In re D.E.
2018 Ohio 3341
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Infant D.E. removed from mother shortly after birth for failure to thrive; placed in WCCS temporary custody and a foster-to-adopt home where he has lived since March 2016.
- Father established paternity later; case plan required drug screens, parenting, housing, employment. Father visited sporadically, missed appointments, refused some drug screens, and lacked stable housing and proof of income.
- Grandmother intervened and sought legal custody; she already had custody of D.E.’s four older siblings but frequently missed visitation, did not attend medical appointments, and had limited space and availability.
- Guardian ad litem moved for permanent custody to WCCS; foster parents expressed willingness to adopt and child was thriving in that placement.
- Juvenile court granted permanent custody to WCCS; Father and Grandmother appealed, arguing insufficient/manifest weight of evidence and that legal custody to them would be in D.E.’s best interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody to agency was justified | Father/Grandmother: court lacked clear and convincing evidence; alternatives (legal custody to them) are in child’s best interest | WCCS/guardian ad litem: child has been in agency custody >12 of 22 months; foster placement provides permanency and stability | Affirmed: statutory second-prong met (12+ months) and best-interest factors support permanent custody to WCCS |
| Whether juvenile court considered R.C. 2151.414(D) best-interest factors adequately | Father/Grandmother: court failed to adequately address each enumerated factor | Court/guardian ad litem: record and 17-page opinion show thorough consideration | Affirmed: court adequately considered the statutory best-interest factors |
| Whether legal custody to Grandmother was a suitable alternative | Grandmother: bonded to child, has custody of siblings, stable employment and home | WCCS: Grandmother overcommitted caring for four young children, missed visits and appointments, had space/safety concerns | Affirmed: court reasonably denied legal custody to Grandmother as not in child’s best interest |
| Whether decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Father/Grandmother: evidence favors their ability to parent and bond with D.E. | WCCS/guardian ad litem: foster placement provides superior stability, parents’ shortcomings (housing, substance-use, inconsistent engagement) unrepaired | Affirmed: no manifest miscarriage of justice; finding supported by credible evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (state must prove termination standards by clear and convincing evidence)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (standard for deciding whether a judgment is against the manifest weight of the evidence)
- In re C.C., 187 Ohio App.3d 365 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010) (case-plan completion is not the sole measure; focus is on whether parent remedied removal concerns)