Summary
The Ohio Second District Court of Appeals reviewed modifications to a father's parenting time with two minor children. The court affirmed the modification concerning C.H., reversed the limitation of parenting time with K.R.H. to therapy sessions at the therapist's discretion, and remanded for further proceedings.
Holdings
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by modifying Father's parenting time with C.H. to the Standard Order of Parenting Time.
- The trial court abused its discretion by limiting Father's parenting time with K.R.H. to therapy sessions and by making any modification dependent solely on the therapist's discretion.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by modifying Father's parenting time with C.H. to the Standard Order of Parenting Time.
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by limiting Father's parenting time with K.R.H. to therapy sessions and placing any modification solely within the therapist's discretion.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (10)
- Shoenfelt v. Shoenfelt, 2009-Ohio-6594, ¶ 7 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219 (1983)(followed)
- State v. Malloy, 2012-Ohio-2664, ¶ 24 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- In re E.R., 2022-Ohio-3658, ¶ 9 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- Braatz v. Braatz, 85 Ohio St.3d 40, 45 (1999)(followed)
- Palichat v. Palichat, 2019-Ohio-1379, ¶¶ 28, 33-36 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, 2014-Ohio-4604, ¶ 32 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- Doane v. Doane, 2001 WL 474267, *6 (5th Dist. May 2, 2001)(followed)
- In re E.M.W., 2009-Ohio-3016, ¶ 18 (2d Dist.)(followed)
- Smith v. Quigg, 2006-Ohio-1495, ¶ 66 (5th Dist.)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…