In re S.G.
2016 Ohio 8403
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- S.G., born Nov. 2012, suffered multiple fractures as an infant; father Patrick pled guilty to endangering children and was incarcerated for 72 months.
- After initial emergency placements in Jan. 2013, S.G. primarily lived with foster parents (the Kennings) for roughly two years and then again from Sept. 2015 onward.
- Mother Kimberly Schafer regained legal custody in Feb. 2015 but relocated to Minnesota in 2015 after testing positive for drugs and consenting to Agency custody; she supported permanency with the Kennings.
- Patrick’s mother, Kimberly Schroeder (paternal grandmother), temporarily housed S.G. for ~10 days in 2013, later visited monthly, and sought to intervene and obtain custody shortly before the permanent-custody hearing.
- The Agency moved for permanent custody (R.C. 2151.353(A)(4)); Guardian ad litem recommended denying permanent custody and increasing Schroeder’s visitation while investigating her as a placement.
- The juvenile court denied Schroeder’s late motion to intervene and granted permanent custody to the Agency, finding S.G. had been in Agency custody 12+ of 22 months and that placement with either parent was not appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Patrick) | Defendant's Argument (State/Agency) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by denying Schroeder’s motion to intervene | Schroeder should have been allowed to intervene and present witnesses; denial violated due process | Motion was untimely; grandparents have no automatic right to intervene; Schroeder knew of the case and was told how to intervene months earlier | Denial affirmed: no abuse of discretion; timely filing and lack of in loco parentis support denial |
| Whether granting permanent custody to Agency was against manifest weight of evidence | Permanent custody improper because a willing suitable relative (Schroeder) existed and GAL recommended further investigation/denial | S.G. needed permanency; parents unsuitable (father incarcerated for abuse; mother abandoned); Schroeder financially unable and had prior neglect/substance/other concerns | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supported best-interest finding and permanent custody to Agency |
| Role of GAL recommendation in permanent-custody decision | GAL recommended denying permanent custody and further investigating Schroeder — court should follow | GAL’s recommendation is not binding; court may weigh other evidence (financial inability, prior neglect, short prior care period) | Court may decline GAL recommendation; it provided sufficient reasons for disagreement |
| Whether relative placement must be exhausted before granting permanent custody | Patrick argued court should have prioritized relative placement (Schroeder) | Agency had investigated Schroeder and found her unsuitable for long-term placement; willingness alone is insufficient | No requirement to place with relative before permanent custody if relative is unsuitable; willingness doesn’t override best-interest analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- In re Schmidt, 25 Ohio St.3d 331 (Ohio 1986) (grandparents lack intervention-as-of-right under Civ.R. 24(A))
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (manifest-weight standard for civil cases)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (Ohio 2008) (permanent-custody: clear-and-convincing proof requirement)
- State v. Schiebel, 55 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 1990) (reviewing sufficiency/quality of evidence for civil findings)
- Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 1988) (deference to trial court’s opportunity to judge witness credibility)