Tredenary v. Fritz
2017 Ohio 8632
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Antoinette Tredenary (petitioner) filed for a domestic violence civil protection order against her former husband, Daniel Fritz, alleging he assaulted her on Aug. 22, 2016; an ex parte order issued for Antoinette but not for their adopted son D.T.
- The hearing addressed whether Antoinette proved by a preponderance that Daniel attempted to or recklessly caused bodily injury (R.C. 3113.31(A)(1)(a)).
- Key disputed facts: at a baseball game and afterward Daniel’s home, witnesses disagree whether Daniel grabbed, struck, lifted, and threw Antoinette against a wall while trying to keep her from entering a bathroom where D.T. was vomiting.
- Antoinette and her brother Dominic testified to a forceful assault; Dominic admitted heavy beer consumption that evening. Daniel denied any assault, said he physically restrained Antoinette briefly to prevent her entering the bathroom, and described the evening as ending amicably.
- Police observed no visible shoulder injury; Antoinette sought emergency care the next day (diagnosed shoulder strain), but did not obtain follow-up treatment; criminal disorderly-conduct charge against Daniel was dismissed after pretrial.
- The domestic relations court found Daniel credible, Dominic’s testimony impaired by intoxication, and concluded Antoinette failed to meet the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner proved domestic violence by a preponderance (attempted or reckless bodily injury) | Tredenary: testimony showed Daniel hit, grabbed, lifted, and threw her against a wall, constituting attempted/reckless bodily injury | Fritz: denied assault; said he restrained her to prevent entry to bathroom and that no injury occurred | Court: Denied petition — petitioner failed to prove domestic violence by preponderance; trial court credibility findings upheld |
| Whether trial court abused discretion or its decision was against manifest weight | Tredenary: trial court’s ruling was against the manifest weight; her and Dominic’s testimony was more credible | Fritz: trial court properly weighed credibility and evidence; no abuse of discretion | Court: No abuse of discretion; sufficient competent, credible evidence supported denial |
| Whether witness intoxication affected credibility such that findings were against the weight | Tredenary: did not effectively contest Dominic’s credibility ruling; argued overall her testimony was more credible | Fritz: highlighted Dominic’s drinking to undermine his reliability | Court: Found Dominic’s intoxication relevant; trial court properly discounted his testimony |
| Sufficiency of medical/police evidence to support assault claim | Tredenary: pointing to ER diagnosis and pain report to police | Fritz: pointed to officer’s observation of no visible injury, lack of follow-up care, and dismissed criminal charge | Court: Medical/police record and lack of follow-up undermined petitioner’s proof; supported denial |
Key Cases Cited
- Felton v. Felton, 79 Ohio St.3d 34 (1997) (petitioner must prove domestic violence by a preponderance to obtain civil protection order)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (standard for manifest-weight review; appellate deference to factfinder credibility determinations)
- Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984) (presumption in favor of trial court’s findings; appellate courts must give reasonable inferences supporting judgment)