Bowman v. Bowman
2014 Ohio 2851
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Mary and Carmin Bowman were divorcing but cohabitating in Medina County with three minor children.
- On Aug. 28, 2012, Carmin slapped M.B. for disobedience, causing a visible injury; Mary filed a police report but no charges were filed.
- Mary and the children feared for safety after Carmin's conduct; he blocked Mary from driving the car, entered the garage, and Mary hid as police were called.
- Mary filed for a civil protection order (CPO); the court granted an ex parte CPO the same day and later held a full hearing on Sept. 23, 2012 issuing a four-year CPO.
- Carmin objected to the magistrate’s decision; in July 2013 a judge overruled objections and custody/parenting time were governed by divorce orders.
- Carmin appeals arguing insufficiency of the evidence; the court affirms the CPO.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supports issuance of a CPO | Bowman contends evidence supported danger of domestic violence | Bowman argues evidence was insufficient | No; evidence supported issuance by a preponderance of the evidence |
| Whether petitioner presently was in danger of domestic violence | Bowman asserts imminent risk given history of violence | Bowman contends risk not shown | No; evidence showed risk sufficient to support CPO issuance |
Key Cases Cited
- Felton v. Felton, 79 Ohio St.3d 34 (Ohio Supreme Court 1997) (preponderance standard for domestic violence protection orders)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio Supreme Court 2012) (sufficiency is a standard of adequacy for appellate review)
- State v. Payne, 178 Ohio App.3d 617 (Ohio 9th Dist. 2008) (consider evidence in light of recent history between parties)