In re Graybill/Rowe Children

Ohio Supreme Court

In re Graybill/Rowe Children

1997 Ohio 267, 77 Ohio St. 3d 373

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 29, 1997

Docket1996-0474

StatusPublished

This text of 1997 Ohio 267 (In re Graybill/Rowe Children) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Graybill/Rowe Children, 1997 Ohio 267, 77 Ohio St. 3d 373 (Ohio 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 77 Ohio St.3d 373.]

IN RE GRAYBILL/ROWE CHILDREN. [Cite as In re Graybill/Rowe Children, 1997-Ohio-267.] Juvenile court—Passing of statutory time period pursuant to R.C. 2151.353(F) does not divest juvenile court of jurisdiction to enter dispositional order. (Nos. 96-474 96-475—Submitted January 8, 1997—Decided January 29, 1997.) APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 95-CA-109. __________________ Paula M. Sawyers, for appellant Stark County Department of Human Services. Todd A. Bergert, for Shirley Row, Mother. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings onthe authority of In re Young Children (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 632, 669 N.E.2d 1140. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS and COOK, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part. __________________ COOK, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. {¶ 2} For the same reasons that I expressed in In re Young Children (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 632, 640, 669 N.E.2d 1140, 1146, I concur in part and dissent in part. I would reverse the judgment of the appellate court and reinstate the permanent custody order. DOUGLAS, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion. __________________

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

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 77 Ohio St.3d 373.]

IN RE GRAYBILL/ROWE CHILDREN. [Cite as In re Graybill/Rowe Children, 1997-Ohio-267.] Juvenile court—Passing of statutory time period pursuant to R.C. 2151.353(F) does not divest juvenile court of jurisdiction to enter dispositional order. (Nos. 96-474 96-475—Submitted January 8, 1997—Decided January 29, 1997.) APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 95-CA-109. __________________ Paula M. Sawyers, for appellant Stark County Department of Human Services. Todd A. Bergert, for Shirley Row, Mother. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings onthe authority of In re Young Children (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 632, 669 N.E.2d 1140. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur. DOUGLAS and COOK, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part. __________________ COOK, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. {¶ 2} For the same reasons that I expressed in In re Young Children (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 632, 640, 669 N.E.2d 1140, 1146, I concur in part and dissent in part. I would reverse the judgment of the appellate court and reinstate the permanent custody order. DOUGLAS, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1997 Ohio 267, 77 Ohio St. 3d 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-graybillrowe-children-ohio-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack