In re A.D. and A.B.-S.D.

Summary

The Second District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed orders awarding Mother legal custody of two children and granting Father parenting time. The court rejected Father’s claims concerning parental fitness, gender-based presumptions, supervised visitation, due process, inadequate factual findings, and the lack of transcripts. Because Father failed to object to the magistrate’s decision or provide transcripts, the court applied plain-error review and found no reversible error.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not commit plain error by awarding Mother legal custody and granting Father parenting time without finding Father unfit or finding a potential for harm to the children. An initial allocation of parental rights and responsibilities is governed by the children's best interests, and absent shared parenting legal custody must be allocated to one parent.
2. The trial court did not improperly presume that Mother would be a better legal custodian based on her gender.
3. Father was not deprived of meaningful appellate review by the absence of transcripts because any impairment resulted from his failure to complete the steps necessary to have the transcripts filed and his failure to follow the App.R. 9(C) procedure.
4. The record did not show that the trial court ordered 48 hours of supervised parenting time or otherwise conditioned Father's parenting time on participation in a private supervised-visitation program. The order required only that exchanges occur at Erma's House.
5. The trial court did not commit plain error by adopting the magistrate's decision without more specific findings of fact.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court committed plain error by awarding Mother legal custody and Father parenting time without finding Father unfit or finding that the children would be harmed by maintaining a relationship with him.
2. Whether the trial court improperly presumed that Mother was a better legal custodian based on gender.
3. Whether the absence of transcripts or an adequate statement of evidence deprived Father of meaningful appellate review.
4. Whether the trial court unlawfully conditioned Father's parenting time on participation in a private supervised-visitation program.
5. Whether the trial court improperly adopted a magistrate's decision without sufficient factual findings.

Disposition

affirmed