Bruns v. Green
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- Sadler
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Published
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- appeal
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision to terminate the shared parenting plan and designate the mother (appellee) as sole legal custodian and residential parent, rejecting the father's (appellant's) appeals on both the custody modification and child support calculation issues.
Excerpt
Appellant did not demonstrate the trial court erred in designating the mother as legal custodian and residential guardian of a minor child without determining a change of circumstances occurred under R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a) since, at the request of both parties, the trial court terminated the prior shared parenting decree and plan pursuant to R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(c). The trial court did not commit reversible error under R.C. 3119.01 in basing its child support calculations on appellant's prior employment where, pursuant to Dach v. Homewood, 10th Dist. No. 14AP-502, 2015-Ohio-4191, the record contained evidence to support a finding appellant was voluntarily underemployed. Judgment affirmed.
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.