In re A.K.
2015 Ohio 29
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Brian (father) repeatedly sought reallocation of custody of three children from Jenise (mother) after a long, bitter custody dispute starting in 2007 with prior appellate rulings upholding mother’s custody.
- Multiple motions, contempt proceedings, abuse investigations (unsubstantiated), and suspensions/restrictions of Brian’s parenting time occurred; court conducted in-camera interviews of the children.
- Brian filed motions for change of custody (May 2011) alleging parental alienation and visitation denials; proceedings spanned 2011–2013 with evidentiary hearings in Aug./Oct. 2013.
- Trial court denied qualifying Brian’s psychologist Dr. Mason as an expert in parental alienation but allowed him to testify about alienation indicators; court found no change of circumstances warranting custody modification.
- Trial court held mother in contempt for some visitation denials but declined to reallocate custody; Brian appealed raising recusal, change-of-circumstances, in-camera interview access, expert exclusion, evidence limitations, stenographer, and manifest-weight challenges.
- Court of appeals affirmed, finding no reversible error except that exclusion of Dr. Mason as an alienation expert was unsupportable but harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Brian) | Defendant's Argument (Jenise) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial judge recusal/bias | Judge should recuse because of pending federal suit and demonstrated bias | No disqualifying bias; Supreme Court of Ohio previously denied disqualification | Denied; no reversible bias and plaintiff’s recusal remedies are with Ohio Supreme Court |
| Change of circumstances to reallocate custody | New facts (children’s depression/behavior, alleged alienation, poor living conditions, visitation denials) justify reallocation | No substantial/new change since 2009 decree; issues long-standing and not altered | Denied; no change of substance sufficient to reallocate custody |
| In-camera interviews/transcript access | Right to confront; counsel should access transcripts of children’s in-camera interviews | In-camera interviews are confidential under statute/rules; parents lack right to transcripts | Denied; trial court properly refused to release interviews to parent’s counsel |
| Expert qualification (Dr. Mason on alienation) | Dr. Mason is a qualified psychologist with experience and continuing education in alienation; should be qualified as an expert | Court questioned foundation specific to ‘‘alienation’’ expertise | Court erred in excluding Dr. Mason as an alienation expert but error was harmless because he testified about alienation indicators and ultimate factfinding remained with trial court |
Key Cases Cited
- Beer v. Griffith, 54 Ohio St.2d 440 (Ohio 1978) (procedures for judicial disqualification reviewed by Ohio Supreme Court)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (Ohio 1997) (custody modification requires a substantial change of circumstances and trial-court discretion)
- Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 1988) (trial court’s superior position to judge credibility in custody proceedings)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (definition of abuse of discretion)
- AAAA Enterprises, Inc. v. River Place Community Urban Redevelopment Corp., 50 Ohio St.3d 157 (Ohio 1990) (standards for abuse of discretion review)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (standard for manifest-weight review)
- Owais v. Costandinidis, 2d Dist. Greene No. 2014-CA-5 (Ohio Court of Appeals decision cited for procedure on bias remedies)