(A) Notwithstanding the provisions to the contrary in Civil Rule 60(B) and in accordance with this section, a person may file a motion for relief from a final judgment, court order, or administrative determination or order that determines that the person or a male minor referred to in division (B) of section 3109.19 of the Revised Code is the father of a child or from a child support order under which the person or male minor is the obligor. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the person shall file the motion in the division of the court of common pleas of the county in which the original judgment, court order, or child support order was made or issued or in the division of the court of common pleas of the county that has jurisdiction involving the administrative determination or order. If the determination of paternity is an acknowledgment of paternity that has become final under section 2151.232, 3111.25, or 3111.821 of the Revised Code or former section 3111.211 or 5101.314 of the Revised Code, the person shall file the motion in the juvenile court or other court with jurisdiction of the county in which the person or the child who is the subject of the acknowledgment resides.
(B) On the motion of any adverse party or on its own motion, the court in which an action is brought under this section may transfer the action to the county in which an adverse party resides when it appears to the court that the location of the original venue presents a hardship for that adverse party.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Myers v. Myers, 792 N.E.2d 770 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003).
Myers v. Myers, 792 N.E.2d 770 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 21דThe magistrate concluded that the right of relief from judgment contained in R.C. 3119.961 could only be exercised by the alleged father.”
Havel v. Villa St. Joseph, 2012 Ohio 552 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 16ד961 of the Revised Code, a court shall grant relief from * * * a child support order under which a person or male minor is the obligor” pursuant to specified conditions.”
State ex rel. Loyd v. Lovelady, 840 N.E.2d 1062 (Ohio 2006). · cites it 16דMore than seven years later, in February 2003, Lovelady filed a motion for relief from the 1996 order under R.C. 3119.961 et seq., asserting that recent DNA testing proved that he is not D.”
Poskarbiewicz v. Poskarbiewicz, 787 N.E.2d 688 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 12ד{¶ 1} This appeal comes to us from a judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, ordering the termination of child support pursuant to R.C. 3119.961 and 3119.962. Because we conclude that the statutory scheme permitting the retroactive…”
Van Dusen v. Van Dusen, 784 N.E.2d 750 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5ד” {¶ 9} At issue in the first assignment of error is the impact of Section 5(B), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution upon R.C. 3119.961 and 3119.967. Section 5(B) reads: {¶ 10} “The Supreme Court shall prescribe rules governing practice and procedure in all courts of the state,…”
Dragon v. Dragon, 2016 Ohio 7304 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 20ד: {¶1} Gerald Dragon disagrees with the denial of his request under R.C. 3119.961 for relief from a 30-year-old paternity determination, in which he also sought a court order to obtain genetic testing and relief from the ensuing child support order.”
In re I.L.J., 2019 Ohio 5241 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3דDespite this, in August 2014, father filed a motion to vacate the February 4, 2013 administrative support order pursuant to R.C. 3119.961 or Civ.R. 60(B). He contended that during the discovery process in a related custody case, he discovered that mother failed to disclose at…”
In re I.L.J., 2016 Ohio 7052 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 8ד60(B) could not be used to vacate an administrative order and that R.C. 3119.961 upon which the father was relying as grounds for vacating the administrative order was only available when a father was disputing paternity.”
McKinzie v. Fry, 2022 Ohio 2292 (Ohio Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 6ד{¶ 4} On May 14, 2021, Fry filed a motion for relief from paternity judgment under R.C. 3119.961 and requested genetic tests.”
Doughty v. Doughty, 2019 Ohio 974 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). “Father Noah Doughty (“Father”) signed and filed a waiver of rights under R.C. 3119.961 and acknowledgement of paternity of A.”
Keathley v. Keathley, 2016 Ohio 5296 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 7דKeathley ("Sarah"), appeals from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Division of Domestic Relations, granting the motion for relief from a paternity determination under R.C. 3119.961 filed by her ex- husband, defendant-appellee, Joseph L.”
In re Z.S., 2011 Ohio 3269 (Ohio Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3ד” 3 {¶ 2} In filing his amended complaint, Simpson indicated he anticipated that defendant-appellee the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services (“the agency”) would issue an administrative child support order against him, so he sought from the court pursuant…”
Havel v. Villa St. Joseph, 2012 Ohio 552 (Ohio 2012). “961 of the Revised Code, a court shall grant relief from * * * a child support order under which a person or male minor is the obligor” pursuant to specified conditions.”
Myers v. Myers, 792 N.E.2d 770 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003). “The magistrate concluded that the right of relief from judgment contained in R.C. 3119.961 could only be exercised by the alleged father.”
State ex rel. Loyd v. Lovelady, 840 N.E.2d 1062 (Ohio 2006). “More than seven years later, in February 2003, Lovelady filed a motion for relief from the 1996 order under R.C. 3119.961 et seq., asserting that recent DNA testing proved that he is not D.”
Dragon v. Dragon, 2016 Ohio 7304 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “: {¶1} Gerald Dragon disagrees with the denial of his request under R.C. 3119.961 for relief from a 30-year-old paternity determination, in which he also sought a court order to obtain genetic testing and relief from the ensuing child support order.”
Dragon v. Dragon, 2016 Ohio 7304 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016). “: {¶1} Gerald Dragon disagrees with the denial of his request under R.C. 3119.961 for relief from a 30-year-old paternity determination, in which he also sought a court order to obtain genetic testing and relief from the ensuing child support order.”
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.