2018 Ohio 3065
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- La Shanda Baker (mother) and Portiea Baker (father) divorced in 2008; mother was named sole legal custodian and residential parent; father ordered to pay child support.
- Mother moved with the two minor children from Ohio to Texas in February 2012; father remained in Ohio and accrued child-support arrearages.
- Father filed multiple motions over several years seeking contempt and custody modification; a magistrate hearing was held in August 2017 (mother pro se) and the children were interviewed in chambers.
- Magistrate found a substantial change in circumstances based on the move, alleged denial of parenting time by mother, and the children’s stated preference to live with father; magistrate transferred custody to father and awarded mother parenting time and a child-support obligation offset by father’s arrearage.
- Mother objected, arguing the record did not support a change of circumstances and that Ohio lacked subject-matter jurisdiction under the UCCJEA; the trial court overruled objections and the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a change of circumstances justified modifying custody | Baker: Relocation alone and the record do not show a material adverse change or denial of parenting time sufficient to reallocate custody | Baker (father): Mother’s unilateral move and actions impeded his contact; children prefer to live with him, supporting change | Court: Affirmed modification — children’s expressed wishes, age, and adverse impact on father–child relationship constitute a sufficient change; record supports best-interest finding |
| Whether Ohio courts lacked subject-matter jurisdiction under the UCCJEA | Baker: Children lived in Texas since 2012 so Ohio lacks jurisdiction | Baker (father): Ohio had prior, continuing jurisdiction from the original custody decree and father still resides in Ohio | Court: Ohio retained exclusive, continuing jurisdiction; mother did not timely raise inconvenient-forum argument, so court properly exercised jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion review)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (Ohio 1997) (change in circumstances must be substantial, not slight)
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Redevelopment, 50 Ohio St.3d 157 (Ohio 1990) (definition of abuse of discretion; appellate review of trial court reasoning)
- Vincenzo v. Vincenzo, 2 Ohio App.3d 307 (Ohio Ct. App. 1981) (relocation alone is not necessarily a change of circumstances unless it adversely impacts the child)
- In re James, 113 Ohio St.3d 420 (Ohio 2007) (children’s wishes and advancing age can contribute to finding a change in circumstances)