In re R.T.
2018 Ohio 3330
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- RCCSB filed complaints May 4, 2017 alleging physical abuse of D.T. and dependency of R.T. and siblings after an incident on Jan. 17, 2017 involving mother’s paramour.
- Following the incident, mother placed children with relatives; in May 2017 she gathered them and fled to Kentucky, prompting temporary custody orders and return of the children to RCCSB.
- Adjudicatory hearings occurred July–Oct. 2017; dispositional hearings occurred Nov. 8, 2017–Mar. 22, 2018. Trial court found all six children dependent and two children abused; mother appealed the dependency/adjudication rulings (R.T. appeal). RCCSB did not file a brief.
- Mother argued dismissal was required under R.C. 2151.35(B) for failure to hold dispositional hearing within 90 days, contested abuse findings as to certain children, challenged R.T.’s dependency, and raised constitutional vagueness of R.C. 2151.031(C).
- The juvenile court concluded (1) the timing requirement is directory not jurisdictional; (2) clear-and-convincing evidence supported dependency of R.T. based on the household environment and violent conduct by mother’s paramour; (3) reasonable efforts and emergency removal rules justified continued temporary custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (B.S.) | Defendant's Argument (RCCSB / Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dispositional hearing deadline (R.C. 2151.35(B)) required dismissal | Statute/jurisdictional; missed 90-day deadline mandates dismissal | Time requirement is directory; dismissal would harm child welfare; remedy for delay is procedendo | Court held the timing is directory; no dismissal (claim overruled) |
| Whether D.T. and M.T. were abused | Mother: trial court erred in abuse finding | RCCSB: evidence showed inflicted injuries and orchestrated cover-up | Court declined to adjudicate here (those children’s appeals separate) |
| Whether R.T. is a dependent child under R.C. 2151.04 | Mother: R.T. not dependent | RCCSB/Court: household environment and paramour’s violence put R.T. at risk; clear and convincing evidence supports dependency | Court affirmed dependency finding |
| Whether removal and continued custody were unjustified / reasonable efforts lacking | Mother: removal and continued custody improper | RCCSB/Court: emergency removal and evidence of flight, prior abuse history, and safety concerns; R.C. 2151.419 allows consideration of emergency removals | Court upheld removal and continuation (reasonable efforts satisfied / emergency removal justified) |
| Constitutional challenge to R.C. 2151.031(C) (vagueness) | Statute overbroad and vague; court relied on unreliable evidence | Court: constitutional challenge waived because not raised below; procedural default bars review | Claim waived; court refused to consider |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Davis, 84 Ohio St.3d 520 (Ohio 1999) (statutory timing provisions in juvenile procedure may be directory; remedy for delay can be writ of procedendo)
- In re Sekulich, 65 Ohio St.2d 13 (Ohio 1981) (adjudication without disposition is not a final, appealable order)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (Ohio 1954) (standard for review of clear-and-convincing evidence and appellate review of weight/credibility)
- State v. Awan, 22 Ohio St.3d 120 (Ohio 1986) (constitutional objections must be raised at first opportunity; appellate courts generally will not consider waived claims)
- Med. Mut. of Ohio v. Schlotterer, 122 Ohio St.3d 181 (Ohio 2009) (de novo review for statutory interpretation issues)