In re T.F.
Citations
- 2025 Ohio 5051
Syllabus
Manifest weight; sufficiency; best interest; clear and convincing; reasonable time; failure to remedy; lack of commitment; abandonment; R.C. 2151.414(B)(1); R.C. 2151.414(D)(1)(a)-(e); R.C. 2151.414(E)(1); R.C. 2151.414(E)(4); R.C. 2151.414(E)(10); R.C. 2151.415(D); R.C. 2151.415(A); R.C. 2151.353(G); R.C. 2151.412(H)(2); R.C. 2151.412(F)(2). Judgment affirmed. Permanent custody to the Cuyahoga County Division of Children and Family Services (\CCDCFS\) was supported by clear and convincing evidence. Mother continuously failed to remedy substance abuse, mental-health, housing, and anger-management issues. She had inconsistent visitation with the children, which did not progress beyond supervised visits. Mother missed 39 drug screens and had no prospective sobriety date. Her visits with the children often included 30- to 45-minute phone distractions. One child became inconsolable when mother no-showed. Evidence also supported the juvenile court's finding that the children's father had abandoned them. These findings supported the conclusion that the children could not or should not be placed with either parent within a reasonable time. The statutory best-interest factors supported custody to CCDCFS, including, but not limited to, the guardian ad litem's recommendation, the children's custodial history since December 2023, and their need for a legally secure placement. Mother's manifest-weight and sufficiency challenges failed because competent, credible evidence established each statutory element. A finding that a judgment is supported by the manifest weight of the evidence necessarily includes a finding that sufficient evidence supports the judgment. We reject mother's argument that CCDCFS moved too quickly or was required to secure placement with a relative. The agency's filing of its motion for permanent custody complied with R.C. 2151.415(A) because the R.C. 2151.353(G) one-year temporary custody deadline neared. Temporary custody continued through disposition, and
Judges: Calabrese
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court· 1982-02-22· cited 9,761×
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1972-04-03· cited 5,889×
- Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court· 1984-04-18· cited 4,990×
- Eastley v. VolkmanOhio Supreme Court· 2012-05-22· cited 2,407×
- Davis v. FlickingerOhio Supreme Court· 1997-02-12· cited 1,567×
- In re MurrayOhio Supreme Court· 1990-07-03· cited 1,148×
- In re CunninghamOhio Supreme Court· 1979-07-18· cited 599×
- In re Z.C.Ohio Supreme Court· 2023-12-27· cited 335×
- In re N.B.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2015-01-29· cited 142×
- In re the Interest of R. J. C.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1974-04-09· cited 118×
- In re G.M.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2011-08-18· cited 56×
- In re M.J.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2013-12-12· cited 49×
- In re C.T.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2020-02-20· cited 36×
- In re GlennOhio Court of Appeals· 2000-10-30· cited 33×
- In re C.O.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-27· cited 22×
- In re R.A.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2021-11-18· cited 17×
- In re P.S.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2023-01-19· cited 17×
- In re R.M.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2024-05-16· cited 14×
- In re S.F.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2013-02-15· cited 12×
- In re B.B.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2024-02-15· cited 12×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.