The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) is a uniform state law that has been enacted by the majority of states, including North Carolina. The UCCJEA establishes subject matter jurisdiction in child custody cases and indicates which court has the authority to decide on a custody issue.
North Carolina has codified its version of the UCCJEA, and four types of subject matter jurisdiction are recognized:
- Initial child custody jurisdiction
- Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction
- Jurisdiction to modify determination
- Temporary emergency jurisdiction
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges suggests determining whether there is an emergency jurisdiction issue first.
Temporary emergency jurisdiction may exist if the child has been abandoned or the child needs protection from mistreatment or abuse.
Permanency Planning Orders and Jurisdiction
In the case of In re R.G., Mother appealed from two permanency planning orders based on the trial court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Specifically, Mother argued that the UCCJEA had been violated.
Mother in this case is R’s biological aunt and adopted R with Father in November 2018. Mother and R lived in North Carolina since adoption, but Father relocated to New York shortly after, at which point custody needed to be determined. A New York order was entered granting joint legal custody and primary physical custody to Mother.
In December 2021, Cumberland County Department of Social Services (DSS) took custody of R and filed a juvenile petition alleging that R was abused and neglected, specifically based on allegations that R was sexually abused by a man living with Mother. DSS further alleged that Mother knew about the abuse, took no steps to protect R, and continued living with the man.
From January through March 2022, the trial court entered multiple orders to continue custody of R with DSS. The orders stated that R was placed with her maternal grandmother, and she was doing well in that placement.
After that, numerous petitions were filed, and the trial court held hearings and entered orders over a period of 13 months. During this time, the North Carolina trial court received a letter from the New York judge relinquishing jurisdiction. Among the orders were the two that Mother appealed: the first being an initial permanency planning order setting permanent plans for R and eliminating reunification efforts with Mother, and the second being another permanency planning order granting guardianship of R to her grandmother.
Mother’s first appeal was dismissed. Regarding the second appeal, Mother stated that the trial court lacked jurisdiction under UCCJEA to enter anything other than emergency custody orders. She further stated that the trial court failed to comply with various provisions of the UCCJEA. Specifically, Mother attested that the New York judge’s letter relinquishing jurisdiction was not sufficient and that an order was necessary.
The Court of Appeals noted that it is not up to the North Carolina Court to dictate how another state relinquishes jurisdiction, and while an order may be a preferred method, it is not specifically required by the UCCJEA. The trial court’s order was affirmed.