In re A.B.
2017 Ohio 5776
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- In 2013 Brown County JFS filed a dependency complaint after children were found living in a cluttered, one‑bedroom apartment with hygiene and safety issues; eight children were removed and placed in agency custody.
- Mother, Father, and Father’s then‑wife (Wife) stipulated to dependency; BCDJFS moved to place four of Mother’s children in legal custody with three nonrelative foster families (the Grays, Blacks, Whites).
- A five‑day dispositional hearing produced testimony about poor hygiene, medical and developmental delays, and progress the children made in foster placements (improved health, speech, school, bonding with foster families).
- The magistrate awarded legal custody of the four children to the respective foster families; the juvenile court later adopted the magistrate’s decision after overruling Mother’s objections.
- Mother appealed seven assignments of error challenging sufficiency/manifest weight, procedural errors (custodians’ absence, multiple hearing dates, delay in ruling, lack of review hearing), agency reasonable‑efforts findings, characterization of foster families, and requested findings of fact; the court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | BCDJFS / Foster Families’ Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether legal custody to nonparents was supported by evidence / against manifest weight | Award was unsupported; conditions remediable; bond with Mother favored reunification | Evidence showed intolerable residence, medical/developmental harm, and substantial child progress in foster homes; best interests favor custody to foster families | Court: No abuse of discretion; award supported by preponderance and not against manifest weight |
| Whether award to Whites was invalid because they did not appear at dispositional hearing (R.C. 2151.353(A)(3)(d)) | Plain error: Whites didn’t testify as statute requires presence to affirm custody | Whites signed required statements of understanding and were aware; Mother forfeited contemporaneous objection; no exceptional plain error | Court: No plain error; placement may continue |
| Whether court erred in procedural scheduling and delay ruling on objections / not holding review hearing | Court abused discretion by splitting disposition across dates, delaying rulings, and not scheduling annual review | Scheduling delays caused by multiple parties and calendars; Mother did not request review hearing; no shown prejudice | Court: No plain error or abuse of discretion; assignments rejected |
| Whether court erred in not making explicit findings / mischaracterizing foster families as kin | Court failed to make separate findings and mischaracterized nonrelatives as kin, affecting custody analysis | Juvenile court adopted magistrate’s findings; R.C. allows legal custody to any person; parental rights not terminated under legal custody | Court: No reversible error; adoption of magistrate’s findings sufficed; custody proper under statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (1997) (plain error standard in civil cases)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (1997) (custody awards supported by substantial credible evidence are not reversed on weight grounds)