In re R.A.H. (Slip Opinion)

2016 Ohio 7592
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 3, 2016
Docket2015-1610
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2016 Ohio 7592 (In re R.A.H. (Slip Opinion)) 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 R.A.H. (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 7592 (Ohio 2016).

Opinion

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In re R.A.H., Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-7592.]

NOTICE This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published.

SLIP OPINION NO. 2016-OHIO-7592 IN RE R.A.H. [Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as In re R.A.H., Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-7592.] Court of appeals’ judgment as to proposition of law No. I reversed, and cause remanded to court of appeals to apply In re A.G.—Proposition of law No. II dismissed as having been improvidently accepted. (No. 2015-1610—Submitted August 17, 2016—Decided November 3, 2016.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 101936, 2015-Ohio-3342. __________________ {¶ 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., ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2016-Ohio-3306, ___ N.E.3d ___. {¶ 2} Proposition of law No. II of the appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently accepted. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

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 A.G. _________________ Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Brooke M. Burns, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant, R.A.H. _________________

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

Related

In re R.A.H.
2016 Ohio 8301 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 Ohio 7592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rah-slip-opinion-ohio-2016.