In re Y.V.
2011 Ohio 2409
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Y.V. was born November 20, 2008; mother was imprisoned for a probation violation, leading to emergency custody by the agency.
- Agency placed Y.V. in a foster home where her two siblings were previously placed; child adjudicated neglected and dependent July 1, 2009.
- Agency gained full temporary custody October 6, 2009 after a hearing; temporary custody extended February 2, 2010 due to some progress.
- Agency filed for permanent custody March 31, 2010, asserting twelve or more months in agency custody during a 22-month period and Y.V.’s best interests favoring permanency.
- Social worker affidavit alleged mother’s severe cocaine problem, failure to complete case plan objectives, and absence of stable housing or income from appellant.
- Appellant did not present evidence at the September 30, 2010 hearing; the court granted permanent custody to the agency; appellate court affirmed the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody is supported by clear and convincing evidence | F.V. argues insufficient evidence | Agency contends evidence satisfies statutory criteria and best interests | Yes; clear and convincing evidence supports permanent custody |
| Whether the court erred by not considering a planned permanent living arrangement (PPLA) | Agency did not request PPLA, so error possible | PPLA not in play absent agency request; not error | No error; PPLA not requested by agency |
Key Cases Cited
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (defines 'clear and convincing' standard)
- In re Awkal, 95 Ohio App.3d 309 (1994) (best interests and permanency considerations under statute)
- In re K.M., 2011-Ohio-349 (2011) (child’s best interest and permanency analysis)
- In re A.B., 2006-Ohio-4359 (2006) (PPLA considerations and agency request)
- In re R.N., 2004-Ohio-2560 (2004) (emphasizes focus on child’s best interests)