Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.381 (2026)

Request to precede court action - jurisdiction

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(A) Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), (E), and (F) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.01 to 3111.18 of the Revised Code unless the person has requested an administrative determination under section 3111.38 of the Revised Code of the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship.

(B) An action to determine the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship may be brought by the child's mother in the appropriate division of the court of common pleas in the county in which the child resides, without requesting an administrative determination, if the child's mother brings the action in order to request an order to determine the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities, the payment of all or any part of the reasonable expenses of the mother's pregnancy and confinement, or support of the child. The clerk of the court shall forward a copy of the complaint to the child support enforcement agency of the county in which the complaint is filed.

(C) An action to determine the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship may be brought by the putative father of the child in the appropriate division of the court of common pleas in the county in which the child resides, without requesting an administrative determination, if the putative father brings the action in order to request an order to determine the allocation of parental rights and responsibilities. The clerk of the court shall forward a copy of the complaint to the child support enforcement agency of the county in which the complaint is filed.

(D) An action to determine the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship may be brought by the caretaker of the child in the appropriate division of the court of common pleas in the county in which the child resides, without requesting an administrative determination, if the caretaker brings the action in order to request support of the child. The clerk of the court shall forward a copy of the complaint to the child support enforcement agency of the county in which the complaint is filed.

(E) If services are requested by the court, under divisions (B), (C), and (D) of this section, of the child support enforcement agency to determine the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship, a Title IV-D application must be completed and delivered to the child support enforcement agency.

(F) If the alleged father of a child is deceased and proceedings for the probate of the estate of the alleged father have been or can be commenced, the court with jurisdiction over the probate proceedings shall retain jurisdiction to determine the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship between the alleged father and any child without an administrative determination being requested from a child support enforcement agency.

If an action for divorce, dissolution of marriage, or legal separation, or an action under section 2151.231 or 2151.232 of the Revised Code requesting an order requiring the payment of child support and provision for the health care of a child, has been filed in a court of common pleas and a question as to the existence or nonexistence of a parent and child relationship arises, the court in which the original action was filed shall retain jurisdiction to determine the existence or nonexistence of the parent and child relationship without an administrative determination being requested from a child support enforcement agency.

If a juvenile court or other court with jurisdiction under section 2101.022 or 2301.03 of the Revised Code issues a support order under section 2151.231 or 2151.232 of the Revised Code relying on a presumption under section 3111.03 of the Revised Code, the juvenile court or other court with jurisdiction that issued the support order shall retain jurisdiction if a question as to the existence of a parent and child relationship arises.

Last updated April 3, 2024 at 4:08 AM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2022 · leading case: Morris v. Mottern, 2015-Ohio-4523, 48 N.E.3d 92.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Morris v. Mottern, 2015-Ohio-4523, 48 N.E.3d 92. · cites it 82× “See R.C. 3111.381; 3109.12. Because she was the unmarried mother of B.”
In re S.K.L., 2016-Ohio-2826. · cites it 10× “’s remedy was properly advanced in the juvenile court” in light of R.C. 3111.381. R.C. 3111.381(A) provides: Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.”
In re T.D., 2018-Ohio-204, 104 N.E.3d 177. · cites it 4× “38 and because none of the exceptions outlined in Section 3111.381 applied. She also argues that, despite her divorce from Mr.”
Powell v. Williams, 2022-Ohio-526, 185 N.E.3d 595. · cites it 2× “On April 29, 2021, the probate court denied appellants’ motion for genetic testing, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction over any parentage action pursuant to R.C. 3111.381 because the statute of limitations in determining the existence or nonexistence of a parent-child…”
State ex rel. C.W. v. Boros, 2019-Ohio-4388. · cites it 7× “38, or (2) the party must file the action in the county in which the child resides. R.C. 3111.381(A) and (C). {¶22} The complaint continues that L.”
Nemcek v. Paskey, 849 N.E.2d 108 (2006). · cites it 2× “{¶ 10} R.C. 3111.381, as currently enacted, requires that an administrative determination of the existence or nonexistence of a parent-and-child relationship be made prior to bringing an action in juvenile court to establish parentage, *4 except when the alleged father is…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.381(A): 3 cases
Morris v. Mottern, 2015-Ohio-4523, 48 N.E.3d 92. “See R.C. 3111.381; 3109.12. Because she was the unmarried mother of B.”
In re S.K.L., 2016-Ohio-2826. “’s remedy was properly advanced in the juvenile court” in light of R.C. 3111.381. R.C. 3111.381(A) provides: Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.”
State ex rel. C.W. v. Boros, 2019-Ohio-4388. “38, or (2) the party must file the action in the county in which the child resides. R.C. 3111.381(A) and (C). {¶22} The complaint continues that L.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.381(B): 2 cases
Morris v. Mottern, 2015-Ohio-4523, 48 N.E.3d 92. “See R.C. 3111.381; 3109.12. Because she was the unmarried mother of B.”
In re S.K.L., 2016-Ohio-2826. “’s remedy was properly advanced in the juvenile court” in light of R.C. 3111.381. R.C. 3111.381(A) provides: Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.381(C): 3 cases
Morris v. Mottern, 2015-Ohio-4523, 48 N.E.3d 92. “See R.C. 3111.381; 3109.12. Because she was the unmarried mother of B.”
In re S.K.L., 2016-Ohio-2826. “’s remedy was properly advanced in the juvenile court” in light of R.C. 3111.381. R.C. 3111.381(A) provides: Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.”
State ex rel. C.W. v. Boros, 2019-Ohio-4388. “38, or (2) the party must file the action in the county in which the child resides. R.C. 3111.381(A) and (C). {¶22} The complaint continues that L.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.381(E): 2 cases
In re S.K.L., 2016-Ohio-2826. “’s remedy was properly advanced in the juvenile court” in light of R.C. 3111.381. R.C. 3111.381(A) provides: Except as provided in divisions (B), (C), (D), and (E) of this section, no person may bring an action under sections 3111.”
Powell v. Williams, 2022-Ohio-526, 185 N.E.3d 595. “On April 29, 2021, the probate court denied appellants’ motion for genetic testing, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction over any parentage action pursuant to R.C. 3111.381 because the statute of limitations in determining the existence or nonexistence of a parent-child…”
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.