In re T.W.

2026-Ohio-124 · Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District, Cuyahoga County · January 15, 2026 · No. 115158

Summary

The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s judgment awarding permanent custody of T.W. to the Cuyahoga County Division of Children and Family Services and terminating the mother’s parental rights. The court held that the permanent-custody decision was supported by clear and convincing evidence and that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying a further continuance to explore a proposed legal custodian or potential planned permanent living arrangement.

Holdings

  1. The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying Mother's motion to continue the permanent-custody hearing.
  2. Sufficiency and manifest weight of the evidence are the proper appellate standards for reviewing a juvenile court's permanent-custody and parental-rights termination decision, depending on the nature of the argument.
  3. Clear and convincing evidence supported the juvenile court's findings under R.C. 2151.414(E)(1) and (4) that T.W. could not be placed with Mother within a reasonable time or should not be placed with her.
  4. The juvenile court's determination that permanent custody was in T.W.'s best interest was supported by clear and convincing evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by denying Mother's motion to continue the permanent-custody hearing so that a newly proposed legal custodian could be explored.
  2. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported findings under R.C. 2151.414(E)(1) and (4) that T.W. could not or should not be placed with Mother within a reasonable time.
  3. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported the determination under R.C. 2151.414(D)(1) that permanent custody was in T.W.'s best interest.
  4. Whether extending temporary custody to allow consideration of a planned permanent living arrangement or another legal custodian would better serve T.W.'s best interests.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (33)

  • In re C.W., 2020-Ohio-3189, ¶ 15 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • State v. Unger, 67 Ohio St.2d 65, 67 (1981)(followed)
  • In re S.B., 2014-Ohio-4839, ¶ 43 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • Cleveland v. Washington, 2013-Ohio-367, ¶ 11 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219 (1983)(followed)
  • In re C.K., 2019-Ohio-4167, ¶ 18 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • Vannucci v. Schneider, 2018-Ohio-1294, ¶ 22 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • In re I.N., 2021-Ohio-1406, ¶¶ 16-17(followed)
  • In re K.H., 2022-Ohio-2588, ¶ 69 (8th Dist.)(followed)
  • In re Z.C., 2023-Ohio-4703, ¶¶ 7-8, 13-18(followed)

Showing top 10 of 33.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…