In re T.C.
2016 Ohio 7631
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Lucas County Children Services (LCCS) removed two children from mother (appellant) in Oct 2014 after reports the family was homeless and the children were unstable; children placed in temporary custody and adjudicated dependent with reunification services ordered.
- Case plan required mother to address mental health, substance use (random drug screens), stable housing, domestic-violence counseling, and trauma therapy.
- Over ~21 months of involvement mother completed some services (domestic-violence program) but missed drug screens, failed to maintain stable employment or income, relied on an adult son for rent, and did not obtain disability/settlement funds she repeatedly promised.
- LCCS filed for permanent custody in Jan 2016; trial held May 2016. LCCS caseworker and the guardian ad litem testified that the children were doing well in foster care and that relatives would adopt if agency obtained permanent custody.
- Trial court found R.C. 2151.414(E)(1) and (4) applicable (parent failed to remedy conditions and demonstrated lack of commitment) and awarded permanent custody to LCCS, terminating mother’s parental rights. Mother appealed, asserting (1) decision against manifest weight/insufficient clear-and-convincing evidence, (2) equal protection/substantive due process violation (decision based on poverty), and (3) ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether clear and convincing evidence supported permanent custody under R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) and (E) | Mother: removal was initially for homelessness but she had stable housing 9 months before trial and consistently visited; court relied on her poverty rather than remedial failures. | LCCS: mother failed continuously to remedy conditions (mental health, substance use, housing, employment) over 21 months; children need stability and relatives will adopt if agency obtains custody. | Affirmed — trial court’s findings under R.C. 2151.414(E)(1) and (4) withstand manifest-weight review; competent, credible evidence supports award. |
| Whether terminating rights based on poverty violated equal protection/substantive due process | Mother: decision punished poverty; she was pursuing workers’ compensation/SSD and awaiting benefits. | LCCS: decision based on mother’s failure to remedy conditions and provide stability, not mere poverty. | Denied — court found the ruling addressed inability/willingness to parent and lack of realistic prospects for improvement, not poverty alone. |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for not investigating workers’ compensation/social security claims | Mother: counsel failed to develop evidence that her disability benefits were imminent/viable, which might have altered the outcome. | LCCS: record contained no evidence those claims were viable; court found mother not credible and no settlement materialized. | Denied — mother failed Strickland prejudice prong; no reasonable probability result would differ. |
| Standard of review for permanent-custody factual findings | (not contested as separate issue) | Appellate court: manifest-weight review; trial court as factfinder best positioned to weigh credibility. | Applied — clear-and-convincing standard; findings not against manifest weight. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (1954) (defines clear-and-convincing standard)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279, 376 N.E.2d 578 (1978) (appellate court will not reverse findings supported by competent, credible evidence)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Jones v. Lucas County Children Servs. Bd., 46 Ohio App.3d 85, 546 N.E.2d 471 (6th Dist. 1988) (applies Strickland standard in parental-termination proceedings)