In re Guardianship of Rose, 2017 Ohio 694

Tonya Rose, age 54 in 2016, resided for ~20 years in an extended care facility and has paraplegia and a brain injury from a 1993 chiropractic injury.
Physicians reported delusional thought disorder (schizophrenia), paranoid psychosis, pseudobulbar affect, visual hallucinations, and refusal to take antipsychotic medication.
Staff reported unsafe behaviors: agitation, throwing food, occasional refusal of clothes and assistance with hygiene, and delusions about staff and residents.
Staci Cottrill (non-family, associated with VALE) filed an application for guardianship of Rose’s person, supported by two expert evaluations concluding guardianship was necessary.
Rose opposed appointment, testified against guardianship asserting autonomy and religious faith, and stipulated to the expert reports; the probate court found Rose incompetent and appointed Cottrill guardian of her person.
Rose appealed arguing the trial court failed to find incompetency by clear and convincing evidence and that mental illness alone is insufficient to establish incompetence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Rose)	Defendant's Argument (Appellee/Court)	Held
Whether clear and convincing evidence supported a finding of incompetence and necessity of guardianship	Rose: Mental illness/long-term nursing home residency alone do not justify guardianship; no new evidence why guardianship now needed	Appellee: Expert evaluations and observed behaviors show psychiatric impairment affecting judgment and personal care, creating incapacity	Court: Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence showed Rose incapable of taking proper care of herself due to mental impairment

Steele v. Hamilton Cty. Community Mental Health Bd., 90 Ohio St.3d 176, 736 N.E.2d 10 (2000) (mental illness alone does not necessarily establish legal incompetence)
In re Estate of Haynes, 25 Ohio St.3d 101, 495 N.E.2d 23 (1986) (definition of "clear and convincing evidence")