In re K.R., 2017 Ohio 7122

In Aug. 2015 Warren County Children Services (WCCS) removed K.R. (8) and R.L. (2) from Mother after Mother tested positive for drugs and had a history of substance abuse; both children were adjudicated neglected and dependent and placed in foster care.
WCCS created a reunification case plan for Mother (drug treatment, mental health assessment, stable housing/income, comply with court orders); Mother completed outpatient treatment but repeatedly relapsed and ceased participation in case plan by mid-2016.
Father (K.R.’s biological father) had a sporadic presence: incarcerated July 2014–July 2015, moved to Kentucky, later entered residential drug treatment, but did not consistently pursue visitation or case-plan services and admitted he had not seen K.R. since before removal.
WCCS moved for permanent custody in Oct. 2016; at the Jan. 2017 hearing the court removed the court-appointed GAL for not meeting with the children but did not appoint a replacement; the court interviewed K.R. in camera.
The juvenile court found Father had abandoned K.R., found that neither parent could have the children placed with them within a reasonable time, and awarded permanent custody of both children to WCCS.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Court failed to appoint a new guardian ad litem after removing original GAL	Mother: court violated R.C. 2151.281(D); failure prejudiced her because a GAL would have observed visits and aided reunification	WCCS: Mother did not object below; no plain error because outcome would not differ	Court: Removal of GAL was proper but court erred by not appointing successor; error was harmless (no prejudice) and assignment overruled
Whether Father abandoned K.R.	Father: court erred — paternity not established, so parental rights never extinguished by abandonment finding	WCCS: Father failed to visit or maintain contact >90 days and took minimal steps to assert parental rights	Court: Sufficient credible evidence of abandonment (Father admitted no contact since before removal); assignment overruled
Whether child could be placed with Father within reasonable time / due process re: service	Father: improper service by publication and late notice deprived him of ability to participate; thus court erred and due process violated	WCCS: Service by publication was proper; in any event Father was aware of removal, took no timely steps, and participated at permanent custody hearing	Court: Service by publication was adequate; even if defective Father suffered no prejudice because he failed to use case services; no due process violation; assignment overruled

Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (state must prove statutory standards by clear and convincing evidence before terminating parental rights)
Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (Ohio 1997) (plain error in civil cases requires an error that seriously affects fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial process)