In re S.L.
2021 Ohio 2377
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- SCDJFS filed a dependency/neglect complaint as to S.L. (born July 14, 2019), alleging both parents were cognitively delayed, homeless, and unable to meet the newborn's needs.
- The juvenile court adjudicated S.L. dependent and placed the child in temporary custody of SCDJFS on October 10, 2019; S.L. remained in agency custody through the February 3, 2021 permanent custody trial.
- SCDJFS moved for permanent custody on December 8, 2020; Mother stipulated to permanent custody; Father contested.
- Evaluations showed Father has moderate intellectual disabilities and serious mental-health diagnoses (bipolar disorder, psychosis), limited parenting knowledge, and unstable housing; he missed treatment and was unsuccessfully discharged from programs.
- Father’s last visit with S.L. was October 5, 2020 (over 90 days before trial); the child had been in agency custody for more than 12 of the prior 22 months and was bonded to a single foster family receiving ongoing therapies.
- The juvenile court granted SCDJFS permanent custody on February 8, 2021; Father appealed challenging the placement and best-interest findings.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | SCDJFS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether child cannot/should not be placed with Father within a reasonable time (R.C. 2151.414(B)) | Trial finding against manifest weight/sufficiency; agency failed to provide reasonable case planning and diligent efforts | Child in agency custody >12 of 22 months; Father abandoned child (>90 days); severe cognitive/mental-health limits, housing instability, noncompliance with treatment; agency made reasonable efforts | Affirmed. Court found clear & convincing evidence of abandonment and 12-of-22-months basis; Father unable to parent within a reasonable time and agency’s efforts were reasonable |
| Whether permanent custody is in the child’s best interest (R.C. 2151.414(D)) | Father notes he was active during visits and challenges the weight of contrary evidence | Child bonded to foster family, receives required therapies there; foster home provides daily care and permanency outweighs minimal bond with Father | Affirmed. Court found competent, credible evidence that permanent custody to SCDJFS is in child’s best interest |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (parental-rights as fundamental civil right)
- Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (1972) (parental rights are fundamental)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1959) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (1978) (appellate review defers where competent, credible evidence supports judgment)
- Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984) (credibility and weight for trier of fact)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (1997) (deference to trial court credibility in custody matters)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (2007) (agency reasonable-efforts finding timing for permanent custody proceedings)