In re R.A.H.

2016 Ohio 7592, 71 N.E.3d 1015, 148 Ohio St. 3d 531
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided November 3, 2016·No. No. 2015-1610·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals as to proposition of law No. I is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the court of appeals to apply In re A.G., 148 Ohio St.3d 118, 2016-Ohio-3306, 69 N.E.3d 646.

{¶2} Proposition of law No. II is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lanzinger, French, and O’Neill, JJ., concur. O’Donnell and Kennedy, JJ., dissent and would affirm the judgment of the court of appeals for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in In re AG.

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

In re R.A.H., 2016 Ohio 7592, 71 N.E.3d 1015, 148 Ohio St. 3d 531 (Ohio 2016).

2016 Ohio 7592 (In re R.A.H.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re D.F.
2022 Ohio 3436 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2022)
In re D.R.
2021 Ohio 1797 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2021)
In re R.A.H. (Slip Opinion)
2016 Ohio 7592 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2016)