In re M.T., 2012 Ohio 534

Mother and Father never married; they share daughter M.T. (born June 1, 2007).
In August 2007, an agreed judgment entry of paternity named Mother M.T.’s residential parent.
Mother was the primary caregiver until December 2010, when she was incarcerated for petty theft and lost her residence.
During incarceration, Father obtained a temporary residential parent order and filed for a change in custody to become sole residential parent.
Hearing held April 20, 2011; Mother appeared pro se, Father appeared with counsel; on April 26, 2011 the court granted Father’s motion and named him M.T.’s residential parent.
Mother appeals arguing the court failed to make required best-interest findings under R.C. 3109.04 and that the modification was not properly justified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court properly considered best interests under R.C. 3109.04	Mother asserts no explicit best-interest findings.	Father argues modification supported by changed circumstances.	Remand required to determine best-interest findings.
Whether the custody change was appropriate under statute after change in circumstances	Mother contends change not justified without best-interest analysis.	Father maintains change warranted by circumstances.	Moot as to weight; remand for best-interest determination.

Hart v. Hart, 2011-Ohio-2501 (9th Dist. 2011) (requires explicit consideration of statutory factors; if absent, remand)
Matis v. Matis, 2005-Ohio-72 (9th Dist. 2005) (judgment can suffice if incorporates factors from R.C. 3109.04(F))
Hodson v. Hodson, 2007-Ohio-4419 (9th Dist. 2007) (court must show consideration of R.C. 3109.04(F) factors)
Graves v. Graves, 2002-Ohio-3740 (9th Dist. 2002) (custody decisions afforded deference but review for abuse of discretion)
Baxter v. Baxter, 2011-Ohio-4034 (9th Dist. 2011) (custody determinations generally reviewed for abuse; deference to trial court)