FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. DN 17-06-000483
P. AGARWAL, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
GATTS, Attorney at Law, for Mother.
PRENTICE, Attorney at Law, for Child.
FARAH, Guardian ad Litem.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
J. CARR PRESIDING JUDGE.
Appellant, L.M. ("Father"), appeals from a judgment
of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile
Division, that terminated his parental rights and placed his
minor child in the permanent custody of Summit County
Children Services Board ("CSB"). This Court
Father and Mother are the biological parents of T.T., born
February 2, 2004. Although both parents have other children,
only T.T. is a party to this appeal. Mother voluntarily
relinquished her parental rights and did not appeal from the
trial court's judgment.
T.T. has a history with CSB dating back to 2009 because of
drug use and violence in the homes of Father and Mother and
the child's serious mental health and behavioral
problems. CSB filed the 2009 case after a drug-related
robbery in Father's home, during which then five-year-old
T.T. witnessed Father being shot in the chest. CSB's
initial complaint requested that T.T. be permitted to stay in
Mother's home, provided she prevented him from having
contact with Father, who had a long history of substance
abuse and criminal activity. Because Mother continued to
allow Father to have contact with T.T., the child was removed
from Mother's home a few days later. T.T. was adjudicated
a dependent child and placed in the temporary custody of CSB.
During June 2010, T.T. was returned to the custody of Mother
under an order of protective supervision. Protective
supervision was terminated on October 5, 2010.
Less than one month later, however, CSB filed another
complaint to allege that T.T. was a dependent child because
Mother was exposing him to ongoing violence and drug
activity. T.T. was adjudicated dependent and placed in the
temporary custody of the maternal grandmother under an order
of protective supervision. During that case, Mother made
minimal progress on the case plan. T.T. was eventually placed
in the legal custody of the maternal grandparents and that
case was closed.
On September 20, 2012, CSB filed a third complaint, alleging
that T.T. was an abused and dependent child. T.T. was removed
from the custody of the grandparents pursuant to Juv.R. 6
because he disclosed to school personnel that he had been
physically abused by a relative. Pursuant to an agreement
between the parties, the allegations of abuse were dismissed
and T.T. was adjudicated a dependent child. He was placed in
the temporary custody of CSB and, although the grandparents
had been reluctant to continue caring for him because of his
mental health and behavioral problems, T.T. was returned to
their legal custody during August 2013.
Several months later, Mother moved for legal custody of T.T.,
alleging that the grandparents were no longer willing to care
for the child. T.T. was ...