Legal Opinion

Davis v. Flickinger

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 12, 1997No. 95-2208PublishedCited by 474 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.

R.C. 3109.04 requires a finding of a “change in circumstances.” Such a determination when made by a trial judge should not be disturbed, absent an abuse of discretion. In determining whether a change in circumstances has occurred so as to warrant a change in custody, a trial judge, as the trier of fact, must be given wide latitude to consider all issues which support such a change, including a change in circumstances because of a child’s age and *417consequent needs, as well as increased hostility by one parent (and that parent’s spouse) which frustrates cooperation between the parties on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Miller v. MillerOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Bechtol v. BechtolOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Wyss v. WyssOhio Court of Appeals · 1982

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by474 opinions

  1. Pacher v. Invisible Fence of DaytonOhio Court of Appeals · 2003
  2. Davis v. FlickingerOhio Supreme Court · 1997
  3. In Re A.G.Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
  4. In re R.M.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
  5. Fisher v. HasenjagerOhio Supreme Court · 2007

469 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API