In re Adoption of D.D.G.
2018 Ohio 35
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Step-father filed petitions on May 12, 2017 to adopt two minor children; he alleged the natural father’s consent was not required because the father failed to provide more than de minimis contact for the year before filing.
- Father last had in-person contact with the children in April 2013 (a one-hour visit related to his father’s funeral); he later claimed limited Facebook contact but could not prove dates/times.
- Father had an acrimonious breakup with the mother in 2006 involving a domestic violence conviction and a protection order (which allowed very limited supervised visits in 2011 for under two months); father thereafter moved away and did not resume visitation.
- From 2013 until the adoption petitions were filed the mother, step-father, and children lived at the same address; father did not send cards, gifts, contact the children’s school, or seek enforcement of an existing parenting-time order.
- The probate court held an evidentiary hearing, found by clear and convincing evidence that father failed without justifiable cause to provide more than de minimis contact for the statutory period, and determined his consent was not required; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether father's consent to step-parent adoptions was required under R.C. 3107.07 because he failed, without justifiable cause, to provide more than de minimis contact for the year before the petitions | Petitioner: Father had no more-than-de-minimis contact during the relevant period and offers no justifiable cause; petitioner met clear-and-convincing burden | Father: He loves the children, attempted Facebook contact, past protection order and relocation limited contact, and prior domestic-violence context justified lack of contact | Court: Affirmed — clear-and-convincing evidence showed no more-than-de-minimis contact and no justifiable cause; father's consent not required |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (Ohio 1985) (establishes burden: petitioner must prove failure to communicate by clear and convincing evidence and discusses "justifiable cause")
- In re Adoption of Bovett, 33 Ohio St.3d 102 (Ohio 1987) (discusses shifting burden to parent to show facially justifiable cause after petitioner establishes failure)
- In re Adoption of McDermitt, 63 Ohio St.2d 301 (Ohio 1980) (addresses factual determination of justifiable cause and deference to probate court credibility findings)
- In re Adoption of M.B., 131 Ohio St.3d 186 (Ohio 2012) (reiterates standard of review for factual findings in adoption/parental-rights contexts)