Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3119
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.08 (2026)

Child support order to include specific provisions for parenting time and visitation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
March 22, 2001
Latest Legislation:
Senate Bill 180 - 123rd General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

Whenever a court issues a child support order, it shall include in the order specific provisions for regular, holiday, vacation, parenting time, and special visitation in accordance with section 3109.051, 3109.11, or 3109.12 of the Revised Code or in accordance with any other applicable section of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: Hamilton v. Hamilton, 2016 Ohio 5900 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hamilton v. Hamilton, 2016 Ohio 5900 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “THE COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY ISSUING CHILD SUPPORT WITHOUT A SPECIFIC VISITATION SCHEDULE UNDER R.C. 3119.08. III. Discussion {¶ 8} "[I]n appeals of civil cases, the plain error doctrine is not favored and may be applied only in the extremely rare case involving…”
Habib v. Shikur, 2018 Ohio 2955 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “The Magistrate ignored the requirements of O.R.C. 3119.08. {¶ 8} The trial court issued a decision and entry on September 29, 2017 overruling appellant's objections and adopting the magistrate's decision.”
Andrew v. Dennis, 2022 Ohio 2567 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). “He maintains that R.C. 3119.08 required the trial court to determine his parenting rights in the same order that it determined child support.”
McKenzie v. McKenzie, 2013 Ohio 4859 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). “Third Assignment of Error The trial court violated R.C. 3119.08 by ordering child support against [Joseph] without providing [Joseph] with an order of specific and holiday parenting time.”
Cubbal v. Charek, 2021 Ohio 1909 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “{¶10} Finally, in the fourth set of objections, Father questioned the child support order based upon no “specific provisions for regular, holiday, vacation, parenting time, and special visitation in accordance with [] R.C. 3119.08.” The June 5, 2020 Judgment Entry {¶11} After…”
In re A.J.B., 2011 Ohio 6176 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “” {¶ 25} R.C. 3119.08 provides: {¶ 26} “Whenever a court issues a child support order, it shall include in the order specific provisions for regular, holiday, vacation, parenting time, and special visitation in accordance with section 3109.”
In re C.E.J., 2014 Ohio 2713 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). “02, (2) the visitation schedule under R.C. 3119.08, (3) which party is permitted to take the tax exemption under R.”
Dangelo v. Dangelo, 2024 Ohio 425 (Ohio Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “" VI {¶ 17} "THE COURT ERRED AS THE APPELLEE NEVER TESTIFIED AS TO THE GROUNDS FOR JURISDICTION AND THE PROPER VENUE.”
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.