Notes of Decisions
Cited in
587
cases (
238 in the last 5 years), 1958–2026 · leading case:
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 126× “Mother argued that none of the children were dependent children under R.C. 2151.04, and that neither K.J. nor Ne.”
In re S.L., 2016 Ohio 5000 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 52× “031 (A) and a dependent child pursuant to R.C. 2151.04 (C); and [A.L.] is a dependent child pursuant to R.”
In re L.H., 2019 Ohio 2383 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 59× “was adjudicated dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C) and adjudicated abused. L.”
In re A.W., 2011 Ohio 4490 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 64× “was dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C), maintaining that the child’s “condition or environment is such as to warrant the state, in the interest of the child, in assuming the child’s guardianship.”
In re A.V., 2021 Ohio 3873 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 23× “04(C) and dismissing the remaining neglect and dependency allegations under R.C. 2151.04(A)(2) and R.C. 2151.04(B). The magistrate found that the state had established dependency under R.”
In Re: The S Child., 2018 Ohio 2961 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 20× “were abused or neglected, reverse the holding that the dependency statute, R.C. 2151.04(C), did not apply, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
In re I.T., 2016 Ohio 555 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 16× “was a dependent child under R.C. 2151.04(B), (C), and (D). The complaint asserted that both parents have mental health issues, and that Father lacks parenting 2 knowledge, is cognitively delayed, and has a history of sexual abuse of children.”
In re K.A., 2017 Ohio 1 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 6× “R.C. 2151.04 contains the various definitions of “dependent child.”
In re O.H., 2011 Ohio 5632 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 20× “was making independent arrangements for her own childcare based on a dependency situation every time she went to visit her sister.”
In re R.L., 2017 Ohio 4271 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 11× “Based on the agency’s investigation, however, CSB filed a complaint on April 22, 2016, alleging that the child was dependent pursuant to R.C. 2151.04(A) and (C). {¶4} After an adjudicatory hearing, the magistrate adjudicated the child dependent pursuant to R.”
In re G.T., 2022 Ohio 1406 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 23× “04(A); the agency failed to show that she suffered from a diagnosed mental health condition that would inhibit her ability to care for G.”
In re A.P., 2022 Ohio 3181 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 11× “We find the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in adopting the -7- Warren CA2022-01-002 magistrate's decision and adjudicating Arlette a dependent child under R.C. 2151.04. Mother's assignment of error is overruled.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(A) — 36 cases
In re R.L., 2017 Ohio 4271 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Based on the agency’s investigation, however, CSB filed a complaint on April 22, 2016, alleging that the child was dependent pursuant to R.C. 2151.04(A) and (C). {¶4} After an adjudicatory hearing, the magistrate adjudicated the child dependent pursuant to R.”
In re G.T., 2022 Ohio 1406 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
“04(A); the agency failed to show that she suffered from a diagnosed mental health condition that would inhibit her ability to care for G.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(A)(2) — 2 cases
In re A.V., 2021 Ohio 3873 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
“04(C) and dismissing the remaining neglect and dependency allegations under R.C. 2151.04(A)(2) and R.C. 2151.04(B). The magistrate found that the state had established dependency under R.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(A)(2)(3) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(A)(C) — 2 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(B) — 77 cases
In re O.H., 2011 Ohio 5632 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
“was making independent arrangements for her own childcare based on a dependency situation every time she went to visit her sister.”
In re I.T., 2016 Ohio 555 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
“was a dependent child under R.C. 2151.04(B), (C), and (D). The complaint asserted that both parents have mental health issues, and that Father lacks parenting 2 knowledge, is cognitively delayed, and has a history of sexual abuse of children.”
In re A.P., 2022 Ohio 3181 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022).
“We find the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in adopting the -7- Warren CA2022-01-002 magistrate's decision and adjudicating Arlette a dependent child under R.C. 2151.04. Mother's assignment of error is overruled.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(B)(C) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(C) — 375 cases
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Mother argued that none of the children were dependent children under R.C. 2151.04, and that neither K.J. nor Ne.”
In re L.H., 2019 Ohio 2383 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
“was adjudicated dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C) and adjudicated abused. L.”
In re A.V., 2021 Ohio 3873 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021).
“04(C) and dismissing the remaining neglect and dependency allegations under R.C. 2151.04(A)(2) and R.C. 2151.04(B). The magistrate found that the state had established dependency under R.”
In re S.L., 2016 Ohio 5000 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
“031 (A) and a dependent child pursuant to R.C. 2151.04 (C); and [A.L.] is a dependent child pursuant to R.”
In Re: The S Child., 2018 Ohio 2961 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
“were abused or neglected, reverse the holding that the dependency statute, R.C. 2151.04(C), did not apply, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(C)(1) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(D) — 50 cases
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Mother argued that none of the children were dependent children under R.C. 2151.04, and that neither K.J. nor Ne.”
In re S.L., 2016 Ohio 5000 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
“031 (A) and a dependent child pursuant to R.C. 2151.04 (C); and [A.L.] is a dependent child pursuant to R.”
In re A.W., 2011 Ohio 4490 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
“was dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C), maintaining that the child’s “condition or environment is such as to warrant the state, in the interest of the child, in assuming the child’s guardianship.”
In re L.H., 2019 Ohio 2383 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
“was adjudicated dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C) and adjudicated abused. L.”
In re K.A., 2017 Ohio 1 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“R.C. 2151.04 contains the various definitions of “dependent child.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(D)(1) — 23 cases
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Mother argued that none of the children were dependent children under R.C. 2151.04, and that neither K.J. nor Ne.”
In re S.L., 2016 Ohio 5000 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
“031 (A) and a dependent child pursuant to R.C. 2151.04 (C); and [A.L.] is a dependent child pursuant to R.”
In re A.W., 2011 Ohio 4490 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
“was dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C), maintaining that the child’s “condition or environment is such as to warrant the state, in the interest of the child, in assuming the child’s guardianship.”
In re L.H., 2019 Ohio 2383 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019).
“was adjudicated dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C) and adjudicated abused. L.”
In re K.A., 2017 Ohio 1 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“R.C. 2151.04 contains the various definitions of “dependent child.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(D)(1)(2) — 4 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(D)(2) — 13 cases
In re K.A., 2017 Ohio 1 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“R.C. 2151.04 contains the various definitions of “dependent child.”
In re S.L., 2016 Ohio 5000 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
“031 (A) and a dependent child pursuant to R.C. 2151.04 (C); and [A.L.] is a dependent child pursuant to R.”
In re A.W., 2011 Ohio 4490 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011).
“was dependent under R.C. 2151.04(C), maintaining that the child’s “condition or environment is such as to warrant the state, in the interest of the child, in assuming the child’s guardianship.”
In re N.J., 2017 Ohio 7466 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“Mother argued that none of the children were dependent children under R.C. 2151.04, and that neither K.J. nor Ne.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(a) — 1 case
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(b) — 5 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04(c) — 6 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.