From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re N.B

North Carolina Court of Appeals
Mar 2, 2004
163 N.C. App. 182 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004)

Summary

following Stratton

Summary of this case from In re R.T.W

Opinion

No. COA03-688

Filed March 2, 2004

Appeal and Error — mootness — adjudication of neglect — subsequent termination of parental rights

An appeal from an adjudication of abuse, neglect and dependency was moot where there was a subsequent termination of parental rights in which the judge noted that she had relied on some of the evidence from the adjudication hearing but not on the adjudication, and had found independent grounds supporting the termination.

Judge TYSON dissenting.

Appeal by respondent parents from judgment entered 17 October 2002 by Judge Marvin Pope in the District Court in Buncombe County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 15 January 2004.

Renae S. Alt, for Buncombe County Department of Social Services, petitioner-appellee. Judy N. Randolph, for Pam Gretz, Guardian ad Litem.

M. Victoria Jayne, for respondent-appellant mother.

Hall Hall Attorneys at Law, P.C., by Susan P. Hall and Douglas L. Hall, for respondent-appellant father.


Respondent parents appeal an adjudication order finding abuse, neglect and dependency and a disposition order denying any reunification services and visits, arguing that the court considered inadmissible hearsay, prejudicially delayed entry of the order, and violated respondent parents' due process rights with a deficient transcript of proceedings. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss respondent parents' appeal as moot.

After respondents appealed the 17 October 2002 adjudication order to this Court, the trial court on 20 October 2003 entered a judgment terminating the parental rights of both respondents. In the order terminating respondents' parental rights, the trial judge specifically noted that, while she relied on some of the evidence presented at the adjudication hearing, she did not rely on theprevious adjudication of abuse and neglect itself. Instead, she found two additional grounds to support termination: 1) leaving N.B. in foster care for twelve months without making reasonable progress to correct the conditions that led to her removal, and 2) failing to pay a reasonable portion of the cost of N.B.'s care, although physically and financially able to do so. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(2) and (a)(3) (2001).

This Court has recently addressed the very situation presented here, and held that a pending appeal of an adjudication of abuse and neglect is made moot by a subsequent termination of parental rights based on independent grounds. In re Stratton, ___ N.C. App. ___, 583 S.E.2d 323 (2003). "A case is `moot' when a determination is sought on a matter which, when rendered, cannot have any practical effect on the existing controversy." Roberts v. Madison County Realtors Ass'n, 344 N.C. 394, 398-99, 474 S.E.2d 783, 787 (1996). Because courts will not determine abstract propositions of law, a case should be dismissed "[w]henever during the course of litigation it develops that the relief sought has been granted or that the questions originally in controversy between the parties are no longer at issue." Dickerson Carolina, Inc. v. Harrelson, 114 N.C. App. 693, 697, 443 S.E.2d 127, 131, disc. review denied 337 N.C. 691, 448 S.E.2d 520 (1994) (internal quotation marks omitted). Where an appellant has "received a new, independent adjudication of the neglect issue and any resolution of the issues raised on this appeal will have no practical effect on the existingcontroversy," the appeal should be dismissed. Stratton, ___ N.C. App. at ___, 583 S.E.2d at 325.

While we acknowledge that the issues raised here could regain life were the subsequent termination of parental rights to be reversed, we are unable to distinguish this case from Stratton, and are bound to follow that decision. In re Appeal from Civil Penalty, 324 N.C. 373, 384, 379 S.E.2d 30, 37 (1989) ("Where a panel of the Court of Appeals has decided the same issue, albeit in a different case, a subsequent panel of the same court is bound by that precedent, unless it has been overturned by a higher court"). In both cases, an adjudication of neglect was followed by the termination of parental rights, based on independent grounds following a hearing by an independent judge. Thus, because the issues regarding the 17 October 2002 order have been rendered moot by the subsequent 20 October 2003 order, according to Stratton, we dismiss respondent parents' appeal.

Dismissed.

Judge STEELMAN concurs.

Judge TYSON dissents.


Summaries of

In re N.B

North Carolina Court of Appeals
Mar 2, 2004
163 N.C. App. 182 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004)

following Stratton

Summary of this case from In re R.T.W
Case details for

In re N.B

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF: N.B., minor child

Court:North Carolina Court of Appeals

Date published: Mar 2, 2004

Citations

163 N.C. App. 182 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004)
592 S.E.2d 597

Citing Cases

In re J.C.S

Chee v. Estes, 117 N.C. App. 450, 452, 451 S.E.2d 349, 350 ("As a general rule, the appellate court obtains…

In re V.L.B

In the present case, like Stratton, any findings in the permanency planning order that are also in the TPR…