Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Matter of Spangler, 2007-G-2800 (12-31-2008)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 31, 2008No. Nos. 2007-G-2800 and 2007-G-2802Published

1Concurrence

{¶ 67} While I concur that this matter must be reversed and remanded, I do so upon narrower grounds than the majority. The majority finds that a county board of mental retardation and developmental disabilities does not have either an express grant of authority to file a motion to remove a guardian under R.C. 5126.05(A) or implied grant of authority to file such a motion. I believe the focus of the standing analysis should instead be on the rights and remedies provided to the various concerned individuals and entities in guardianship matters in R.C. Chapters 2109 and 2111.

{¶ 68} The analysis…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Love v. TupmanOhio Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Brown v. Wright, Unpublished Decision (1-6-2006)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API