Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

136 Ohio App. 3d 503

737 N.E.2d 92

In Re Stacey S.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 30, 1999

This page is marked noindex.

Ohio Court of Appeals · decided 1999-12-30

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1999-12-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably 153 Ohio App. 3d 299 - Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance v. Christian (2003), 160 Ohio App. 3d 32 - In Re Alexis K. (2005)

44 state decisions

2201999200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Melvin L. Resnick, Judge,

¶1 dissenting.

¶2 I must respectfully dissent as to the disposition of the first assignment of error in this case. Juv.R. 4(A) expressly states that “[w]hen the complaint alleges that a child is an abused child, the court must appoint an attorney to represent the interests of the child.” Here, the statement in the complaint involving a finding of a genital abnormality in one of the children that may be consistent with sexual abuse does not rise to an allegation that any of the six children involved is an abused child within the meaning of the rule or statutory law, see R.C. 2151.031. Instead, the complaint alleges that these children are neglected and dependent. The parents stipulated to a finding of the same. There is no finding of abuse, sexual or physical, anywhere in the record. Accordingly, pursuant to Juv.R. 4(A), the children were not entitled to appointment of counsel. I would find appellants’ first assignment of error not well taken and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

/136/ohioapp3d/503 · .json · Public domain