In re B.B., 2011 Ohio 2928

The mother appeals the juvenile court’s custody-modification judgment adopting a magistrate’s decision granting father primary residential parent and custodian status.
The magistrate held a hearing on September 2, 2010, and issued a written decision on September 8, 2010.
Mother timely filed objections to the magistrate’s factual findings on September 17, 2010.
Mother separately moved for the transcript at state expense and for leave to file supplemental objections after transcript availability.
Trial court overruled objections and adopted the magistrate’s decision on September 22, 2010 and issued a detailed judgment entry on September 23, 2010.
The appellate court sustained the sole assignment of error, reversed, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Transcript timing and objections procedure under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(iii).	Mother was entitled to a transcript and time to supplement objections.	Court could proceed after objections; transcript not required before ruling.	Judgment reversed; remanded for proceedings after transcript rule consideration.

Haverdick v. Haverdick, 11th Dist. No. 2010-T-0040, 2010-Ohio-6256 (Ohio 2010) (trial court errs without allowing transcript opportunity when reviewing objections)
In re N.L., 11th Dist. No. 2009-T-0019, 2011-Ohio-1010 (Ohio 2011) (transcript necessary for evaluating objections to magistrate’s decision)
Lincoln v. Rush Expediting, Inc., 2d Dist. No. 23847, 2010-Ohio-5286 (Ohio 2010) (further supports need for transcript before ruling on objections)
Black v. Brewer, 178 Ohio App.3d 113, 2008-Ohio-4365 (Ohio 2008) (proper consideration of objections requires transcript availability)
In re Wheeler, 5th Dist. No. CT2004-0037, 2005-Ohio-220 (Ohio 2005) (abuse of discretion when ruling without transcript)
In re Moorehead, 75 Ohio App.3d 711, 600 N.E.2d 778 (Ohio 1991) (transcript review essential to objections)