Hamm v. Jones

2018 Ohio 4948
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 10, 2018
Docket2018-A-0047
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 Ohio 4948 (Hamm v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hamm v. Jones, 2018 Ohio 4948 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

[Cite as Hamm v. Jones, 2018-Ohio-4948.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

ASHTABULA COUNTY, OHIO

REBEKAH HAMM, : OPINION

Plaintiff, : CASE NO. 2018-A-0047 ASHTABULA COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT : ENFORCEMENT AGENCY, : Appellee, : - vs - : KIERAN I. JONES, : Defendant-Appellant.

Civil Appeal from the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division. Case No. 2011 JI 00259.

Judgment: Modified and affirmed as modified.

Terry C. Weddleton, Ashtabula County Child Support Enforcement Agency, 2924 Donahoe Drive, Ashtabula, OH 44004 (For Appellee).

Rebecca R. Grabski, 206 South Meridian Street, Suite B, Ravenna, OH 44266 (For Defendant-Appellant).

TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J.

{¶1} Appellant, Kieran I. Jones, appeals from the May 16, 2018 judgment entry

of the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division. Appellant was

ordered to serve 30 days in jail with 15 days suspended for his failure to pay child support.

The trial court’s judgment is modified and affirmed as modified. {¶2} On October 24, 2011, upon a motion filed by appellee, the Ashtabula

County Child Support Enforcement Agency (“ACCSEA”), the Ashtabula County Court of

Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, issued an order for child support consistent with the

ACCSEA’s August 3, 2011 administrative order. Appellant was ordered to pay child

support for his minor child, K.J., in the amount of $225.30 per month plus administrative

fees, commencing September 3, 2011.

{¶3} Pursuant to a motion to modify support filed by ACCSEA, on April 22, 2014,

the trial court adopted an administrative order modifying appellant’s support obligation.

The trial court ordered that commencing February 1, 2014, appellant pay child support in

the amount of $185.93 per month. The trial court further ordered appellant pay “$37.19

plus 2% processing charge towards the arrears until all arrears are paid in full.”

{¶4} On May 5, 2014, ACCSEA filed a motion to show cause, requesting the trial

court order appellant to show cause why he should not be held in contempt for his failure

to pay his child support obligation. As of April 10, 2014, appellant owed $6,916.72 in

arrears. Appellant was ordered to appear on July 8, 2014, to answer the charge of

contempt. A warrant was issued for his arrest after appellant failed to appear.

{¶5} Appellant was arrested, and on April 27, 2015, a hearing before the

magistrate was held to address the motion to show cause. After being advised of his

rights, appellant waived his right to counsel. The parties reached an agreement during

the hearing which was later set forth in a magistrate’s decision filed July 7, 2015. The

magistrate’s decision states, in pertinent part:

1. [ACCSEA] shall reinstate Obligor’s driver’s license, immediately, and shall not re-suspend during the purge period.

2 2. That Obligor be found in contempt for failure to pay support as ordered.

3. That Obligor be found in default of his support obligation in the amount of $8235.76 including processing charges, as of 3/31/15.

4. That the current order of support is $185.93 per month plus processing charge.

5. That Obligor be permitted to purge himself of contempt by paying $37.19 per month towards arrears in addition to current support as ordered. The purge period shall commence 5/1/15. A purge hearing shall be set every 90 days for 9 months. If Obligor fails to pay as ordered during purge period, the matter shall be set for sentencing.

ACCSEA reserves the right to move for earlier sentencing hearing if Obligor fails to pay as ordered for over 30 consecutive days during the purge period. However, if the Obligor is laid off due to no fault of his own, he shall avoid jail time by providing documentation that the layoff was not his fault and by seeking work at twenty (20) places per month and keeping lists of his efforts to present to the court at hearing. [Emphasis removed.]

{¶6} After neither party filed objections, the trial court adopted the magistrate’s

decision on August 6, 2015.

{¶7} A purge hearing was held on September 30, 2015, at which neither party

appeared. In a magistrate’s order filed October 21, 2015, the magistrate found appellant

failed to make payments required to purge himself of contempt for the purge period.

However, the magistrate rescheduled the purge hearing for January 13, 2016, due to

appellant’s multiple pending criminal cases.

{¶8} A magistrate’s order filed on February 13, 2016, indicates the parties failed

to appear for the January 13, 2016 hearing. The order further states: “Obligor has failed

to make the payments required to purge himself of contempt for this purge period. Obligor

failed to seek work as ordered, or at least failed to prove he sought work. He is

incarcerated now, but with credit for time served, will be released in about 10 months.

3 Accordingly, the Magistrate will keep it on her docket.” The purge hearing was

rescheduled for December 21, 2016.

{¶9} The parties again failed to appear at the rescheduled hearing. A

magistrate’s order filed on January 23, 2017, states: “Obligor has failed to make the

payments required to purge himself of contempt for this purge period. He was released

from prison on 8/16/16.” The magistrate set a sentencing hearing for March 29, 2017.

{¶10} Appellant failed to appear for the sentencing hearing, and a warrant was

issued for his arrest. A magistrate’s order filed March 29, 2017, states: “The ACCSEA

reports that the Obligor owes $12,805.12 as of March 29, 2017 inclusive of the

administrative fee. The ACCSEA reports that the Obligor has failed to pay child support

as ordered and failed to appear today to explain what he has completed since release

from prison on August 16, 2016.”

{¶11} Appellant appeared on his own on April 12, 2017, for sentencing. The trial

court’s judgment entry filed the same day, states: “The ACCSEA reports that the Obligor

owes $12,995.51 as of April 10, 2017 inclusive of administrative fee. The ACCSEA

reports that the Obligor has failed to make any payment of child support as ordered since

March 2015.” Appellant provided documentation indicating he was employed but was not

working due to a non-work-related injury. Appellant was ordered to make his child support

payments once he resumed work. The matter was rescheduled for a “Review of

Sentencing” on August 23, 2017, “to assure payments are made.”

{¶12} Appellant appeared for the sentencing hearing on August 23, 2017. A

judgment entry filed by the trial court on the same day states: “The ACCSEA reports that

the Obligor owes $13,587.07 as of August 21, 2017 inclusive of administrative fee. The

4 ACCSEA reports that the Obligor has made some small payments while he is attending

school to complete his CDL[.] * * * The Obligor also submitted evidence that he was on

medical leave for hernia surgery for 9 weeks commencing April 17, 2017.” The matter

was rescheduled for a “Review Sentencing” on December 13, 2017. Appellant was

ordered to “bring to Court proof of his CDL progress and his Seek Work Lists where he

has applied for employment.”

{¶13} Appellant failed to appear on December 13, 2017. The trial court’s

judgment entry states that the ACCSEA reported that appellant owed $14,298.63 “as of

December 13, 2017 inclusive of administrative fee.” Appellant had made “some small

sporadic payments but failed to pay as ordered and failed to appear today and explain.”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tucker v. Tucker
461 N.E.2d 1337 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1983)
Kungle v. Kungle, 2006ca00367 (9-17-2007)
2007 Ohio 4929 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
State v. Render
330 N.E.2d 690 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1975)
Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories
400 N.E.2d 384 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 Ohio 4948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamm-v-jones-ohioctapp-2018.