{
  "id": 1511483,
  "name": "IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, M., A minor child, d.o.b. 12/24/94 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 01/16/98 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 02/06/96",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Mitchell, M.",
  "decision_date": "2002-10-04",
  "docket_number": "No. 127A02",
  "first_page": "288",
  "last_page": "289",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "356 N.C. 288"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "559 S.E.2d 237",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "148 N.C. App. 483",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9366635
      ],
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/148/0483-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 118,
    "char_count": 1376,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.706,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.777275602216893e-08,
      "percentile": 0.41504485396638957
    },
    "sha256": "2ea7e9f366f47c84444c14174418e78c0bd10c68c51428cf07efe78299a12b8f",
    "simhash": "1:0f57c69a6487c788",
    "word_count": 223
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:17:54.672071+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, M., A minor child, d.o.b. 12/24/94 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 01/16/98 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 02/06/96"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion.\nREVERSED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., by Stuart A. Brock, for appellant Guardian ad Litem.",
      "Charles W. McKellerfor respondent-appellee Cynthia Chatman."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, M., A minor child, d.o.b. 12/24/94 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 01/16/98 IN THE MATTER OF: MITCHELL, K., a minor child, d.o.b. 02/06/96\nNo. 127A02\n(Filed 4 October 2002)\nTermination of Parental Rights\u2014 dispositional stage \u2014 best interests of children \u2014 proper determination\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals remanding a termination of parental rights case is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion that the trial court did not place an improper burden on respondent in the dispositional stage to show that termination is not in the children\u2019s best interest and that the trial court did not fail to exercise its discretion in finding that termination would be in the best interests of the children.\nAppeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 148 N.C. App. 483, 559 S.E.2d 237 (2002), affirming in part, reversing in part, and remanding orders entered 16 November 2000 by Pool, J., in District Court, Transylvania County. Heard in the Supreme Court 12 September 2002.\nWomble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, P.L.L.C., by Stuart A. Brock, for appellant Guardian ad Litem.\nCharles W. McKellerfor respondent-appellee Cynthia Chatman."
  },
  "file_name": "0288-01",
  "first_page_order": 338,
  "last_page_order": 339
}