In re C.J.
2017 Ohio 8612
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- C.J., born Nov. 2015, was placed in LCCS temporary custody at birth and remained in the same foster home; parents are V.B. (mother) and A.J. (father).
- Mother had an extensive prior child-welfare history: LCCS involvement since 2012, five older children found neglected, and those children were eventually placed with relatives; mother repeatedly failed to meet medical and parenting obligations and did not complete recommended mental-health treatment earlier in the case.
- Mother initially visited C.J. regularly, then ceased visits from Aug–Dec 2016; she later resumed visits and engaged in counseling and a domestic-violence survivor program but had not completed interactive parenting before the permanent-custody hearing.
- Father had minimal contact (two visits), did not complete case-plan services, and was incarcerated at the time of trial and awaiting sentencing on multiple felony charges.
- LCCS moved for permanent custody of C.J.; the guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody to LCCS; the trial court granted permanent custody to LCCS (April 11, 2017), terminating parental rights. The court denied permanent custody as to a different sibling, C.B.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by refusing to extend temporary custody so mother could complete services | V.B.: she had made significant recent progress and needed more time because C.J. had been in agency custody less than two years | LCCS: mother had lengthy history of noncompliance and five months of absence; continuance was unwarranted | Court: no error; permanent custody appropriate despite <2-year custody period; mother’s prior failures and lack of commitment justified permanent custody |
| Whether granting permanent custody to LCCS was against manifest weight of the evidence | Parents: award was against manifest weight given mother’s recent engagement in services and improvements | LCCS & GAL: parents failed to remedy conditions, mother’s lengthy absences showed lack of commitment; father’s incarceration prevented care | Court: not against manifest weight; findings under R.C. 2151.414(E)(4) (mother) and (E)(13) (father) supported; best interest finding affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (Ohio 1954) (defines clear-and-convincing-evidence standard)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279, 376 N.E.2d 578 (Ohio 1978) (appellate review: judgments supported by competent, credible evidence will not be reversed as against manifest weight)
- In re Brown, 98 Ohio App.3d 337, 648 N.E.2d 576 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994) (trial court is best positioned to weigh witness credibility)