TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Children of Haws

In Re Children of Shirley Haws.

In re Children of Haws, 411 N.E.2d 802 (Ohio Ct. App. 1977)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Ohio Court of Appeals · State Appellate Courts
Decided
February 10, 1977
Docket
No. 36873
Judges
Day, Corrigan, Parrino
Citations
411 N.E.2d 80264 Ohio App. 2d 16818 Ohio Op. 3d 1231977 Ohio App. LEXIS 7138

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

This is an original action in habeas corpus seeking to retrieve children alleged to be in the unauthorized custody of one other than the natural mother. Despite the seeming conflict between the absolute language of R. C. 2151.23(A)(3) and Section 3, Article IV of the Ohio Constitution as amended, the jurisdiction of the issues in this case is concurrent. Both the Court of Appeals and Juvenile Court have original jurisdiction in habeas corpus, In re Black (1973), 36 Ohio St. 2d 124, 127 .

Upon examination of the pleadings, we find the admission there that the petitioner is the natural mother of the children. It does not appear that the matter of custody has been determined by a court having jurisdiction to determine the best interests of the children — an issue not justiciable in habeas corpus, In re McTaggart (1965), 2 Ohio App. 2d 214, 223-224 . Because the single issue on habeas corpus is the legality of the custody, Shirley Haws is entitled to custody of the children in issue unless it be determined in a juvenile proceeding that the best interests of the children dictate otherwise. This order determines the present right of the petitioner to the children, * but physical possession is to be *169 withheld unless and until Juvenile Court has determined where permanent custody shall lodge.

Writ discharged; other relief as indicated in this opinion.

Day, C. J., Corrigan and Parrino, JJ., concur.

* There is some reason to believe from the representation of counsel and documents filed in the case that the petitioner in habeas corpus is not in the jurisdiction.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1982: 21984: 11999: 119822026peak 1982 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Riverside Insurance v. Wiland474 N.E.2d 371 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984)
  2. E. E. B. v. D. A.446 A.2d 871 (N.J. 1982)
  3. Eeb v. Da446 A.2d 871 (N.J. 1982)
  4. Jeroncic v. Dept. of Human Services, Unpublished Decision (7-27-1999)No. 62712. (Ohio Ct. App. July 27, 1999)

Most recent

  1. Jeroncic v. Dept. of Human Services, Unpublished Decision (7-27-1999)No. 62712. (Ohio Ct. App. July 27, 1999)
  2. Riverside Insurance v. Wiland474 N.E.2d 371 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984)
  3. Eeb v. Da446 A.2d 871 (N.J. 1982)
  4. E. E. B. v. D. A.446 A.2d 871 (N.J. 1982)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
In re Black, 304 N.E.2d 394 (Ohio 1973) 5
In re McTaggart, 207 N.E.2d 562 (Ohio Ct. App. 1965) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list