Phillips v. Hostetler
2017 Ohio 2834
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Phillips and Hostetler divorced in 2013 with a separation agreement and shared parenting plan for three children.
- In October 2015 Phillips moved to terminate shared parenting and requested determination of child support.
- After mediation and several hearings, a magistrate held a final hearing on July 11, 2016 and issued an August 3, 2016 decision naming Phillips residential parent, setting visitation for Hostetler, and attaching a child support worksheet ordering Hostetler to pay $706.17/month.
- Hostetler filed objections claiming (1) the child-support worksheet used at the August decision differed from one used earlier, (2) his income was misstated, and (3) income documents were provided late; he also challenged provisional modifications and local-rule compliance on appeal.
- The trial court overruled objections, noting Hostetler did not request a hearing transcript and accepting the magistrate’s factual findings; Hostetler appealed pro se.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding Hostetler forfeited challenges he failed to timely raise in the trial court and did not assert plain error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hostetler) | Defendant's Argument (Phillips) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether provisional magistrate orders modifying parental time were improper | Magistrate made provisional modifications and denied Hostetler fair process | Magistrate’s interim orders were not timely objected to; parties had agreed on parenting issues | Forfeited: Hostetler did not raise these issues below; assignment overruled |
| Whether local rules (service/filing) were violated (Loc.R. 2.07/14.01/20.01) | Phillips failed to comply with local rules regarding post-decree motions and service of affidavits | Phillips’ counsel had received income records and parenting issues were agreed; no timely objection on these rules | Forfeited: Hostetler raised different rules/timings at trial and failed to preserve these arguments on appeal |
| Whether child support calculation was incorrect (income, remarriage benefits, tax exemptions) | Child support ignored benefits from Phillips’ remarriage and tax-exemption history; income figures used were inaccurate | Trial record & magistrate worksheet supported calculation; Hostetler earlier agreed to rotating tax exemptions and did not challenge specific figures with transcript | Forfeited: Hostetler did not preserve the specific grounds on which he now appeals; assignment overruled |
| Whether the trial court abused discretion or showed bias by accepting submitted documents | Documents were submitted late or improperly, producing judicial bias and wrong support determination | Hostetler failed to move to set aside magistrate orders or provide transcript/affidavit to controvert factual findings | Forfeited: No timely rule-53 motion or proper objections; court accepted magistrate findings and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (1997) (party must timely advise trial court of possible error to preserve issue for appeal)