Thomason v. Thomas

Summary

The Ohio Twelfth District Court of Appeals reviewed the issuance of a three-year civil stalking protection order based on repeated offensive social-media posts. The court held that credible evidence supported menacing by stalking and affirmed the order’s issuance, but concluded that its prohibition on communications concerning the appellee and her family was an impermissibly broad, content-based restriction on speech. The court vacated that portion of the order and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not err in issuing the three-year CSPO because credible evidence established by a preponderance of the evidence that Thomas engaged in a pattern of conduct that knowingly caused Thomason mental distress.
2. Paragraph 7 was an overbroad, content-based prior restraint on speech because it effectively prohibited Thomas from making any future post or communication concerning or referencing Thomason, her family, or her business, regardless of the content or context.
3. Paragraph 7 had to be vacated and the matter remanded for the trial court to issue a narrowly tailored provision protecting Thomason and her family while respecting Thomas's right to free speech; the remaining CSPO provisions remained affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether credible evidence supported the finding that Thomas engaged in menacing by stalking sufficient to justify a civil stalking protection order under R.C. 2903.211 and R.C. 2903.214.
2. Whether Paragraph 7 of the CSPO was an unconstitutional prior restraint and overbroad, content-based restriction on Thomas's speech.
3. Whether the speech restrictions were narrowly tailored and the least restrictive means of protecting Thomason and her family.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded