2017 Ohio 375
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- Mother (Teddi F.) is the biological mother of three children: Z.F. (b. 2011), C.F. (b. 2012), and K.S. (b. 2015). All three children were placed in temporary custody of Summit County Children Services Board (CSB).
- C.F. suffered severe injuries in 2014; Mother initially blamed another child but later admitted Father S. inflicted the injuries. Father S. was convicted of endangering children and felony domestic violence. C.F. was adjudicated abused; Z.F. and K.S. were adjudicated dependent.
- CSB’s case plan required Mother to secure stable housing/income, complete parenting classes, obtain a mental-health assessment and follow treatment, and attend supervised visitation. Substance abuse was a lesser focus.
- Mother completed a psychological assessment (diagnosed with a personality disorder with antisocial traits) but failed to engage in consistent, long-term counseling and was later terminated from treatment. She continued relationships with violent men, including Father S., and minimized his harm to C.F.
- Mother did not maintain stable housing or income, failed to visit the children consistently, showed little implementation of parenting skills, and the children were well-settled in foster placements; CSB could not find willing suitable relatives for permanent placement.
- Trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights and awarded CSB permanent custody; Mother appealed arguing (1) the court erred in finding she had been convicted of child endangering regarding C.F., and (2) the permanent-custody ruling was not supported by clear and convincing evidence and was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in finding Mother was convicted of child endangering re: C.F. | Mother: No proper evidence of a conviction was before the court; reliance on that finding was erroneous. | CSB: Even if that finding was in error, the court made alternative findings that satisfy R.C. 2151.414(E), so any error was not prejudicial. | Court: Any error was harmless because other alternative statutory grounds (12 of 22 months in custody and R.C. 2151.414(E)(1) failure to remedy conditions) were supported by clear and convincing evidence. |
| Whether the statutory first-prong for permanent custody was met (R.C. 2151.414(E)) | Mother: Conditions had been remedied or were remediable; not proven by clear and convincing evidence. | CSB: Mother failed to substantially remedy conditions (lack of housing/income, continued unsafe relationships, failure to engage in long-term counseling, inconsistent visitation). | Court: Held CSB met the first-prong; Mother failed to substantially remedy the conditions that caused removal. |
| Whether termination and award of permanent custody was in children’s best interests (R.C. 2151.414(D)) | Mother: Termination not supported by clear and convincing evidence; children’s best interests do not favor permanent custody by CSB. | CSB: Children are well-adjusted in foster homes, desire of older children to remain, need for permanence, no suitable relatives, guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody. | Court: Held awarding permanent custody to CSB was in the children’s best interests. |
| Whether Mother suffered reversible prejudice from any trial-court errors | Mother: Erroneous factual findings prejudiced her case. | CSB: Even assuming some errors, other valid findings support the decision so no prejudice. | Court: No reversible prejudice; alternative findings supported termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lowry v. Lowry, 48 Ohio App.3d 184 (1988) (appellate standard for demonstrating reversible error requires showing both error and resulting prejudice)
- Gries Sports Ents., Inc. v. Cleveland Browns Football Co., Inc., 26 Ohio St.3d 15 (1986) (standard on prejudice for reversible-error analysis)
- In re William S., 75 Ohio St.3d 95 (1996) (describing the two-prong statutory permanent-custody test under R.C. 2151.414)