Baker-Chaney v. Chaney
2017 Ohio 5548
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Parents divorced in 2014 and had a January 24, 2014 shared parenting plan with week-on/week-off custody of two daughters (born 2005, 2006).
- Mother remarried and sought to relocate with the children to New Albany; Father opposed and sought termination of the shared parenting plan.
- Psychological evaluator and guardian ad litem found both parents capable; guardian noted older child strongly opposed moving with Mother; evaluator recommended children remain with Father to minimize change.
- Father had a past opioid addiction (treatment ~2007) and current prescription pain medication use; evaluators and GAL found no evidence of current abuse and did not recommend addiction counseling.
- Trial court issued interim temporary custody to Father during the multi-day hearing, later adopted Father’s proposed findings, terminated the shared parenting plan, named Father residential parent, and ordered Mother to pay Father’s attorney fees ($13,754.12).
- On appeal, the appellate court affirmed custody decisions (no abuse of discretion) but reversed and remanded the attorney-fee award for lack of evidentiary hearing on fee reasonableness.
Issues
| Issue | Baker-Chaney's Argument | Chaney's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by terminating shared parenting plan and naming Father residential parent | Trial court failed to consider statutory best-interest factors and punished Mother for remarriage/relocation; decision not supported by credible evidence | Decision based on evaluations, children’s preferences (older child), least disruptive placement, and competent evidence | Affirmed: record contained competent, credible evidence; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether issuance of temporary custody orders during post-decree trial prejudged case | Temporary orders punished Mother for relocation and prejudiced final outcome | Temporary orders are interlocutory and merged into final decree; final judgment controls | Affirmed/dismissed as moot: temporary orders merged into final decree |
| Whether Mother was denied due process by exclusion of evidence (medical records and rebuttal witness) | Court improperly denied inspection of Father’s medical records and excluded rebuttal witness testimony | Court limited scope of medical records via in-camera review as overbroad and excluded weak, prejudicial impeachment evidence | Affirmed: in-camera review appropriate and exclusion of witness testimony not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether trial court erred by awarding Father attorney fees without evidentiary hearing | Mother requested hearing to test reasonableness; award entered without hearing; order was improper | Court relied on testimony and exhibits and declined to conduct separate hearing | Reversed and remanded on attorney-fee award: trial court abused discretion by awarding fees without hearing to establish reasonableness |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (standards for appellate review of custody decisions)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (abuse of discretion standard)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (trial court's broad latitude in custody determinations)
- Trickey v. Trickey, 158 Ohio St. 9 (deference to trial court in child welfare/custody matters)
- Colom v. Colom, 58 Ohio St.2d 245 (interlocutory domestic-relations orders merge into final decree)
- State ex rel. Thompson v. Spon, 83 Ohio St.3d 551 (characterization of interlocutory orders in domestic relations)