Matter of Maynard
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Petitioner DSS (hereinafter petitioner) contends that the trial court erred in setting aside the Surrenders. After careful review of the record and briefs, we affirm.
I
Petitioner first contends that the district court did not have jurisdiction to grant the motion setting aside the Surrenders. We disagree. The district court has “exclusive, original jurisdiction over any case involving a juvenile who is alleged to be delinquent, undisciplined, abused, neglected, or dependent.” G.S. 7A-523. “When the court obtains jurisdiction over a juvenile, jurisdiction shall continue until…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Koufman v. KoufmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Greer v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- California v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Kaplan v. Prolife Action League of GreensboroCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re I.K.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2013
- State v. AdamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
- State v. AdamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996