In re J.D.T.
2012 Ohio 4537
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Appellant Todd Triplett seeks to adopt his wife Curry's child J.D., a nine-year-old, with Curry as biological mother and the biological father (Appellee) objecting.
- Curry and Appellee are divorced; Triplett petitions to adopt J.D. on August 8, 2011, asserting Appellee failed to provide de minimis contact and maintenance for one year prior to filing.
- The trial court ruled Appellee’s $44.05 annual child support was sufficient to require his consent; it found Appellee’s lack of consistent contact justifiable due to Curry’s interference.
- The court credited appellee’s witnesses who testified to ongoing efforts to contact J.D. despite Curry’s interference, and discredited the Tripletts’ competing testimony on credibility.
- Triplett filed a motion for reconsideration; on appeal, court affirmed the judgment, with Judge Vukovich dissenting.
- Key procedural posture: appellate review affirmed probate court under R.C. 3107.07(A) and related case law, and the dissent urged reversal and remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether de minimis contact standard applied correctly | Triplett argues lack of de minimis contact was proven by clear and convincing evidence | Appellee contends court properly found lack of contact justifiable | No error; justifiable cause supported by record |
| Whether justifiable cause for lack of contact was proven | Appellee showed ongoing efforts to contact J.D. over the year | Curry blocked contact and interfered with communication | Appellee's lack of contact deemed justifiable; petition denied |
| Whether $44.05 child support constitutes maintenance to excuse failure to support | $44.05 should not satisfy maintenance requirement given arrears | Low earnings and recent employment explain minimal payments | Yes, the court did not err; evidence supports justifiable cause for lack of support |
| Burden of proof on petitioner in adoption under R.C. 3107.07(A) | Petitioner must prove lack of contact and lack of justifiable cause by clear and convincing evidence | Respondent bears the burden to show lack of justifiable cause; court’s standard applicable | Petitioner failed to overcome the burden; decision affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (Ohio 1985) (burden of proof for termination of parental rights; justifiable cause)
- In re Adoption of M.S., 7th Dist. Nos. 11-BE-14, 11-BE-15 (2001-Ohio-6403) (clear and convincing evidence burden; de minimis standard)
- In re Bovett, 33 Ohio St.3d 102 (1987) (burden shifting in adoptions; due process concerns)
- In re Masa, 23 Ohio St.3d 163 (1986) (burden of proof in adoption; justifiable cause consideration)
- In re Fetzer, 118 Ohio App.3d 156 (3d Dist.1997) (example cited re payments satisfying maintenance)
- In re Adoption of M.B., 131 Ohio St.3d 186 (2012-Ohio-236) (development of maintenance/justifiable cause standard)
- Holcomb, Holcomb v. Smith () (see above (Holcomb))
- State v. Schiebel, 55 Ohio St.3d 71 (1990) (standard of review for evidence)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (defining clear and convincing evidence)