(A) At any hearing in which a court is asked to modify or terminate an order of disposition issued under section 2151.353, 2151.415, or 2151.417 of the Revised Code, the court, in determining whether to return the child to the child's parents, shall consider whether it is in the best interest of the child.
(B) An order of disposition issued under division (A)(3) of section 2151.353, division (A)(3) of section 2151.415, or section 2151.417 of the Revised Code granting legal custody of a child to a person is intended to be permanent in nature. A court shall not modify or terminate an order granting legal custody of a child unless it finds, based on facts that have arisen since the order was issued or that were unknown to the court at that time, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the person who was granted legal custody, and that modification or termination of the order is necessary to serve the best interest of the child.
Last updated January 1, 2025 at 4:50 AM
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 155
cases (61 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case: In re J.R.P., 2018 Ohio 3938 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018).
In re J.R.P., 2018 Ohio 3938 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 18ד{¶ 22} Appellants' second, third and fifth assignments of error all relate to the trial court's application of R.C. 2151.42 rather than R.C. 3109.04 in making its custody determination in the instant matter.”
In re I.E., 2020 Ohio 3477 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11ד{¶ 14} R.C. 2151.42 does not define the phrase “change in circumstances.”
In re A.M., 2017 Ohio 7690 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 12ד{¶10} In considering Mother’s motion to modify legal custody, the juvenile court as a practical matter applied the standard set forth in R.C. 2151.42(B), which is applicable in cases 5 where a child who was previously adjudicated dependent, neglected, or abused was placed in the…”
In re A.P., 2012 Ohio 3873 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 11ד14, 1999), the reasoning of Burmeister has no application here because that appeal predated enactment of Section 2151.42 of the Revised Code. {¶26} Rather than pursuing a modification or termination of the prior legal custody order under Section 2151.”
In re C.B., 2011 Ohio 2899 (Ohio 2011). · cites it 3דR.C. 2151.42. 2 Thus, the juvenile court’s order determined the action and prevented any further judgment.”
In re L.C.C., 2018 Ohio 4617 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4דto appellant, pursuant to R.C. 2151.42(A), did not have the effect of terminating all appellant's residual parental rights, privileges, and responsibilities.”
In re A.G., 2026 Ohio 26 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 22דIn fact, the trial court’s statutory authority to modify prior dispositional orders makes explicit reference to R.C. 2151.42, “if applicable[.]” {¶18} R.”
In re E.E.D., 2022 Ohio 4014 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 7ד2 (“Legal custody may be modified or terminated only by following the procedures identified in R.C. 2151.42.”); In re L.H., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No.”
In re James, 866 N.E.2d 467 (Ohio 2007). · cites it 2ד” {¶ 26} Finally, with respect to the views of the dissenters, we note that R.C. 2151.42, styled “Consideration of whether return to parents is in best interest of child; certain orders granting legal custody intended to be permanent,” also addresses juvenile custody cases.”
In re N.G., 2012 Ohio 2825 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 6דafter it adjudicated her a dependent and neglected child and LCCS was authorized to seek a modification or termination of the trial court’s prior dispositional order “at any time[,]” it was also necessary that any modification of the prior dispositional order comply with R.C.…”
In re A.P., 2021 Ohio 1229 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 10ד353, not R.C. 2151.42, the trial court was required to consider only the best interest of the child.”
In re A.S., 2016 Ohio 7622 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4דA different statute, R.C. 2151.42, governs the modification or termination of dispositional orders in dependency cases.”
In re J.R.P., 2018 Ohio 3938 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “{¶ 22} Appellants' second, third and fifth assignments of error all relate to the trial court's application of R.C. 2151.42 rather than R.C. 3109.04 in making its custody determination in the instant matter.”
In re I.E., 2020 Ohio 3477 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “{¶ 14} R.C. 2151.42 does not define the phrase “change in circumstances.”
In re C.B., 2011 Ohio 2899 (Ohio 2011). “R.C. 2151.42. 2 Thus, the juvenile court’s order determined the action and prevented any further judgment.”
In re L.C.C., 2018 Ohio 4617 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). “to appellant, pursuant to R.C. 2151.42(A), did not have the effect of terminating all appellant's residual parental rights, privileges, and responsibilities.”
In re H.M.K., 2013 Ohio 4317 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013).
In re A.M., 2017 Ohio 7690 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). “{¶10} In considering Mother’s motion to modify legal custody, the juvenile court as a practical matter applied the standard set forth in R.C. 2151.42(B), which is applicable in cases 5 where a child who was previously adjudicated dependent, neglected, or abused was placed in the…”
In re I.E., 2020 Ohio 3477 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020). “{¶ 14} R.C. 2151.42 does not define the phrase “change in circumstances.”
In re A.P., 2012 Ohio 3873 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). “14, 1999), the reasoning of Burmeister has no application here because that appeal predated enactment of Section 2151.42 of the Revised Code. {¶26} Rather than pursuing a modification or termination of the prior legal custody order under Section 2151.”
In re A.G., 2026 Ohio 26 (Ohio Ct. App. 2026). “In fact, the trial court’s statutory authority to modify prior dispositional orders makes explicit reference to R.C. 2151.42, “if applicable[.]” {¶18} R.”
In re E.E.D., 2022 Ohio 4014 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “2 (“Legal custody may be modified or terminated only by following the procedures identified in R.C. 2151.42.”); In re L.H., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No.”
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.