2019 Ohio 5095
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Joshua and Candy Herron divorced in 2014 after a 2010 marriage; they share one child born in 2012 under a shared-parenting plan providing equal time.
- Father agreed to pay private school tuition and was designated the child’s primary health insurer under the prior plan.
- In October 2017 Mother moved to modify parental rights, alleging Father changed the child’s doctor and cancelled counseling; Father moved to reallocate parental rights and responsibilities.
- A magistrate ordered the child to live primarily with Mother, named Mother residential parent for school purposes, made Mother primary health insurer/selector of providers, and ordered Father to pay child support; the trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision and overruled Father’s objections.
- On appeal Father argued the court improperly modified companionship (parenting time) without finding a change of circumstances and relied on insufficient findings; the Ninth District vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded for compliance with R.C. 3109.04.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly modified companionship/parenting time from equal shared time | Herron: trial court used wrong statutory standard and failed to find a change of circumstances required to alter allocation of parental rights | Candy: magistrate/trial court found facts justifying change in primary residence and parenting time (communication failures, medical/counseling issues, safety concerns) | Court: sustained; remanded because trial court did not comply with R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) and failed to show consideration of required best-interest factors and change-of-circumstances findings |
| Whether Mother should be designated residential parent for school purposes | Herron: designation flowed from improper companionship modification and thus was erroneous | Candy: designation appropriate given the magistrate/trial-court factual findings | Court: sustained (vacated pending proper reconsideration of parenting time) |
| Whether Mother should be primary health insurer and selector of health-care providers | Herron: designation stems from improper reallocation and thus must be vacated | Candy: designation supported by magistrate findings about medical/counseling communications and child’s needs | Court: sustained (vacated pending proper reconsideration of parenting time) |
| Whether child support order (and denial of deviation) was proper | Herron: child support order is predicated on improper modification of companionship; requested deviation was improperly denied | Candy: child support award appropriate under new allocation of parenting time | Court: sustained (child support order vacated and remanded as interrelated to parenting-time decision) |
Key Cases Cited
- Fisher v. Hasenjager, 116 Ohio St.3d 53 (Ohio 2007) (distinguishes modifications that reallocate residential parent under R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) from changes to shared-parenting-plan terms under R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(b); allocation changes require a showing of change of circumstances and best interest analysis)