Angus v. Angus
2016 Ohio 7789
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Sarah Ice (plaintiff) and Larry Angus (defendant) married in 2007; prior to marriage Ice had child E.A. and J.A.; Angus signed paternity affidavits for both. After marriage Ice had two more children.
- Ice filed for divorce in 2011. Genetic testing during the proceedings showed Angus was not E.A.'s biological father but was J.A.'s; trial court disestablished Angus as E.A.'s father and established paternity for Keith Taylor, who acknowledged paternity.
- Angus filed numerous repetitive pro se motions attacking magistrate rulings, seeking disqualification of the magistrate, genetic testing of Taylor, transcripts at public expense, and court-appointed counsel; the trial court denied many motions and adopted magistrate decisions; prior appeals (Angus I) affirmed many rulings.
- This consolidated appeal challenges (1) denial of a transcript at public expense (July 13, 2015 entry) and (2) denial of objections to the magistrate’s refusal to recuse and denial of Angus’s request to compel Taylor’s genetic testing (June 11, 2015 entries).
- The court limited its review to the assignments of error raised and treated procedural irregularities (magistrate ruling on recusal) as errors of process but nonetheless reviewed merits of the recusal rulings and other issues.
- The appellate court affirmed all challenged judgments, rejecting Angus’s claims on timeliness of transcript requests, lack of standing to seek testing of Taylor, absence of proven magistrate bias, and prior-law-of-the-case rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Angus's Argument | Court/Opposing Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transcript at public expense | Requested transcript to show "major errors"; move was denied as improper | Request was made after trial court had already ruled on objections; appellate review limited to record at time of trial-court ruling | Denial affirmed: request untimely and transcript could not affect already-entered judgment |
| Magistrate recusal | Magistrate biased, made improper statements, acted as advocate; procedural and due-process violations | Magistrate's characterization of Angus’s filings accurate; alleged oral statements unsupported (no transcript); adverse rulings ≠ bias; motions should be filed with trial court per Civ.R. 53(D)(6) | Denial of recusal affirmed; no demonstrated bias or prejudice; procedural missteps noted but review of merits appropriate |
| Compel genetic testing of Taylor | Angus sought testing of Taylor to prove paternity of E.A. | Once Angus’s paternity was excluded, he lacks standing to litigate identity of the male parent | Denial affirmed: Angus lacks standing to seek testing of third party |
| Court-appointed counsel | Angus contends he was entitled to appointed counsel for these matters | No persuasive connection to judgments on appeal; previously rejected in Angus I | Denial affirmed; law of the case applies |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Pratt v. Weygandt, 164 Ohio St. 463 (1956) (definition of judicial bias requiring fixed anticipatory judgment)
- Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1 (1984) (law-of-the-case doctrine)
- Beer v. Griffith, 54 Ohio St.2d 440 (1978) (authority on procedures for judge disqualification and Supreme Court role)
- Pratts v. Hurley, 102 Ohio St.3d 81 (2004) (subject-matter jurisdiction and related principles)
- Morrison v. Steiner, 32 Ohio St.2d 86 (1972) (definition of subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Wade v. Wade, 113 Ohio App.3d 414 (1996) (limitations on trial court review when transcript/evidence not provided with objections)