Ohio Supreme Court, 2016

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

In re R.A.H. (Slip Opinion)
Ohio Supreme Court · Decided November 3, 2016 · No. 2015-1610
2016 Ohio 7592
In re R.A.H. (Slip Opinion)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

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. _________________

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.