2021 Ohio 4166
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Parties divorced August 27, 2018; appellee ordered to pay spousal support $500/month for five years, terminable on death, remarriage, or appellant's cohabitation with a non-related adult male.
- Appellee moved to terminate support on May 6, 2020, alleging appellant was cohabitating with her boyfriend.
- Magistrate held a hearing (Oct. 2, 2020) and, in a March 2, 2021 decision, found appellant cohabitating and terminated support effective June 1, 2020.
- Appellant filed general objections but did not file the transcript of the magistrate hearing or timely request an extension; trial court adopted the magistrate's decision on April 26, 2021.
- Appellant appealed arguing the cohabitation finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence; the appellate court affirmed, concluding the magistrate’s factual findings were established and supported cohabitation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by terminating spousal support based on cohabitation | Mengel (plaintiff) argued appellant was cohabitating with a boyfriend, so support should terminate | Jeannine (defendant) argued the cohabitation finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Court affirmed: appellant failed to provide transcript so magistrate’s factual findings are established; those findings support cohabitation under applicable factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Moell v. Moell, 98 Ohio App.3d 748 (6th Dist. 1994) (sets out cohabitation as factual inquiry and principal factors to consider)
- Dickerson v. Dickerson, 87 Ohio App.3d 848 (1993) (cohabitation addresses lifestyle, not merely housing arrangement)
- Piscione v. Piscione, 85 Ohio App.3d 273 (1992) (same line of authority on cohabitation factors)
- State v. Williams, 79 Ohio St.3d 459 (1997) (lists factors indicating shared familial or financial responsibilities and consortium)
- State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Twp. Trustees, 73 Ohio St.3d 728 (1995) (appellate court cannot consider a transcript not presented to the trial court at the objection stage)