H.C. v. C.P.

Summary

The Tenth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed a judgment granting a civil stalking protection order against C.P. The court held that the trial court improperly considered testimony about the contents of a flyer because neither the original nor a duplicate was admitted into evidence and no exception to the Best Evidence Rule was established. The court remanded with instructions to vacate the protection order and found the remaining assignments of error moot.

Holdings

1. The trial court erred in considering testimony about the contents of the flyer because neither the original nor a duplicate was admitted and H.C. did not establish an exception permitting other evidence of the flyer's contents.
2. The CSPO was unsupported because, once the improperly admitted testimony about the flyer was excluded, no other competent, credible evidence reasonably showed that C.P. engaged in a pattern of conduct while knowingly causing H.C. mental distress.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting a civil stalking protection order when the evidence concerning the contents of the flyer was not properly admitted under Ohio's Best Evidence Rule.
2. Whether competent, credible evidence supported a finding that C.P. engaged in a pattern of conduct, knowingly causing H.C. mental distress, as required for a civil stalking protection order.
3. Whether the trial court erred in rejecting C.P.'s fraud-based arguments under Civ.R. 60(B)(3) and Civ.R. 60(B)(5), although those assignments became moot after reversal on the evidentiary issue.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded