Christopher, In re
Decision Date | 23 August 1977 |
Citation | 376 N.E.2d 603,8 O.O.3d 271,54 Ohio App.2d 137 |
Parties | , 8 O.O.3d 271 In re CHRISTOPHER. |
Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Where an infant child has been in the custody of prospective adoptive parents as a result of a permanent order of custody in a dependency action and that permanent order is subsequently vacated and the parent moves to terminate temporary custody, it appears that the interests of the child and parent may conflict and a guardian ad litem must be appointed for the child pursuant to Juvenile Rule 4(B) prior to the hearing on the mother's motion to terminate custody.
2. The guardian ad litem appointed for a child in a dependency action where the interest of the child and the parent may conflict must have no ties or loyalties to anyone with an adversary interest in the outcome such as a natural parent or the prospective adoptive parents.
3. Where a natural parent moves to terminate temporary custody in another based on a previous finding of dependency, the parent's present suitability and fitness for the role of parent must be considered in the context of the child's best interests.
Thomas E. Ray, Cardington, for appellee, Sheila Christopher Sherman.
Michael Boller, Sidney, guardian ad litem and appellant, for himself.
This is an appeal prosecuted by a guardian ad litem of a child now nearly four years of age. The appeal contests the termination of a temporary custody order based on a previous finding of dependency. The termination has the dual effect of returning the child, Shawn Christopher, to his natural mother and taking him from his prospective adoptive parents. A chronological history of the proceedings follows.
Shawn Christopher was born on September 14, 1973, and nine months later taken from his mother following a filing of a complaint in the Juvenile Court of Morrow County alleging Shawn to be a dependent child. 1
On July 1, 1974, the Juvenile Court declared Shawn to be a dependent child and granted custody to the Morrow County Welfare Department.
On August 30, 1974, and without intervention or order from the Juvenile Court, the Morrow County Welfare Department placed Shawn with his mother. That arrangement lasted until January 11, 1975, when Shawn was retrieved from his mother after she had temporarily abandoned the child with friends.
On September 30, 1975, permanent custody was granted to the Morrow County Welfare Department and Shawn was placed with prospective adoptive parents.
On April 5, 1976, Shawn's mother filed an action in habeas corpus seeking custody of Shawn and challenging the validity of the permanent custody order of September 30, 1975.
On August 12, 1976, the writ of habeas corpus was denied but the Morrow County Juvenile Court, on its own motion, vacated its prior permanent custody order. 2
Shawn's mother then filed a notice of appeal on August 25, 1976, but subsequently dismissed the appeal and on November 29, 1976, filed a motion to terminate temporary custody of the Morrow County Welfare Department.
On December 7, 1976, the prosecuting attorney of Morrow County filed, on behalf of the Morrow County Welfare Department, a motion for permanent custody of Shawn.
The motions came on for hearing on December 16, 1976. A visiting judge was assigned to hear the motion. The visiting judge dismissed the motion for permanent custody because the motion did not set forth the grounds upon which the request was based and also because the necessary notice requirements had not been met. The trial court then heard testimony in support of the motion to terminate the temporary custody. 3 At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court opined:
At the time of the December 16, 1976, hearing counsel for Shawn's mother was the prosecuting attorney elect of Morrow County, Thomas Ray. Ray has continued to represent Shawn's mother in this appeal. The Morrow County Welfare Department was represented by its designated counsel, the prosecuting attorney of Morrow County, Dean Curl.
Following the December 16, 1976, hearing, Dean Curl, acting as prosecuting attorney of Morrow County, moved the trial court as follows:
On December 23, 1976, a memorandum-opinion was filed by the trial court. He denied the request for reconsideration of his verbal order of December 16, 1976, but appointed Dean Curl as the guardian ad litem for Shawn Christopher and stayed execution of his verbal order of December 16, 1976, pending appeal and directed that Shawn Christopher remain in the proposed adoptive home pending review and further orders.
On January 18, 1977, the trial court's ruling of December 16, 1976, terminating custody of the Morrow County Welfare Department and his memorandum-opinion of December 23, 1976, were each journalized so that the order to return Shawn to his mother was stayed and Dean Curl was appointed as guardian ad litem and counsel for Shawn.
On February 9, 1977, the resignation and withdrawal of Dean Curl as guardian ad litem and counsel was filed and on the same day Michael Boller of Sidney, Ohio, was appointed successor guardian ad litem.
On February 17, 1977, Mr. Boller moved for further hearing on the motion to terminate the custody of the Morrow County Welfare Department or in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cunningham, In re
...v. Fetter (1914), 90 Ohio St. 110, 127, 106 N.E. 761; In re Tilton (1954), 161 Ohio St. 571, 120 N.E.2d 445; In re Christopher (1977), 54 Ohio App.2d 137, 376 N.E.2d 603; In re Baby Girl S. (1972), 32 Ohio Misc. 217, 290 N.E.2d 925; In re Turner (1967), 12 Ohio Misc. 171, 6 231 N.E.2d Thus ......
-
Sappington, In re
...of Trembley (June 24, 1983), Ashtabula App. No. 1108, unreported, at 3, 1983 WL 6160; see, also, In re Christopher (1977), 54 Ohio App.2d 137, 143, 8 O.O.3d 271, 274-275, 376 N.E.2d 603, 607 (reversing lower court where appellate court concluded that interests "may conflict"); In re Adoptio......
-
Adoption of Howell, In re
...a permanent custody case under Juv.R. 4(B)(2) because the child's and the parent's interests may conflict. In re Christopher (1977), 54 Ohio App.2d 137, 8 O.O.3d 271, 376 N.E.2d 603 is of interest in which the court held that it was apparent that the mother had shown little interest in the ......
-
James Tolle v. Susan Gerstner
... ... Writ of Habeas Corpus" in the Montgomery County Court of ... Common Pleas, Juvenile Division. Plaintiff asserted in the ... complaint that defendant Susan Gerstner is the mother of Baby ... Boy Gerstner (Christopher), born on April 12, 1980. Mr. Tolle ... further alleged that he is the biological father of the ... child, although Susan Gerstner has, 1) refused to acknowledge ... him as the natural father of the child, and 2) has denied him ... his rights and duties incident to the ... ...
-
Superintendence Rule 48: Standardizing the Guardian Ad Litem System in Ohio Courts
...MINIMIZING CONFLICT, MAXIMIZING FAMILIES 20 (2001), available at http://www.supreme court.ohio.gov/JCS/taskforce/report_final.pdf. 19376 N.E.2d 603 (Ohio Ct. App. 1977). 20Id. at 605. 21Id. at 607. 22Id. at 605–06. 23Id. at 609. 24Id. at 607. 25Id. at 605. Page 466 466 CAPITAL UNIVERSITY LA......