Legal Opinion
In re D.A.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided March 28, 2007No. 2006-0514PublishedCited by 67 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLanzinger, J.
{¶ 1} We accepted this discretionary appeal to determine whether the parental rights of a mentally retarded couple were properly terminated and permanent custody of their son properly awarded to Tuscarawas County Job and Family Services. We reverse.
Procedural Facts
{¶ 2} In early 2004, appellants voluntarily relinquished custody of their ten-year-old son, D.A., who was having behavioral problems, to appellee, Tuscarawas County Job and Family Services (“the agency”). After 30 days, the agency sought temporary custody of D.A. by filing a complaint alleging that the boy was a neglected and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Prince v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by67 opinions
- In re K.H.Ohio Supreme Court · 2008
- In re R.M.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
- In re C.B.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
- Henry v. HimesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2014
- In re B.E.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.