539 S.E.2d 362, 365 (2000) (citation omitted).
We first consider Isabella's argument that the trial court erred by concluding that grounds existed pursuant to sections 7B1-111(a)(1) and (7) of our General Statutes to terminate her parental rights. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111 sets out the statutory grounds for terminating parental rights. A finding of any one of the separately enumerated grounds is sufficient to support a termination. In re Taylor, 97 N.C. App. 57, 64, 387 S.E.2d 230, 233-34 (1990) (applying former statute N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A2-89.32). In the case sub judice, the trial court concluded that Isabella had both neglected and abandoned Cooper.
Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1), the court may terminate parental rights upon a finding that the "parent has abused or neglected the juvenile." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1). A "[n]eglected juvenile" is defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-101(15) as
[a] juvenile who does not receive proper care, supervision, or discipline from the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker; or who has been abandoned; or who is not provided necessary medical care; or who is not provided necessary remedial care; or who lives in an environment injurious to the juvenile's welfare; or who has been placed for care or adoption in violation of law.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-101(15). Generally, "[a] finding of neglect sufficient to terminate parental rights must be based on evidence showing neglect at the time of the termination proceeding." In re Young, 346 N.C. 244, 248, 485 S.E.2d 612, 615 (1997) (citation omitted).
Here, the trial court found that at the time of the termination proceedings, Cooper was receiving proper care from Olivia and residing in a "good and fit home." Moreover, the trial court found that "[t]he minor child is healthy and happy in the care of [Olivia.]" While the trial court also found that Isabella had failed to provide any support for Cooper other than several items of clothing, it also noted that Olivia never requested any support from Isabella.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
683 S.E.2d 790, 200 N.C. App. 435, 2009 N.C. App. LEXIS 1902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-matter-of-ejt-ncctapp-2009.