In re K.M.-B.
| Decision Date | 06 November 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. L–15–1037.,L–15–1037. |
| Parties | In re K.M.-B., T.M., E.M. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Dan Nathan, for appellants.
Karin L. Coble, for appellee.
{¶ 1} Appellants, H.M. and D.M., appeal from the January 23, 2015 judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, which awarded appellee, C.M., visitation with her grandchildren. For the reasons which follow, we reverse.
{¶ 2} C.M., the maternal grandmother of E.M., T.M., and K.M.-B. (hereinafter the “grandmother”), petitioned the court on July 23, 2014, to establish non-parent visitation with her grandchildren pursuant to R.C. 3109.11 or 3109.12. G. is the maternal grandfather of the children and is divorced from the grandmother. The grandmother is currently married to J.M., whom she refers to as “Papa J.”
{¶ 3} H.M. is the mother of all of the children (hereinafter referred to as the “mother”). R.B. is the father of K.M.-B., who was born in 2005. The mother was never married to R.B. D.M. is the father of E.M. and T.M. T.M. was born on December 11, 2007. The mother and D.M. were unmarried, but cohabitated, at the time of T.M.'s birth. They were married approximately four months later on April 16, 2008. E.M. was born on March 2, 2010.
{¶ 4} A hearing was held on November 3, 2014, before a magistrate, and all of the parties appeared pro se. While the parties referred to documents while they testified, none of those documents were admitted into evidence and thus are not part of the record on appeal. Furthermore, no objections were made during the presentation of the evidence. The following evidence was admitted.
{¶ 5} The grandmother testified the mother was a “loving and caring mother.” However, the grandmother did not agree with the mother's decision to isolate the grandchildren from the grandmother. The grandmother testified she loved the children and had participated in their lives since their births. She participated in family and school events, as well as spending time alone with the children. She attended water parks and festivals with the family. She would assist appellants when she was available. She would take the children to a campground in the summer for a weekend. She purchased clothing for the grandchildren. She entertained the children on overnight stays. Furthermore, the grandmother testified that she has always had a close and loving relationship with appellants. The grandmother was a school bus driver since 2002 and had received recognition from parents for her loyalty, patience, and safety. The grandmother testified she had only been issued three traffic citations.
{¶ 6} The grandmother further testified that she lived with appellants for a few months after she separated from her first husband, J.M. On September 12, 2012, D.M. and the grandmother had a verbal argument, which led to a tense environment for a few days. When she returned home from work in the early morning hours of September 16, 2012, the locks had been changed. Both she and the mother called the police. The grandmother testified that the mother told the police that the grandmother had voluntarily moved out on September 14, but the grandmother denied having moved out. The grandmother was instructed to leave the premises immediately. The mother testified the grandmother was ticketed for excessive noise and that the police report indicated the grandmother was exhibiting irrational behavior that night. The grandmother testified that the ticket was dismissed. The mother testified that on April 10, 2013, the grandmother was convicted of criminal damaging. The grandmother testified the conviction was later expunged.
{¶ 7} The grandmother further testified that after the September incident, the relationship between the parties deteriorated. The mother testified that she had told the grandmother specific rules that had to be complied with for the grandchildren to spend time with her, but the grandmother refused to abide by those rules. The mother found that the only way to reason with the grandmother was to end contact with her. The mother would allow the grandchildren to see the grandmother in public places but never to go to the grandmother's home where J.M. resided because of his criminal convictions for DUI. The grandmother admitted that J.M. had been convicted of four DUI offenses.
{¶ 8} The mother testified the grandmother had filed a small claims case arising out of an incident where her bus had been blocked by trucks and she was forced to back up the bus. The defendant in that case attested the grandmother refused to back up and instead verbally confronted a truck driver over the issue and made offensive gestures. The mother also testified the grandmother had attempted to falsify her paycheck. The mother further testified that before the criminal damaging case, the mother and D.M. filed suit in small claims against the grandmother and won the suit. The grandmother filed a counterclaim that they had taken her property, but it was thrown out because the grandmother did not appear.
{¶ 9} The grandmother testified regarding two other specific events evidencing K.M.-B.'s desire to see her grandmother. In June 2014, the grandmother attended a sporting event for one of the children because a civil protection order against her had expired.1 The mother's father, the grandmother's ex-husband, G., was also there. While she was there, the grandmother gave K.M.-B. money for concessions. A few days later, the mother called the grandmother and told her not to attend the games when G. was also attending because G. was upset that he could not afford to give the children money. The grandmother refused to comply with the mother's request and the mother did not call the grandmother again.
{¶ 10} On October 4, 2014, the grandmother attended another sporting event. The grandmother spoke to K.M.-B., who wanted to invite the grandmother to a grandparent breakfast at school. A few minutes afterward, the mother took the kids away. The mother testified she left because the grandmother referred to “Papa J.” after the mother had told the grandmother not to refer to J.M. as “Papa” to the children because he was not related to them. The mother did not want to discuss the issues regarding J.M. with the children. After that incident, a civil protection order was issued, and the grandmother was separated from the children for approximately 19 months. While she could see the children, the grandmother could not spend time with them as she had done prior to September 2012.
{¶ 11} K.G., the grandmother's sister and the children's great aunt, testified the mother's children wanted to see and spend time with their grandmother. In June 2014, at the wedding of the great aunt's daughter, the great aunt observed K.M.-B. crying profusely and then D.M. talking to K.M.-B. for a short time. The great aunt approached K.M.-B. to see what was wrong. K.M.-B. told the great aunt K.M.-B was not allowed to see her grandmother. The grandmother also testified that she spoke to K.M.-B. that night and learned that K.M.-B. was unhappy because she could not visit the grandmother. Both women testified that they were supportive and positive. The mother testified she also spoke to her daughter and explained that she was not allowed to go to her grandmother's house because J.M. is not her “Papa” and K.M.-B. did not need to be around him. The mother felt it was inappropriate to explain the problem to K.M.-B. because she was a child.
{¶ 12} The great aunt also testified that in July 2014, the mother and her children were at a birthday party for the great aunt's daughter when K.M.-B. asked to go to the grandmother's house. The mother said they had to go home and check first. Later at the party when the great aunt and K.M.-B. were alone, K.M.-B. said she wanted to see her grandmother. The great aunt had observed in the past that K.M.-B. enjoys visiting with her grandmother and that K.M.-B. is upset by the current situation.
{¶ 13} Another time, K.M.-B. was visiting the great aunt's granddaughter and K.M.-B. asked the great aunt to take her to her grandmother's house. The great aunt did not want to be put in the middle of the issue and feigned an excuse to avoid the issue. The great aunt could not understand why there was a breakdown in the relationship between the mother and the grandmother because the mother was a good mother and the grandmother was a good grandmother. The great aunt just wanted the entire family to be able to associate again like they had in the past.
{¶ 14} The mother explained that E.M. and T.M. do not communicate with the grandmother because they realize something is wrong and are uncomfortable. The two children were at the house in September 2012 when the grandmother went around the house banging on the windows. The mother did not want to tell the children very much about what was going on between the mother and their grandmother. She did not want them to visit the grandmother when J.M. was present because he was not their grandpa and he had just committed a fourth DUI offense. The mother also believed the grandmother had acted irrationally at times and refused to abide by the mother's rules. The mother testified that she had found the only way she could deal with the grandmother was to stop trying to talk to her and avoid contact for a time.
{¶ 15} The magistrate concluded it was in the best...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re A.M.S.
...order in a divorce case." Doughty, 5th Dist. Delaware No. 18 CAF 05 0040, 2019-Ohio-974, at ¶ 61, citing In re K.M.-B., 2015-Ohio-4626, 48 N.E.3d 998 (6th Dist.). See also R.C. 2301.03(L) vesting Cuyahoga County domestic relations judges with "all the powers relating to all divorce, dissolu......
- Wentz v. Wideman
- In re A.R.
- In re A.R.