2020 Ohio 4400
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Parents (never married) had twin sons born in Jan. 2007; Ohio juvenile court issued initial custody/visitation/support orders in 2008.
- After separation, the family moved to Grand Rapids, Michigan; the parents and children lived there as a family roughly 2010–2019 and purchased a home there.
- Father filed a motion in Montgomery County (Ohio) in Sept. 2019 to transfer the case to Michigan; he also filed in Michigan; the Kent County (Mich.) court accepted jurisdiction on Oct. 22, 2019 after consulting with the Ohio magistrate under the UCCJEA.
- Mother filed a motion in Ohio (Oct. 2019) to reallocate parental rights after returning to Ohio; the Ohio magistrate and trial court found Ohio had lost exclusive continuing jurisdiction under R.C. 3127.16 because the child, parents, and persons acting as parents no longer "presently reside[d]" in Ohio.
- The Ohio court dismissed Mother’s motion and declined jurisdiction; Mother appealed, arguing (1) Ohio retained exclusive continuing jurisdiction as the original home state, and (2) the court should have held a UCCJEA due-process/hearing before declining jurisdiction.
- The Second District affirmed: Ohio had lost exclusive continuing jurisdiction and Michigan was the appropriate forum; no error in not holding a separate R.C. 3127.21 hearing because Michigan had accepted jurisdiction after inter-court communication.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | Father’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ohio retained exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over custody under R.C. 3127.16 | Ohio remained the original home state and Mother’s filing after her return preserved Ohio’s continuing jurisdiction | Ohio lost exclusive jurisdiction because the child, parents, and persons acting as parents did not "presently reside" in Ohio for the relevant period; family resided in Michigan for years | Court held Ohio lost exclusive continuing jurisdiction; long-term Michigan residence meant Ohio no longer was the state that "presently resided" under R.C. 3127.16 |
| Whether the court erred by failing to hold a R.C. 3127.21 forum-inconveniens hearing (due process) before declining jurisdiction | Court must allow a hearing and consider statutory factors before declining jurisdiction | Michigan had become the children’s home state and the Ohio and Michigan courts had communicated; Michigan had accepted jurisdiction, making Michigan the more appropriate forum | Court held no reversible error: Ohio lacked exclusive jurisdiction and inter-court communication plus Michigan’s acceptance made Michigan the appropriate forum; separate R.C. 3127.21 hearing was not required under these facts |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Seaton v. Holmes, 100 Ohio St.3d 265 (Ohio 2003) (original decree state loses continuing jurisdiction when parties leave and do not "remain the residence" of that state)
- Justis v. Justis, 81 Ohio St.3d 312 (Ohio 1998) (discusses UCCJA framework and PKPA interaction)
- Rosen v. Celebrezze, 117 Ohio St.3d 241 (Ohio 2008) (UCCJEA gives priority to home-state jurisdiction and addresses interstate custody conflicts)
- State ex rel. M.L. v. O’Malley, 144 Ohio St.3d 553 (Ohio 2015) (where an initial in-state filing remains pending, the state may retain jurisdiction for the pending proceeding)
- C.H. v. O’Malley, 158 Ohio St.3d 107 (Ohio 2019) (clarifies that a voluntarily dismissed filing is a legal nullity for home-state commencement analysis)