Loewen v. Newsome
2018 Ohio 73
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Parents (Newsome — Mother; Loewen — Father) are unmarried; child born 2004. Father is a U.S. citizen and resided in Florida; long procedural history including earlier hearings and remands.
- Multiple custody hearings and two guardians ad litem (GALs); appellate remands found earlier trial court abused discretion in releasing first GAL and required specific scheduling/deadlines on remand.
- Final hearing Oct. 2015; trial court designated Father residential parent and legal custodian, ordered Mother to pay $50/month child support, and awarded Father the federal dependency exemption.
- Mother appealed, raising: (1) custody decision was against manifest weight and court erred in finding her not credible; (2) child support order lacked income proof and no worksheet was attached; (3) tax exemption wrongly awarded to Father.
- This Court affirmed custody and tax-exemption allocations but remanded limitedly for the court to calculate child support and place the completed child-support worksheet in the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Newsome) | Defendant's Argument (Loewen) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether awarding Father residential custody was against manifest weight / credibility finding was erroneous | Newsome: trial court had no basis to find her not credible and erred by awarding full custody to Father | Loewen: trial court observed demeanor, considered statutory best-interest factors, evidence supported award to Father | Court affirmed custody — no abuse of discretion or manifest-weight reversal; trial court properly weighed credibility and factors |
| Whether child support order was improper without income evidence and without worksheet attached | Newsome: no adequate income proof presented, arbitrary minimum support, and court failed to attach required worksheet | Loewen: Father submitted tax return; court set statutory minimum; argued no worksheet needed because minimum set | Court held: income evidence for Father existed and minimum order permissible; but remanded for completion and filing of statutory child support worksheet (partial reversal) |
| Whether trial court abused discretion in awarding federal dependency exemption to Father | Newsome: court had no income evidence for either parent, so allocation was improper | Loewen: Father presented his income; as residential parent he is presumptively entitled unless non-residential parent overcomes presumption | Court affirmed award to Father — presumption favoring residential parent applies and Mother failed to rebut |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio 1988) (trial court custody discretion entitled to utmost respect)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
- Pons v. Ohio State Medical Board, 66 Ohio St.3d 619 (Ohio 1993) (appellate courts will not substitute their judgment for factfinder)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (manifest-weight standard described)
- State v. Otten, 33 Ohio App.3d 339 (Ohio App. 1986) (appellate review for manifest-weight requires reviewing whole record and credibility)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (presumption in favor of trier of fact when weighing evidence)
- Marker v. Grimm, 65 Ohio St.3d 139 (Ohio 1992) (child support worksheet must be completed and part of the record)