DSS presented five witnesses, and respondent mother presented one witness. When the hearing resumed on 4 June 2007, respondent mother presented the testimony of two additional witnesses, and DSS presented four witnesses in rebuttal. At no time during the balance of the first day of hearings or during the entire second day of hearings did respondent mother argue or contend that she had insufficient time to prepare to meet the new allegations made under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1111(a)(2). II. Analysis It is clear that, when there are procedures set forth in Chapter 7B governing termination of parental rights proceedings, those procedures must control over those set forth in the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. In re S.D.W. & H.E.W., 187 N.C. App. 416, 419, 653 S.E.2d 429, 431 (2007) (<HOLDING>) However, because “a termination of parental
holding that anders procedures apply in parental termination cases holding that the defenses presentation of two psychiatrists testimony constituted an election of the procedure and a waiver of the specific statutory procedures holding that by vesting jurisdiction of gtla actions in circuit court where the tennessee rules of civil procedure applied the legislature intended to allow the tennessee rules of civil procedure to apply to gtla actions recognizing that where the juvenile code sets forth specific procedures governing termination actions those procedures apply to the exclusion of the rules of civil procedure recognizing that the interaction of general constitutional rules governing pretrial identification procedures and the deferential standard of habeas review affords significant discretion to the state court