Legal Opinion

In Re Adoption of H.N.R.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 2015No. 2014-2201PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connor, C.J.

{¶ 1} Appellant, C.S.M., brings an as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of an aspect of Ohio’s Putative Father Registry (“OPFR”) that limits the time frame during which a man can register as a putative father in order to gain a right to receive notice of any subsequent adoption proceedings involving the man’s putative child. See R.C. 3107.07(B)(1) and 3107.062. C.S.M. argues that the deadline — 30 days after the child’s birth in the version of the law that applied to C.S.M., which has since been reduced by the legislature to 15 days — is *145unconstitutional as applied to the putative…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. County of Sacramento v. LewisSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  3. United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Hamdi v. RumsfeldSupreme Court of the United States · 2004

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Jones v. Metrohealth Med. Ctr., Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County2017
  2. In re Adoption of H.P.Ohio Supreme Court · 2022
  3. State v. ShingletonOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  4. In re Adoption of A.C.B. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  5. Gateway Royalty, L.L.C. v. EAP Ohio, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2025

2 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