Redmond v. Wade
2017 Ohio 7192
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Parents were subject to a shared-parenting decree; on May 3, 2016 the trial court terminated shared parenting, named Adam Wade residential parent, and allocated parenting time to Keri Paton (formerly Redmond/Wade).
- The May 3 order granted Paton additional local visitation in Lawrence County (two–three hours per visit) when the child had no prior activity scheduled.
- While Paton’s appeal of the May 3 order was pending, Wade moved (June 23, 2016) to (1) limit Paton’s additional Lawrence County visits and (2) require exchanges at the Lawrence County Sheriff’s Office, alleging misuse of visits and exchange problems.
- A magistrate held a hearing, issued an order limiting the additional local parenting time to one visit per month, required sheriff-office exchanges, and directed use of the Our Family Wizard app; the magistrate later filed a nunc pro tunc entry memorializing a July 20 hearing. The record lacks a transcript of that hearing.
- Paton objected; she did not provide a transcript or affidavit of the magistrate hearing. The trial court overruled objections (Sept. 12, 2016), concluding it must accept the magistrate’s factual findings in the absence of a transcript, and adopted the modifications. Paton appealed; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Paton) | Defendant's Argument (Wade) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify parenting time during appeal | Trial judge and magistrate should not have modified parenting time while prior order was on appeal | Trial court could act under Civ.R. 75(H) to address parenting matters pending appeal and protect child’s best interests | Court: Civ.R. 75(H) authorized the trial court to decide the motion; order not void and is reviewable |
| Whether trial court failed to independently review magistrate's findings as required by Civ.R. 53 | Judge abused discretion by not performing independent review of magistrate | Paton failed to provide transcript/affidavit required by Civ.R. 53(D)(3); thus court properly accepted magistrate’s factual findings and reviewed legal conclusions only | Court: No error—without a transcript/affidavit the trial court was limited and properly accepted magistrate’s factual findings |
| Whether modification of additional local visitation was an abuse of discretion / against manifest weight | No evidence showed reducing visitation served child’s best interest; modification was improper | Evidence was presented to the magistrate; trial court adopted magistrate’s factual findings (no transcript challenged those findings) | Court: Appellate review limited by lack of transcript; cannot find abuse of discretion or manifest-weight error; assignment overruled |
| Whether magistrate/judge exhibited bias (due process) and failed to follow judicial conduct rules | Trial court and magistrate were biased against mother; due process violated | Allegations of bias must be pursued via R.C. 2701.03 (affidavit to Supreme Court) or magistrate disqualification motion under Civ.R. 53(D)(6); no such motions filed | Court: Appellate court cannot entertain judge-bias claims on appeal; no motion to disqualify magistrate was filed, so issue forfeited and not shown as plain error |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Sullivan v. Ramsey, 124 Ohio St.3d 355 (trial court divested of jurisdiction over matters inconsistent with appellate jurisdiction)
- State ex rel. Rock v. School Emp. Retirement Bd., 96 Ohio St.3d 206 (same principle on post-appeal trial-court jurisdiction)
- State ex rel. Special Prosecutors v. Judges, Court of Common Pleas, 55 Ohio St.2d 94 (trial court may act only in aid of the appeal once appeal perfected)
- In re S.J., 106 Ohio St.3d 11 (orders issued without jurisdiction are void)
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197 (when transcript portions are omitted, reviewing court presumes validity of proceedings)
- State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Twp. Trustees, 73 Ohio St.3d 728 (appellate review limited to abuse-of-discretion when transcript not provided)
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (plain-error doctrine in civil cases is narrowly applied)