In re S.S., 2016 Ohio 7328

Father (appellant) moved from Ohio to Georgia and previously was ordered to pay child support and given parenting time for his minor daughter Stacey.
Father filed a motion to modify child support in March 2015 claiming unemployment; Mother filed a motion to modify parenting time in May 2015.
A trial before a magistrate was scheduled for December 15, 2015; Father did not appear and filed a continuance motion the morning the hearing began, saying he had a Georgia subpoena/trial conflict beginning December 14.
Magistrate overruled the continuance, dismissed Father’s child-support modification motion without prejudice for failure to prosecute, and proceeded to grant Mother’s parenting-time modification (restricting Father’s parenting time unless Mother agreed).
Father filed objections but failed to file a transcript; the juvenile court overruled his objections. Father appealed pro se.
The appellate court affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion in denying the continuance, noting Father could refile the support motion, and holding the parenting-time issue moot because the child reached majority.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the magistrate abused discretion in denying a continuance	Father argued the hearing should be continued due to a Georgia subpoena/trial conflict	Magistrate/trial court relied on late filing/call and discretionary standards to deny continuance	No abuse of discretion; continuance denial was reasonable given late notice and uncertain record of earlier communication
Whether dismissal of Father’s support modification was improper	Father argued dismissal prejudiced his rights to modify support	Magistrate dismissed for failure to prosecute but without prejudice	Dismissal without prejudice upheld; Father may refile, so no reversible harm
Whether failure to file a transcript justified overruling objections	Father objected to magistrate’s decision but did not provide transcript	Court required transcript to review objections	Overruled objections because of missing transcript; appellant failed to preserve record for review
Whether parenting-time ruling requires relief on appeal	Father sought reversal of parenting-time decision	Mother maintained ruling stands; child later turned 18	Parenting-time issue is moot because child reached majority; no relief available

Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (defines abuse of discretion standard)
State v. Unger, 67 Ohio St.2d 65 (Ohio 1981) (continuance decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion)