Jefferson Child Support Enforcement Agency v. Roberts
2016 Ohio 8216
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Father (Steven Roberts) was ordered to pay child support for son Mark under a 2010 order that would have ended on Mark’s 19th birthday (Oct. 17, 2014).
- Jefferson CSEA filed a motion (Nov. 20, 2014) to determine whether support should continue because Mark might be mentally or physically disabled and unable to support himself.
- Hearing included mother Tyra Roberts’s telephonic testimony, voluminous medical records submitted by mother, and vocational expert testimony for father (Linda Dezack).
- Medical evidence and testimony described lifelong, serious conditions: epilepsy with daily seizures, eosinophilic esophagitis, osteoporosis with multiple compression fractures, scoliosis/kyphosis, necrosis of the jaw, Crohn’s disease, chronic migraines, heavy daily medication (30–40 pills), need for hospital bed and electric wheelchair, and inability to drive or work.
- Two treating physicians provided letters stating Mark is permanently disabled and cannot work; vocational expert opined Mark could work based only on post-18 records and conceded she was not a medical expert.
- Trial court found Mark is disabled and incapable of self-support, continued child support, but scheduled a review hearing (Feb. 1, 2017) because permanence was uncertain. Father appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (CSEA/Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether child support continues because child is mentally/physically disabled and incapable of self-support | Mark’s lifelong medical history and treating physicians’ opinions show he is disabled and cannot support himself | No medical testimony at hearing; records are hearsay; evidence insufficient to show disability or inability to self-support | Court upheld continuation: found Mark disabled and incapable of supporting himself based on testimony and medical records |
| Admissibility of medical records under hearsay/business-records exception | Medical records were provided and relied on at hearing; admissible for the court’s consideration | Records are inadmissible hearsay and did not meet Evid.R. 803(6) | Father waived the objection by counsel agreeing to admit records to preserve expert testimony; issue forfeited on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Booth v. Booth, 44 Ohio St.3d 142, 541 N.E.2d 1028 (1989) (appellate review of child support matters uses abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (1983) (definition of abuse of discretion)