167 Ohio App. 3d 141 - In Re Sheffey’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently January 2024
23 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Relies on Santosky v. Kramer · In re Murray · 97 Ohio St. 3d 92 - In re Hoffman · 21 Ohio App. 3d 31 - In Re Smart
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * [T]he court may grant permanent custody of a child to a movant if the court determines * * *, by clear and convincing evidence, that it is in the best interest of the child to grant permanent custody of the child to the agency that filed the motion for permanent custody and that any of the following apply: {¶ 28} "(a) The child is not abandoned or orphaned or has not been in the temporary custody of one or more public children services agencies or private child placing agencies for twelve or more months of a consecutive twenty-two month period ending on or after March 18, 1999, and the child cannot be placed with either of the child's parents within a reasonable time or should not be placed with the child's parents. {¶ 29} "(b) The child is abandoned. {¶ 30} "(c) The child is orphaned, and there are no relatives of the child who are able to take permanent custody. {¶ 31} "(d) The child has been in the temporary custody of one or more public children services agencies or private child placing agencies for twelve or more months of a consecutive twenty-two month period ending on or after March 18, 1999.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Accordingly, when the state initiates a permanent-custody proceeding, parents must be provided with fundamentally fair procedures in accordance with the due process provisions under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[b]y denying the mother proper notice, a recitation of her rights, and proper participation in the proceedings, as well as by denying her a continuance, and failing to appoint her counsel during the hearing for neglect and dependency, the trial court did not comply with the basic constitutional requirements set forth in both the Ohio and United States Constitutions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re D.E.
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.