2023 Ohio 3190
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- LCCS filed a complaint and a motion for permanent custody of newborn N.J. on Dec. 13, 2022; mother tested positive for marijuana at birth and admitted using marijuana during pregnancy.
- Mother previously had permanent parental-rights terminations as to two older children and one legal custody loss; those prior terminations were central to agency’s recommendation for permanent custody.
- N.J. was placed in foster care within days of birth; foster parents are meeting his medical needs (including clubfoot treatment), are bonded to him, and intend to seek adoption.
- Mother has housing and some engagement with therapy but missed multiple mental-health appointments, declined prescribed medication after her psychiatrist left, underwent only sporadic drug screens that remained positive for marijuana, and missed or was late to several visits.
- The juvenile court found by clear and convincing evidence that R.C. 2151.414(E)(1), (4), and (11) applied and that awarding permanent custody to LCCS was in N.J.’s best interest; it terminated mother’s parental rights on April 10, 2023.
- Mother appealed solely arguing the court erred in applying R.C. 2151.414(E)(11) because she had rebutted the presumption that prior terminations precluded reunification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 2151.414(E)(11) supported denial of reunification after prior involuntary terminations | Mother: she has stable housing, is in therapy, and rebutted the presumption that prior terminations show she cannot provide a legally secure placement | LCCS: mother continued substance use, failed to engage consistently in mental-health care, missed visits, and has a history of involuntary terminations | Court: E(11) applicable; mother failed to provide clear and convincing evidence to rebut presumption; permanent custody affirmed |
| Whether awarding permanent custody to LCCS was in child’s best interest under R.C. 2151.414(D)(1) | Mother: bond with foster family does not preclude reunification; she can provide adequate care | LCCS/GAL: child is well cared for, bonded to foster family who will adopt, needs legally secure placement | Court: best-interest factors favor permanent custody to LCCS; award affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380, 678 N.E.2d 541 (standard for manifest-weight review)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538, 2008-Ohio-4825, 895 N.E.2d 809 (clarifying the clear-and-convincing evidence standard in juvenile cases)
- In re B.C., 141 Ohio St.3d 55, 2014-Ohio-4558, 21 N.E.3d 308 (permanent-custody analysis and best-interest inquiry)
- In re Brown, 98 Ohio App.3d 337, 648 N.E.2d 576 (deference to trial court as factfinder)