Domestic Relations – Parent & Child – Guardianship – Burden of Proof – Review Waiver – Insufficient Findings 

Even though the trial court concluded that there was “no compelling basis or reason for the Court to go against the recommendations of the PCDSS and the GAL,” the trial court did not impose an evidentiary burden on the respondent-father. Instead, the court was indicating that two different proposed guardianship placements – with the paternal grandmother in Texas or with the maternal great-aunt in North Carolina – might be appropriate in isolation, but that under the circumstances – where “Nolan” had already been settled in his current placement with his great aunt and his older sibling for a significant period of time – the court could not identify a reason why it was in Nolan’s best interest to remove him from his long-term placement and send him to a new placement in another state.

We affirm the trial court’s guardianship order. However, we vacate and remand the trial court’s waiver of further review.

The trial court must make written findings of fact satisfying each of the enumerated criteria listed in G.S. § 7B–906.1(n), and its failure to do so constitutes reversible error. The trial court made findings addressing only three of the five required criteria and failed to make the findings required by subsections (3) or (4). As a result, we vacate the portion of the trial court’s order waiving further review, and remand for the trial court to either make the findings required under subsections (3) and (4) or reinstate further review hearings.

In re N.G. (Lawyers Weekly No. 012-336-22, 14 pp.) (Richard Dietz, J.) Appealed from Pender County District Court (Russell Davis, J.) Stephen Schoeberle for petitioner; Lee Gilliam for respondent; Michelle FormyDuval Lynch for guardian ad litem. 2022-NCCOA-540