A North Carolina appellate court has dismissed an appeal concerning the termination of parental rights for a child, ruling that the order in question was interlocutory. This decision affects the Cumberland County Department of Social Services (DSS) and the parents involved in the case, which centers on allegations of neglect and dependency.
The case, titled In re: A.S., III, was filed under docket number 25-879 and involved a juvenile petition filed by DSS on March 28, 2022. The petition alleged that the child, referred to as Andrew, faced neglect and dependency due to the actions of his parents. The situation escalated when it was revealed that the father had assaulted the mother while she was pregnant, and the mother tested positive for illegal substances at the time of Andrew's birth.
Following the filing of the juvenile petition, the court granted DSS nonsecure custody of Andrew. Over the next several months, the court issued various orders regarding custody and visitation, ultimately concluding that Andrew was neglected and dependent. In April 2024, DSS filed a motion to terminate the parental rights of both parents, which led to a series of preliminary hearings.
After several delays and continuances, the trial court dismissed DSS's motion for termination of parental rights without prejudice on June 24, 2025. This dismissal came after the court found that there had been ample time for the matter to be scheduled for a hearing, and the delays had been prejudicial to the parents. DSS and the guardian ad litem (GAL) subsequently appealed this dismissal.
The Court of Appeals, led by Judge Valerie Zachary, reviewed the appeal and determined that the order was interlocutory. The court explained that an interlocutory order is one that does not dispose of the case but leaves it open for further action. The court stated, "A judgment is either interlocutory or the final determination of the rights of the parties." The court emphasized that only final judgments can typically be appealed.
In this case, since the trial court had not relinquished its jurisdiction over the child and DSS could refile its motion to terminate parental rights, the appellate court ruled that the order was not final. The court noted, "Because the trial court maintains jurisdiction over this matter and DSS may refile its motion to terminate parental rights, the order dismissing the motion without prejudice is not 'final' as contemplated by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 54(a)." As a result, the court dismissed the appeal.
This ruling has significant implications for the parties involved. It means that DSS can still pursue the termination of parental rights in the future, and the case will remain open in the juvenile court system. The court's decision also highlights the importance of timely resolution in juvenile cases, as delays can have detrimental effects on the welfare of children.
Looking ahead, the dismissal of this appeal does not preclude DSS from refiling its motion to terminate parental rights. The court has made it clear that the issue of whether the parents' rights will ultimately be terminated remains unresolved. The ruling serves as a reminder of the procedural complexities involved in juvenile cases and the need for all parties to act diligently to avoid unnecessary delays.
Details were not available in the court filing regarding potential next steps for the parties involved or if there are any related cases pending. The court's decision underscores the ongoing challenges faced by families in the juvenile justice system and the critical nature of timely legal proceedings in cases involving the welfare of children.