2019 Ohio 2296
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Parents entered an Agreed Shared Parenting Plan (Oct. 10, 2014) designating both as residential parents and legal custodians; father was school-placement parent so long as he lived in the Westerville district.
- Both parents later moved to terminate or modify the shared parenting plan and seek sole custody; guardian ad litem filed reports.
- Multi-day hearing occurred in 2017; trial court (Mar. 2, 2018) terminated the shared parenting decree, named mother sole legal custodian and residential parent, set a parenting schedule, and ordered child support.
- Father appealed, raising two assignments of error: (1) court changed residential parent without the change-in-circumstances findings required by R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a); (2) court imputed income based on prior employment without expressly finding father was underemployed or applying R.C. 3119.01(C)(11).
- Court of Appeals affirmed: held termination under R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(c) permits reallocation under R.C. 3109.04(A) without the E(1)(a) change-in-circumstances showing, and found sufficient record evidence to infer voluntary underemployment for imputation purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Bruns' Argument | Green's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court was required to make R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) change-in-circumstances findings before changing residential parent | Bruns: Not applicable (Bruns sought termination); trial court properly terminated and reallocated | Green: Court illegally changed residential parent without finding changed circumstances required for a modification | Held: Termination under R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(c) is distinct from modification; after termination court may reallocate under R.C. 3109.04(A) without E(1)(a) findings (affirmed). |
| Whether trial court erred by imputing income to Green without expressly finding voluntary underemployment or applying R.C. 3119.01(C)(11) factors | Bruns: Record supports imputation; trial court could infer underemployment from evidence | Green: Court should have made express underemployment finding and considered statutory factors before imputing prior higher earnings | Held: No reversible error—reviewing court can infer underemployment where record supports it; evidence (prior earnings, employment history, later lower-paid latchkey work while finishing degree) supported imputation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fisher v. Hasenjager, 116 Ohio St.3d 53 (Ohio 2007) (addresses application of R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) in modification disputes and resolves conflict among appellate districts)
- In re James, 113 Ohio St.3d 420 (Ohio 2007) (discusses change-in-circumstances requirement to modify custody orders)
- Rock v. Cabral, 67 Ohio St.3d 108 (Ohio 1993) (parental subjective reasons for unemployment are irrelevant to imputation; factors govern potential income imputation)