In re C.B., 2018 Ohio 5303

Children (one born 2010, twins born 2011) were removed from Mother's care in Oct. 2015 after neglect allegations tied to Mother's substance abuse; ACDJFS obtained temporary custody.
Mother completed much of her case plan, maintained sobriety (multiple negative drug screens), participated in treatment, and had periods of in‑home visitation; children briefly returned to Mother Jan–Feb 2017.
Mother lived with her father; her brother (a Tier III registered sex offender) was present in the home while the children were there, prompting removal on Feb. 28, 2017; Mother was also convicted of petty theft while children were in her care.
Maternal aunt and uncle cared for the children for much of the case, addressed dental and educational needs, and were recommended by the GAL for legal custody despite some domestic‑violence history involving the uncle.
Magistrate granted legal custody to Maternal Aunt and Uncle; trial court remanded for explicit findings under R.C. 3109.04(F)(1), then adopted the magistrate’s decision and awarded legal custody to the aunt and uncle while increasing mother’s parenting time incrementally.

Issue	Mother's Argument	ACDJFS's Argument	Held
Whether awarding legal custody to aunt/uncle was against manifest weight/sufficiency	Mother: She completed case plan, maintained sobriety, and custody with her serves children’s best interests	ACDJFS: Children were bonded to aunt/uncle; their dental/educational needs were addressed there; mother exposed children to criminal activity and presence of convicted sex offender	Court: Affirmed — preponderance of evidence supports legal custody to aunt/uncle based on best‑interest factors
Whether ACDJFS failed to make reasonable efforts to prevent continued removal	Mother: ACDJFS stopped pursuing reunification after Feb. 28, 2017 and failed to prevent removal	ACDJFS: Agency provided appropriate services and reasonable efforts prior to and overall in the case; child safety paramount after safety incidents	Court: Affirmed — overall record shows reasonable efforts toward prevention until safety concerns necessitated removal
Whether ACDJFS failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification	Mother: Agency did not adequately pursue reunification after removal	ACDJFS: Continued services were provided and reunification was the goal until safety issues (brother’s presence, theft conviction) required protection	Court: Affirmed — evidence supports that reasonable reunification efforts were made given child safety concerns

In re C.R., 108 Ohio St.3d 369, 843 N.E.2d 1188 (Ohio 2006) (legal custody does not divest parents of residual parental rights; best‑interest focus in dispositional decisions)
Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (Ohio 1997) (custody decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion; trial court has broad latitude)
C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr., 54 Ohio St.2d 279, 376 N.E.2d 578 (Ohio 1978) (judgments supported by some competent, credible evidence will not be reversed as against manifest weight)