In re adoption of M.G.B.-E., 2019 Ohio 753

Parents divorced in 2004; mother received custody and allegedly interfered with father's visitation over many years. Father largely lost contact with the children and did not resume parenting time after a counseling requirement was not completed in 2008.
Father located the children in 2014 and filed a motion in domestic relations court in May 2015 to reestablish parenting time.
Four days after Father's motion, stepfather filed petitions in probate court to adopt the children, arguing Father's consent was not required because he had failed without justifiable cause to have more than de minimis contact in the year before the petition (R.C. 3107.07(A)).
Probate court initially found Father's consent unnecessary; this court affirmed, but the Ohio Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding the probate court must consider domestic-relations litigation (Father's efforts and Mother’s interference) in determining justifiable cause.
On remand the probate court limited its consideration to filings up to the original adoption hearing date and again found Father’s consent unnecessary without addressing justifiable cause or the domestic-relations evidence the Supreme Court identified.
This appellate court reversed and remanded, holding the probate court erred by (1) refusing to consider all relevant domestic-relations evidence as of the remand hearing and (2) failing to make/findings on whether Father’s lack of contact was without justifiable cause.

Issue	Father (appellant) argument	Stepfather/probate argument	Held
Scope of evidence on remand: may probate consider domestic-relations filings beyond the one-year look-back or beyond original hearing date?	Probate should consider domestic-relations filings up to the remand hearing to show Father’s efforts to reestablish parenting time.	Probate limited consideration to filings up to the date of the original adoption hearing.	Probate courts are not restricted to evidence strictly within the one-year look-back; they must consider relevant domestic-relations evidence as of the remand hearing for context.
Requirement to address justifiable cause: did probate make findings on whether lack of contact was without justifiable cause?	Probate failed to consider or make findings on justifiable cause, including Mother’s interference.	Probate asserted Father had de minimis/no contact and denied consent as unnecessary.	Probate’s decision did not address justifiable cause or Mother’s interference; reversal and remand required for proper findings.
Manifest-weight challenge to probate’s factual finding that Father lacked contact	Father argues any finding that his lack of contact was without justifiable cause is against the manifest weight.	Stepfather defends the finding that Father had de minimis contact.	Moot on remand because court must first consider additional evidence and make justifiable-cause findings.

In re M.G.B.-E., 154 Ohio St.3d 17 (2018) (Ohio Supreme Court: probate must consider domestic-relations proceedings and parental efforts/interference when assessing justifiable cause under R.C. 3107.07(A))
In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (1985) (even complete lack of contact within the statutory period does not eliminate consent requirement if justifiable cause exists)