green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.8 score
“nder such circumstances, the trial court need not make detailed findings as to the amount that would be reasonable' to expect from respondent.”
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
IN THE MATTER OF DD
in a bench trial, the court is presumed to disregard incompetent evidence.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
IN MATTER OF BABY BOY M.
nder such circumstances, the trial court need not make detailed findings as to the amount that would be reasonable' to expect from respondent.
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re HLAD
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 411 , 546 S.E.2d 169, 175 , disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001) (holding that "[w]here there is competent evidence to support the court's findings, the admission of incompetent evidence is not prejudicial").
discussed
Cited "see"
In re H.L.A.D.
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402 , 411, 546 S.E.2d 169 , 175, disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001) (holding that "[w]here there is competent evidence to support the court's findings, the admission of incompetent evidence is not prejudicial").
discussed
Cited "see"
In re T.M.
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402 , 410, 546 S.E.2d 169 , 175 ("[w]illfulness is established when the respondent had the ability to show reasonable progress, but was unwilling to make the effort"), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re TM
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 410 , 546 S.E.2d 169, 175 ("[w]illfulness is established when the respondent had the ability to show reasonable progress, but was unwilling to make the effort"), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re L.C.
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402 , 412-13, 546 S.E.2d 169 , 176-77 (trial court did not abuse discretion by terminating respondent's parental rights when he admitted "disciplining" child by "smacking" and "whipping," and father had not made "meaningful clinical progress" during counseling), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re LC
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 412-13 , 546 S.E.2d 169, 176-77 (trial court did not abuse discretion by terminating respondent's parental rights when he admitted "disciplining" child by "smacking" and "whipping," and father had not made "meaningful clinical progress" during counseling), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re T.M.
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402 , 411, 546 S.E.2d 169 , 175 ("Where there is competent evidence to support the court's findings, the admission of incompetent evidence is not prejudicial."), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re TM
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 411 , 546 S.E.2d 169, 175 ("Where there is competent evidence to support the court's findings, the admission of incompetent evidence is not prejudicial."), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re S.N.
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402 , 410, 546 S.E.2d 169 , 175 ("Willfulness is established when the respondent had the ability to show reasonable progress, but was unwilling to make the effort."), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re SN
See In re McMillon, 143 N.C.App. 402, 410 , 546 S.E.2d 169, 175 ("Willfulness is established when the respondent had the ability to show reasonable progress, but was unwilling to make the effort."), disc. review denied, 354 N.C. 218 , 554 S.E.2d 341 (2001).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
LEE CYCLE CTR., INC.
v.
WILSON CYCLE CTR., INC.
v.
WILSON CYCLE CTR., INC.
No. 271A01.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Aug 30, 2001.
Published
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of North Caro… (2)
“Plaintiffs’ motion to file brief pursuant to Rules 2 and 25 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, filed 20 August 2001, is denied. Plaintiffs’ petition for writ of certiorari, also filed 20 August 2001, is allowed. Defendants’ motion to dismiss, filed 14 August 2001, is allowed. Plaintiffs shall file their brief on or before 1 October 2001. Defendants shall file their brief on or before 31 October 2001.” By order of this Court in Conference, this the 30th day of August, 2001.