2014 Ohio 2338
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Agency filed for dependent child status and sought permanent custody; child born Dec 16, 2011 amid alleged maternal suicidality and parental intellectual delays.
- Temporary custody awarded to agency at birth; parents stipulated to dependency and continued agency custody.
- Case plan required father to complete psychological evaluation, batterer's intervention, GED, employment, and stable housing; mother participated briefly then disengaged.
- Father completed evaluation; recommended individual counseling and batterer’s program, but failed to complete both.
- Mother failed to maintain contact and failed to appear at permanent custody hearing; GAL recommended agency custody.
- Magistrate granted permanent custody to agency; trial court adopted the decision; father appeals asserting manifest weight and case-plan adequacy arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody to the agency is in the child’s best interest | R.E. has been with the agency 12+ months; foster family bonded; need for secure placement. | Parents started some services but failed to remedy issues; risks persist. | Yes; best interest supported by bonding and lack of substantial remedy. |
| Whether the case plan and services were appropriate and substantial remedy occurred | Agency properly required batterer’s intervention and counseling based on concerns. | Some services (DV assessment, counseling provider) contested; father argues steps were substantial. | Yes; court affirmed due to sufficient evidence of plan appropriateness and inadequate remedy. |
| Whether the trial court erred in weighting the evidence under manifest weight standard | Record supports findings; no conflict undermines weight. | Father contends substantial steps toward reunification. | No; evidence supports the court’s decision. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (clear and convincing standard for permanency—liberty interest in custody)
- In re Starkey, 2002-Ohio-6892 (Ohio 7th Dist. 2002) (appellate review limited to sufficiency of clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Rodgers, 138 Ohio App.3d 510 (Ohio 12th Dist. 2000) (manifest weight review in custody determinations)
- In re E.B., 2010-Ohio-1122 (Ohio 12th Dist. Warren 2010) (best-interest analysis under R.C. 2151.414(D) factors)