M.E.H. v. C.K.H.

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 1394

Syllabus

Appellant's firearms were seized by the police department when an ex parte domestic violence civil protection order was issued against him. The petition seeking the protection order was subsequently dismissed and the ex parte order dissolved, and the trial court filed an order stating appellant \may\ retrieve his firearms by presenting the court's order to the police department. When the police department refused to return the weapons to him, appellant filed a motion to have the police department and a particular police officer held in contempt for failure to return the firearms to him. The trial court overruled the motion on the basis that neither the department nor the officer had been a party to the protection order and neither had acted in concert with or represented the interests of the parties to the protection order, as in other cases cited by appellant in which non-parties were held in contempt. The order also had not included an express or affirmative directive requiring the department to return the firearms to appellant. The trial court did not err in overruling the contempt motion. Judgment affirmed.