In re A.L.
2013 Ohio 5120
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Parents never married; father filed for custody of two children in April 2010. A guardian ad litem (GAL) was appointed.
- Interim shared-parenting order issued; mother later removed the children from the school district and moved out after a domestic incident in June 2010.
- Father obtained temporary custody after alleging mother secretly re-enrolled the children and that mother filed false domestic violence charges that led to temporary protection orders.
- Trial occurred in two parts (Feb 28, 2012 and July 31, 2012). Magistrate limited each side’s presentation time per a May 9, 2011 order; mother objected at trial but did not proffer what evidence was excluded.
- Magistrate found father to be the residential parent, citing concerns about recorded conversations mother had with crying children and other credibility issues; supervised visitation was ordered for mother.
- Mother filed numerous pro se objections but did not supply a transcript to the trial court; the trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court’s time limits on mother’s presentation violated due process by preventing cross-examination of the GAL | Mother: magistrate imposed an arbitrary time limit that deprived her counsel of adequate opportunity to cross-examine the GAL and present her case | Father: time limits were proper docket-control measures; mother did not identify excluded evidence or resulting prejudice | Court: affirmed magistrate; mother failed to provide transcript and did not proffer excluded evidence or prejudice, so time limits were not reversible error |
| Whether trial court abused discretion by adopting the magistrate’s decision without independently reviewing the hearing transcript | Mother: trial court could not meaningfully review factual findings without the transcript | Father: mother failed to supply the transcript as required, so trial court was not obliged to consider matters outside the record | Court: affirmed; Civ.R. 53 requires objector to file transcript/affidavit to preserve objections to factual findings; mother waived those objections by not providing transcript |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion review)
- State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Twp. Trustees, 73 Ohio St.3d 728, 654 N.E.2d 1254 (Ohio 1995) (appellate court may not consider record material not before the trial court)
- State v. Ishmail, 54 Ohio St.2d 402, 377 N.E.2d 500 (Ohio 1978) (reviewing court cannot add matter to the record and decide appeal on that new matter)