2021 Ohio 4065
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background:
- Three children (L.P., born 2013; W.P., born 2015; R.P., born 2016) were placed in Franklin County Children Services (FCCS) custody after severe injuries to L.P. in Nov. 2016 and parental admissions that they caused the injuries.
- L.P. adjudicated abused; R.P. and W.P. adjudicated dependent; FCCS maintained temporary custody beginning December 2016 (L.P., R.P.) and May 2017 (W.P.).
- FCCS moved for permanent custody on October 19, 2018; hearing occurred Sept. 15–16, 2020. At that time each child had been in agency custody for 12+ months of a consecutive 22-month period.
- Father (R.P.) appealed, arguing (1) the denial of a one-day continuance was an abuse of discretion and (2) the permanent-custody decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Mother (S.S.) appealed, arguing (1) the guardian ad litem’s (GAL) report and testimony were erroneously admitted and (2) FCCS failed to prove permanent custody by clear and convincing evidence.
- The trial court granted FCCS permanent custody; the appellate court affirmed, rejecting parents’ arguments about the continuance, the GAL testimony, and the sufficiency/weight of the evidence on best interests.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of continuance (father) | R.P.: one-day continuance required so father could attend and testify. | FCCS: hearing long delayed; offered accommodation; father’s excuse (home maintenance) was weak; statutory time limits require prompt resolution. | Denial not an abuse of discretion; 695-day delay since filing justified refusal to further continue. |
| Admissibility/weight of GAL report/testimony (mother) | S.S.: GAL failed Sup.R.48 minimum investigation (too little interview/observation); testimony/report should be excluded. | FCCS: GAL filed report timely; trial court may admit testimony and weigh any deficiencies; noncompliance with Sup.R.48 is not automatic exclusion. | No plain error; report was not admitted and GAL testimony was admissible; trial court may consider investigative shortcomings in assigning weight. |
| Permanent custody — best interest / manifest weight | Parents: evidence insufficient to show permanent custody was in children’s best interests. | FCCS: statutory ground met (12 of 22 months in custody); concerns re: unsafe housing, missed drug screens, unresolved mental health/anger issues, incidents by father, strong foster-parent bond and adoption plan. | Affirmed. R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(d) satisfied; the manifest weight of evidence supports trial court’s finding that permanent custody to FCCS is in the children’s best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (1997) (plain-error doctrine in civil cases is disfavored and applied only in exceptional circumstances)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (articulates Ohio manifest-weight-of-the-evidence standard and appellate review deference to trial court’s factual findings)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (discusses distinctions between sufficiency and weight-of-the-evidence analyses)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (2007) (trial court may consider child’s wishes either directly or via the guardian ad litem)