Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3119
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.65 (2026)

Revising order where hearing not requested

✓ 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
 

If neither the obligor nor the obligee requests a court hearing on a revised amount of child support to be paid under a court child support order in accordance with section 3119.63 of the Revised Code, the court shall issue a revised court child support order to require the obligor to pay the revised amount of child support calculated by the child support enforcement agency.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2007–2021 · leading case: Willier v. Willier, 889 N.E.2d 575 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Willier v. Willier, 889 N.E.2d 575 (Ohio Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 7× “{¶ 13} In crafting its argument, the MCCSEA argues that “[ajpplying the Ohio Revised Code and the Ohio Administrative Code, the legislature clearly did not intend for the court to conduct an independent review of the recommendation.”
In re L.D.M., 2021 Ohio 1853 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “R.C. 3119.65 provides that if a court hearing is not requested on the revised amount - 11 - Butler CA2020-07-078 of child support, "the court shall issue a revised court child support order[.”
Hannah v. Hannah, 2016 Ohio 1538 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “60 through R.C. 3119.65. Then the trial court, through the magistrate, conducted a hearing pursuant to R.”
Snell v. Andrews, 2013 Ohio 2915 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “{¶8} R.C. 3119.65 vests the trial court with the authority to issue a modified order of child support when neither party requests a hearing on the revised amount.”
Young v. Norris, 2018 Ohio 3688 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “) R.C. 3119.65. {¶ 14} In this case, appellant contends that he knew an administrative review was taking place, noting "[t]he review was schedule for 10/16/2017" and "was a desk review and it was not necessary for either party to be present, therefore, a notice of the results…”
DiDonato v. DiDonato, 2019 Ohio 2994 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “{¶20} R.C. 3119.65 states that “[i]f neither the obligor nor the obligee requests a court hearing on a revised amount of child support to be paid under a court child support order in accordance with section 3119.”
DeJesus v. DeJesus, 170 Ohio App. 3d 307 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 8× “Consequently, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in relying on Rieger . CSEA’s first assignment of error is sustained.”
Petrikas v. Petrikas, 2021 Ohio 3577 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021). “60 through R.C. 3119.65. Then the trial court, through the magistrate, conducted a hearing pursuant to R.”
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.