The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court's December 17, 2024, order dismissing an abuse and neglect petition against a father in a case involving allegations of firearm safety violations and unsanitary living conditions.
The case, *In re C.D.* (No. 25-23), involved a child who split time between homes in different counties, creating jurisdictional complexities that ultimately led to the petition's dismissal. The mother, identified as T.C., appealed the Circuit Court of Gilmer County's decision to dismiss the abuse and neglect petition against the child's father.
On November 14, 2024, the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Services filed an abuse and neglect petition alleging that the father placed the child at serious risk of injury. The petition specifically cited two main concerns: the father left firearms within easy reach of the child, and his home was maintained in an unsanitary, deplorable condition.
The case presented unique jurisdictional challenges due to the child's living arrangement. According to court records, the child divided time between the mother's home in Gilmer County and the father's home in Doddridge County. This arrangement led to confusion about proper venue for the abuse and neglect proceedings.
At a preliminary hearing held November 25, 2024, the circuit court discovered that the DHS had filed petitions based on the same set of facts in multiple counties. The Circuit Court of Ritchie County had already addressed the matter, entering an order on November 14, 2024, finding no evidence to support the petition and dismissing it.
During the hearing, the prosecutor representing DHS acknowledged that petitions had been filed in both Ritchie and Gilmer Counties. The prosecutor confirmed that the Circuit Court of Ritchie County had "adjudicated" the issues and stated that DHS would withdraw the Gilmer County petition.
The mother's counsel objected to this course of action, arguing that the mother was "not happy" with the Ritchie County decision because she alleged that the abuse actually occurred in Doddridge County, not Ritchie County. This objection highlighted the geographic complexity of the case and raised questions about which court had proper jurisdiction over the matter.
The Circuit Court of Gilmer County ultimately concluded that under Rule 4a of the West Virginia Rules of Procedure for Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings, Ritchie County had already adjudicated the issue, and state procedural rules prevent filing petitions in more than one county for the same allegations. This rule is designed to prevent forum shopping and ensure consistent resolution of child welfare cases.
The mother appealed the dismissal to the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, arguing that the circuit court's dismissal was erroneous. However, the high court disagreed with this characterization.
In its January 29, 2026, memorandum decision, the Supreme Court of Appeals determined that oral argument was unnecessary for the case and that a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court's order was appropriate under West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 21.
The case highlights several important aspects of West Virginia's child protection system. First, it demonstrates the procedural safeguards in place to prevent duplicative proceedings in child abuse and neglect cases. The rule requiring that such petitions be filed in only one county helps ensure efficient use of court resources and prevents conflicting orders that could harm children's interests.
Second, the case illustrates the challenges that can arise when families live across county lines. The geographic distribution of the family members – with the child splitting time between the mother's home in Gilmer County and the father's home in Doddridge County – created venue questions that complicated the proceedings.
The allegations themselves also reflect ongoing concerns about child safety in homes where firearms are present. The petition's claims that firearms were left within easy reach of the child highlight the importance of proper gun storage in households with children. These safety concerns are compounded when combined with allegations of unsanitary living conditions.
While the specific details of the Ritchie County court's findings that led to the original dismissal are not detailed in the Supreme Court's memorandum decision, the high court's affirmation suggests that the procedural grounds for dismissal were proper under state law.
The case serves as a reminder of the complex interplay between child protection laws, jurisdictional rules, and family dynamics. It also underscores the importance of understanding proper venue requirements when filing child abuse and neglect petitions in cases involving families who live across county boundaries.
For practitioners handling child welfare cases, the decision reinforces the need for careful consideration of jurisdictional issues before filing petitions, particularly in cases where families have connections to multiple counties. The ruling affirms that West Virginia's procedural rules governing child abuse and neglect cases will be strictly enforced to maintain the integrity of the state's child protection system.