In re C.B.
129 Ohio St. 3d 231
| Ohio | 2011Background
- Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services (CCDCFS) was granted temporary custody of C.B. after adjudication as dependent and placed with foster parents.
- After more than a year, CCDCFS sought permanent custody and termination of parental rights so C.B. could be placed for adoption.
- The juvenile court denied permanent custody, terminated CCDCFS temporary custody, and awarded legal custody to the father while continuing protective supervision for progressive visitation; the temporary-custody order was to terminate soon.
- CCDCFS moved to modify the dispositional order two days later, seeking a two‑month extension of temporary custody to complete progressive visitation; the court stayed the termination pending a hearing.
- Mother appealed the custody grant to the father and GAL cross-appealed challenging the denial of permanent custody and the award of legal custody to the father.
- Appellate courts treated the issue as whether the order terminating temporary custody and granting legal custody to a parent was a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02, and whether the child is entitled to independent counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the disposition final and appealable under R.C. 2505.02? | CCDCFS argues Adams dictates no final order until modification is final. | Children's positions rely on the court terminating temporary custody and granting legal custody to a parent as final. | Yes; the order is final and appealable. |
| Does a child in a permanent-custody case have a right to independent counsel when GAL is also an attorney for the child? | Williams requires independent counsel in certain conflicts; child needs separate counsel here. | GAL represents best interests; no demonstrated conflict requiring independent counsel. | No independent counsel required; issue dismissed as improvidently accepted. |
| Did the trial court properly protect the child’s best interests via the guardian ad litem’s role in a permanent-custody proceeding? | GAL failed to safeguard best interests due to conflict with father's interests. | GAL acted within statutory role; no demonstrated conflict or failure. | GAL’s role adequately protected the child’s best interests; no basis for independent counsel. |
| Is there a final order requiring reversal/remand given the procedural posture late in the proceedings? | Record shows ongoing disposition; not final at time of appeal. | Order terminated temporary custody and awarded legal custody, ending the proceeding for child. | The court remands; the order is final under the applicable standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adams, 115 Ohio St.3d 86 (2007-Ohio-4840) (temporary-to-permanent custody modification not final)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (parents have permanent custody rights; appealability when deprived)
- In re H.F., 120 Ohio St.3d 499 (2008-Ohio-6810) (adjudication of abuse/neglect with temporary custody is final under 2505.02)
- In re Williams, 101 Ohio St.3d 398 (2004-Ohio-1500) (child in custody proceedings may be entitled to independent counsel in certain circumstances)