Phillips v. Phillips, 2014 Ohio 248

Lisa and Donald Phillips entered a shared parenting plan (2000); Lisa was designated residential parent for two minor children (S.P. and M.P.).
Lisa later moved to Kentucky with the children; contact between Donald and the children became limited.
In Feb 2012 an altercation between Lisa and teen S.P. led to S.P.’s detention; Donald obtained temporary custody in Kentucky and moved in Lorain County court to terminate the shared parenting plan and reallocate custody.
The trial court conducted in-camera interviews of the children (upon motion), did not appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL) despite a motion for one, terminated the shared parenting plan, designated Donald as residential parent and legal custodian, terminated his support obligation, and imputed income to Lisa for child support calculations.
Lisa appealed pro se, asserting four assignments of error: (1) allocation of parental rights/best-interest analysis; (2) visitation terms; (3) child support income imputation; (4) failure to appoint a GAL.
The appellate court affirmed as to custody and visitation, reversed as to imputation of income (for lack of explicit finding of voluntary unemployment/underemployment), and rejected plain-error relief for failure to appoint a GAL (though a dissent would have reversed on that basis).

Issue	Phillips' Argument	Donald's Argument	Held
1. Whether trial court properly allocated parental rights after terminating shared parenting	Trial court failed to state it considered R.C. 3109.04(F)(1) factors and showed bias against her	Trial court’s findings and record show consideration of best-interest factors; decision entitled to deference	Affirms allocation to Donald; trial court sufficiently considered best-interest factors and did not abuse discretion
2. Whether visitation order (conditioned on counseling) is contradictory/abusive	Visitation terms inconsistent/abusive	Order clearly conditions visitation on proof of commencement of counseling; suspension is explicit	Overrules challenge; visitation condition is clear
3. Whether trial court properly imputed income to Lisa for child support	Imputation improper because no explicit finding she is voluntarily unemployed/underemployed; award against manifest weight	Court imputed minimum-wage full-time income	Sustained in part: reversed/remanded on child support because court did not expressly find voluntary unemployment/underemployment
4. Whether trial court erred in failing to appoint a GAL after in-camera interviews	Mandatory appointment required when requested; failure is reversible error	Although appointment is mandatory on request, appellant forfeited by not objecting; any error not plain error here	Majority: assignment overruled (no plain error); dissent would reverse as statutory mandatory duty was not followed

Bechtol v. Bechtol, 49 Ohio St.3d 21 (Ohio 1990) (trial court’s opportunity to observe witnesses is important in custody credibility determinations)
Trickey v. Trickey, 158 Ohio St. 9 (Ohio 1949) (trial court’s superior position to judge witness credibility in custody matters)
Masters v. Masters, 69 Ohio St.3d 83 (Ohio 1994) (standard for appellate review of custody: abuse of discretion)
Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (Ohio 1984) (standards for review of factual findings and credibility assessments)
Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (appellate review of manifest weight and credibility determinations)
Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (Ohio 1997) (plain-error doctrine in civil appeals is disfavored and limited to exceptional circumstances)
Perez v. Falls Fin., Inc., 87 Ohio St.3d 371 (Ohio 2000) (affirming high threshold for applying plain-error doctrine in civil cases)
State ex rel. Papp v. James, 69 Ohio St.3d 373 (Ohio 1994) (R.C. 3109.04(B) requires appointment of a GAL if court interviews child and a party requests a GAL)