Moore v. Guyton
2013 Ohio 143
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Moore filed a petition for a domestic violence civil protection order (CPO) against Guyton seeking protection for herself and family/household members; an ex parte CPO was issued pending a full hearing.
- A full hearing followed on Moore’s CPO request, with evidence presented by Moore, witnesses Carpenter and Yates, and Guyton.
- Moore testified to past abuse and to fear for her life from alleged threats by Guyton, though she did not personally hear the threats herself.
- Carpenter and Yates testified they overheard Guyton threaten Moore's life with a rifle, and Moore testified she feared for her life.
- Guyton testified he did not threaten Moore or her children and described his relationship with the children as strained but expressed remorse and intent to repair the relationship.
- The trial court granted the CPO, protecting Moore, the three children (T.G., A.G., J.G.), and Moore’s fiancé Schultz, for five years (through April 3, 2017).
- Guyton appeals, arguing the CPO was excessive and improperly included the children in the order; the appellate court affirms in part and reverses in part on remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the CPO issuance was an abuse of discretion due to Moore being protected | Moore; Guyton | Guyton argues Moore was not properly protected | Abuse of discretion not shown; CPO validly protected Moore |
| Whether including the children TG, AG, JG and Schultz was proper | Moore; Guyton | Guyton argues children lacked threats against them | Children inclusion reversed for TG, AG, JG; Schultz inclusion deemed plain error; remand for proper scope |
Key Cases Cited
- Felton v. Felton, 79 Ohio St.3d 34 (1997) (preponderance standard for domestic violence orders; danger to family/mhousehold members)
- Smith v. Burroughs, 2010-Ohio-4806 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010) (reasonable fear of imminent physical harm; review of CPOs involves both subjective and objective elements)
- Lillard v. Allen, 2008-Ohio-3664 (8th Dist. 2008) (children may not be included as protected persons without threat evidence)
- Luikart v. Shumate, 2003-Ohio-2130 (3d Dist. 2003) (protection scope limits when no threat to children shown)
- Smith v. Burroughs, 2010-Ohio-4806 (3d Dist. 2010) (affirmative evidence required for inclusion of protected persons)