2013 Ohio 268
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- J.W. and S.B. are parents of L.W., B.W., and J.W.; custody and child support have been contentious since birth of the children.
- Custody was transferred to Father on about February 14, 2006, after which Father fell behind on child support.
- Father filed motions to establish a child support order (Feb. 8, 2008) and for past care (July 8, 2009).
- Juvenile court terminated Father’s child support obligations as of February 14, 2006, when custody vested in Father (March 8, 2010).
- Numerous hearings occurred; trial held July 25, 2011; Magistrate issued decision May 4, 2012.
- Father timely objected May 16, 2012 and sought transcript and leave to supplement objections; juvenile court adopted the magistrate’s decision before transcript was obtained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| De novo review after objections | Father contends court failed independent de novo review. | Mother concedes error; requests proper review under Juv.R. 40(D). | Remand for proper de novo review; first error not ripe. |
| Compliance with Juv.R. 40 and transcript | Father argues transcript/affidavit necessary for independent review were not obtained timely. | Mother concedes need for transcript; supports remand to allow proper record. | Remand for proceedings consistent with Juv.R. 40(D). |
Key Cases Cited
- In re H.R.K., 2012-Ohio-4054 (8th Dist. No. 97780 (2012)) (requires independent de novo review on objected magistrate findings with transcript)
- Radford v. Radford, 2011-Ohio-6263 (8th Dist. Nos. 96267 and 96445) (describes de novo review and independent analysis)
- In re R.C., 2011-Ohio-4641 (8th Dist. No. 96396) (abuse of discretion when ruling without transcript for objections)
- Savioli v. Savioli, 99 Ohio App.3d 69 (8th Dist. 1994) (transcript/affidavit facilitation for objected issues)