Return to nccourts.org
Return to the Opinions Page
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA07-73

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 5 June 2007

IN RE: C.C.P.W.,

    A Minor Juvenile.                Wilson County
                                No. 06 JA 105
    

    Appeal by respondent father from an order entered 30 November 2006 by Judge William G. Stewart in Wilson County District Court adjudicating the minor child abused, neglected and dependent. Heard in the Court of Appeals 30 April 2007.

    Stephen L. Beaman, for petitioner-appellee Wilson County     Department of Social Services.

    Millicent C. Graves, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

    Carol Ann Bauer, for respondent-appellant father.

    STROUD, Judge.
    On 29 August 2006, the Wilson County Department of Social Services filed a juvenile petition alleging that the minor child, C.C.P.W., was abused, neglected and dependent due to inappropriate discipline by father which resulted in serious physical injury to C.C.P.W. The petition named C.C.P.W.'s father and stepmother, with whom C.C.P.W. resided, as well as C.C.P.W.'s biological mother, who had court-ordered visitation with C.C.P.W. on alternating weekends. On 30 November 2006, the trial court entered an adjudication and disposition order adjudicating C.C.P.W. as abused, neglected and dependent as to father and stepmother. The court also adjudicatedC.C.P.W. as dependent as to C.C.P.W.'s biological mother. Father now appeals the trial court's order.
    Father's sole assignment of error in the record is that the trial court committed prejudicial error when it overruled his objections to inadmissable hearsay testimony during the adjudication hearing. However, father has failed to assign error to any of the trial court's conclusions of law or findings of fact.     This Court has previously held that the failure to assign error to conclusions of law “constitutes an acceptance of the conclusion[s] and a waiver of the right to challenge said conclusion[s] as unsupported by the facts.” Fran's Pecans, Inc. v. Greene, 134 N.C. App. 110, 112, 516 S.E.2d 647, 649 (1999); see also In re J.A.A. & S.A.A., 175 N.C. App. 66, 74, 623 S.E.2d 45, 50 (2005) (applying this rule to appeal of termination of parental rights). This Court has also held that
        where no exception is taken to a finding of fact by the trial court, the finding is presumed to be supported by competent evidence and is binding on appeal. Furthermore, the scope of review on appeal is limited to those issues presented by assignment of error in the record on appeal.

Koufman v. Koufman, 330 N.C. 93, 97-98, 408 S.E.2d 729, 731 (1991) (internal citations omitted).
    Father's failure to challenge any finding of fact or conclusion of law in the trial court's adjudication order precludes this Court from reversing the trial court's judgment. Consequently, we affirm the trial court's order.
    Affirmed.
    Judges JACKSON and STEPHENS concur.    
    Report per Rule 30(e).

*** Converted from WordPerfect ***