Collier v. Bayless

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 3922

Syllabus

The trial court did not err when it found that, under the totality of the circumstances, appellee's act of striking his son in the face with the back of his hand was not domestic violence under R.C. 3113.31, but rather constituted proper and reasonable parental discipline. Trial court did not err when it admitted the testimony of a case worker from Montgomery County Children's Services as lay witness testimony pursuant to Evid.R. 701. Case worker was not providing expert testimony, but rather lay testimony based upon her own firsthand observations and perceptions of the individuals whom she interviewed during her investigation into the allegations of domestic violence. The error in admitting her testimony regarding the veracity of the child was harmless, as the child testified and was thoroughly cross-examined. Accordingly, the trial court did not err by overruling appellant's objections to the magistrate's decision, dismissing the petition for a domestic violence civil protection order (CPO), and vacating the ex parte domestic violence CPO. Judgment affirmed.