766 N.E.2d 637 (Ohio 2002), 00-4736, In re Adoption of Williams

Docket Nº:00-4736.
Citation:766 N.E.2d 637, 117 Ohio Misc.2d 39, 2002-Ohio-1034
Opinion Judge:WAYNE F. WILKE, Judge.
Party Name:In re [ADOPTION OF] WILLIAMS. [*]
Attorney:Darrell D. Payne, Cincinnati, for petitioner. Darrell D. Payne, for petitioner. Ambrose Moses III, for respondent.
Case Date:February 04, 2002
Court:County Court of Ohio
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 637

766 N.E.2d 637 (Ohio 2002)

117 Ohio Misc.2d 39, 2002-Ohio-1034

In re [ADOPTION OF] WILLIAMS. [*]

No. 00-4736.

Probate Court of Hamilton County, Ohio.

February 4, 2002.

[117 Ohio Misc.2d 40]Darrell D. Payne, Cincinnati, for petitioner.

Ambrose Moses III, Columbus, for respondent.

WAYNE F. WILKE, Judge.

{¶1} This matter came before the court on November 29, 2001, pursuant to Civ. R. 53(E)(4)(b), regarding objections to the decision of magistrate dated October 15, 2001. In that decision, the magistrate recommended that the consent of Shawn Williams, the child's biological father, was not necessary for this proposed stepparent adoption petition to proceed. Present were Darrell D. Payne on behalf of the petitioner, Jeffrey Sandidge, and Ambrose Moses III on behalf of the respondent, Shawn Williams. The court established a timetable for written closing arguments to be submitted and afforded the parties the opportunity to file replies to those closing arguments. This matter is now ripe for decision.

Facts and Procedural Posture

{¶2} The child was born on May 22, 1993 in Cincinnati, Ohio. His mother is Ingrid Sandidge and his biological father is Shawn Williams. Ingrid Sandidge and Jeffrey Sandidge were married on September 19, 1998, and Jeffrey Sandidge filed a petition to adopt the child on September 1, 2000.

{¶3} The magistrate found that Shawn Williams made at least three telephone calls to the child in the year immediately prior to the filing of the adoption petition, although the respondent contends that he made even more calls than that. The magistrate also found that Shawn Williams sent birthday presents, consisting of toys and clothes, in the year immediately proceeding the filing of the adoption and that Shawn Williams paid $125 for karate lessons on the child's behalf during that same one-year period. There is presently no court-mandated duty imposed upon Shawn

Page 638

Williams to pay any support. The question is whether Shawn Williams communicated with or supported his son in the year immediately preceding the filing of the adoption petition. If he did communicate with and support his son, then Shawn Williams's consent to the adoption is required. However, if he failed to communicate or to provide support for the child, then Shawn Williams's consent to the proposed adoption is not required.

[117 Ohio Misc.2d 41]Conclusions of Law

...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP