In re Williams

Summary

The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Jami Williams’s motion to terminate a restriction prohibiting contact between her minor child and her boyfriend, a convicted sex offender. The court held that Jami had not established the required change in circumstances under R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) and that, independently, permitting contact was not in the child’s best interest. The court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.

Holdings

1. A prior decree allocating parental rights and responsibilities may not be modified unless facts arising since the decree, or facts previously unknown to the court, establish a change in circumstances of the child or the relevant parent and the modification is necessary to serve the child's best interests. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Jami failed to establish the required change in circumstances.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that contact between the child and Funderburg would not be in the child's best interests and in refusing to remove the no-contact restriction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under R.C. 3109.04 by denying Jami Williams's motion to remove the no-contact restriction without finding a qualifying change in circumstances.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that permitting contact between the child and Funderburg would not serve the child's best interests.

Disposition

affirmed