In re McBride

110 Ohio St. 3d 19 (Ohio 2006) · Supreme Court of Ohio · July 19, 2006

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court held that a natural parent whose parental rights and permanent custody of a child have been terminated does not have standing to file a custody petition as a nonparent. The court concluded that Ohio Revised Code provisions governing permanent custody and modification of dispositional orders limit the broad filing language of Juvenile Rule 10.

Court
Supreme Court of Ohio
Writing for the Court
Lanzinger, J.; Moyer, C.J.; Resnick, J.; Pfeifer, J.; Lundberg Stratton, J.; O'Connor, J.; O'Donnell, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
July 19, 2006
Procedural posture
Discretionary appeal from an interlocutory order affirmed by the First District Court of Appeals concerning the mother's standing to file a nonparent custody petition after the agency received permanent custody.
Standard of review
De novo review of the legal question of statutory standing.
Precedential value
Published Ohio Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Hamilton County Department of Human Services, now known as Hamilton County Job and Family Services v. Peggy Fugate
Disposition
reversed

Topics

family law procedurechild custodyparental rightsstandingstatutory interpretation

Practice areas

family lawjuvenile lawchild custodyparental rights

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a natural parent whose parental rights have been terminated through an order granting permanent custody has standing to file a petition for custody of the child as a nonparent.
  2. Whether Juv.R. 10's authorization for 'any person' to file a custody complaint overrides statutory restrictions on participation and modification of a permanent-custody disposition.

Holdings

  1. A parent who has lost permanent custody of a child does not have standing as a nonparent to file a petition for custody of that child.
  2. Juv.R. 10's provision that 'any person' may file a custody complaint must be read together with statutory limitations and cannot confer standing that the statutes expressly withhold.

Key quotations

Given this definition, we find that the right to file a petition for custody is substantive and that Juv.R. 10 must be read in conjunction with the limitations expressed in R.C. 2151.414(F) and 2151.353(E)(2). (¶ 13)
We hold that a parent who has lost permanent custody of a child does not have standing as a nonparent to file a petition for custody of that child. (¶ 15)

Factual background

In 1996, Selina McBride and her brother were found living alone while their mother, Peggy Fugate, was incarcerated, and the children were adjudicated neglected, dependent, and abused. Selina was placed in the temporary custody of Hamilton County Job and Family Services, which later received permanent custody in 1997 after a hearing; Fugate did not object to the magistrate's decision. After Selina was not adopted and moved among foster homes and institutions, Fugate filed a custody petition in 2003 as a nonparent, asserting that the conditions that had led to foster care had been resolved.

Procedural history

The juvenile court awarded permanent custody of Selina McBride to Hamilton County Job and Family Services after a neglect, dependency, and abuse proceeding. Years later, Selina's natural mother, Peggy Fugate, filed a custody petition as a nonparent. The magistrate dismissed the petition for lack of standing, but the juvenile court set aside that decision and permitted the petition to proceed; the First District affirmed, and the Supreme Court of Ohio accepted the agency's discretionary appeal.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…