In re J.H.

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 4593

Syllabus

Permanent custody; manifest weight; clear and convincing evidence; best interest; prior removals; lack of basic needs; failure to remedy; lack of commitment; R.C. 2151.353(A)(4); R.C. 2151.414(D)(1); R.C. 2151.414(E)(1); R.C. 2151.414(E)(4); timeliness of dispositional hearing; continuance; R.C. 2151.35(B)(1); case plan timing; R.C. 2151.412(D); leave to amend; Juv.R. 22(B); guardian ad litem recommendations. Judgment affirmed. The juvenile court's grant of permanent custody to the Agency under R.C. 2151.353(A)(4) was supported by clear and convincing evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence. The record established that despite reasonable case-planning efforts, mother failed to remedy chronic conditions such as unsafe and unsanitary housing, failure to meet basic, educational, and medical needs. She refused access to the home and did not comply with offered services. Parents demonstrated lack of commitment. The children benefited from structured placements, and permanent custody served their best interests. The court complied with R.C. 2151.35(B)(1) because the dispositional trial was set within the statutory deadline and was continued (at the mother's request) within the permissible 45-day extension period. Mother's complaint that the case plan was filed one day late under R.C. 2151.412(D) was waived by not raising it below, and mother further failed to show prejudice. Finally, proceeding with and deciding the permanent-custody disposition, rather than granting the Agency's request to amend the proposed disposition to temporary custody, was within the court's discretion under Juv.R. 22(B). The parties tried the disposition on the merits, and the court was not bound by the guardian ad litem's oral shift away from his written recommendation of permanent custody.