In re K.L.
2021 Ohio 3080
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- K.L., born Feb. 5, 2018, is medically fragile after a neonatal heart defect and an August 15, 2018 heart transplant; she requires lifelong, potent immunosuppressant medication and a pristine living environment to avoid infection.
- JFS removed K.L. (and sibling) Jan. 4, 2019; children were adjudicated dependent March 5, 2019, and K.L. remained in JFS temporary custody.
- Case plan required parents to keep a clean home, properly administer medications/feeding-tube care, and address parenting/mental-health issues; parents completed some services but struggled with home cleanliness and medication oversight.
- Incidents included an improperly cleaned G-tube, administration of expired medication while K.L. was in parents’ care, and photographic evidence (Nov. 2020) of pervasive clutter, trash, and unsanitary conditions.
- JFS moved for permanent custody Oct. 29, 2020; after a Feb. 3, 2021 hearing, the juvenile court awarded permanent custody to JFS. Mother appealed, raising three assignments of error (denied continuance, weight/sufficiency of evidence for permanent custody, and GAL report deficiencies).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (JFS/Trial Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of continuance to secure witnesses | Counsel had service/subpoena problems and could not present three defense witnesses | Request was untimely; no written continuance or subpoenas in court file; no proffer of witness testimony; child’s need for finality | Denial not an abuse of discretion — mother failed to proffer; subpoenas not shown; prejudice speculative |
| Whether clear-and-convincing evidence supported granting permanent custody to JFS | Mother had made progress (parenting classes, med training); expired meds caused no harm; foster parent responsible for meds | K.L.’s severe medical needs require an immaculate home; parents repeatedly failed to maintain cleanliness, failed to monitor meds, and did not sustain remedial change despite services | Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supported finding child could not be placed with parents and that permanent custody was in child’s best interest |
| Alleged error from GAL failing to file written report and relying on agency records | GAL did not file required written report and based recommendation on agency document, which prejudiced mother's case | Rules of Superintendence are housekeeping (not substantive); no objection at hearing; GAL testified and counsel could cross-examine; outcome supported by other evidence | No plain error. Failure to file written report not reversible here; court criticized GAL’s limited written work but found outcome unchanged |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Unger, 67 Ohio St.2d 65 (trial court’s continuance denial reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (standard for review of manifest weight/clear-and-convincing findings)
- Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (presumption favoring fact-finder’s findings)
- In re William S., 75 Ohio St.3d 95 (permanent custody statutory framework)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (definition of "clear and convincing evidence")
- In re Walker, 162 Ohio App.3d 303 (purpose of proffer when evidence/exclusion impacts appellate review)
- State v. White, 15 Ohio St.2d 146 (bench trial presumption that court considers only competent evidence)