Rock v. Rock
2013 Ohio 390
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Belvo and Rock divorced in 2000 with a shared parenting plan for two children.
- The divorces decrees required Rock to maintain life insurance ($100,000) for the children and provide health insurance if affordable.
- Rock suffered a work-related injury in 2009, leaving him unemployed and reliant on workers’ compensation.
- From Aug. 2010 to June 2011 their daughter lived with Rock while finishing high school.
- Belvo sought contempt for failing to provide health and life insurance; Rock sought reallocation of parental rights for the daughter.
- Magistrate and trial court ultimately denied contempt and granted Rock's motion to reallocate parental rights regarding the daughter.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contempt for life insurance provision | Belvo: Rock failed to maintain $100,000 life insurance. | Rock: he has surrogate life-insurance benefits meeting the requirement. | Not in contempt; life-insurance requirements satisfied. |
| Contempt for health insurance provision | Belvo: Rock did not provide health insurance. | Rock: health insurance unavailable at reasonable cost after job loss; Belvo provided coverage since 2009. | Not in contempt; health insurance responsibility excused due to availability and cost. |
| Child support while daughter lived with Rock | Belvo: should not pay Rock child support for the time. | Rock: obligation persists until 19 or graduation; daughter lived with him during high school. | Belvo ordered to pay Rock child support through daughter's 19th birthday and high-school graduation. |
| Reallocation of parental rights for the daughter | Belvo: contested reallocation not appropriate. | Rock: daughter's residence with him warranted relocation of rights. | Affirmed; trial court properly reallocated parental rights and responsibilities for the daughter. |
Key Cases Cited
- Windham Bank v. Tomaszczyk, 2705.01 (Ohio Supreme Court (1971)) (defines contempt as disobedience of a court order)
- Sandro v. Sandro, 114 Ohio App.3d 636 (3d Dist. 1996) (clear and convincing standard in civil contempt)
- Szymczak v. Szymczak, 136 Ohio App.3d 706 (8th Dist. 2000) (abuse of discretion standard for contempt rulings)
- State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (credibility of witnesses; weight of testimony for trier of fact)