DOMESTIC RELATIONS LAW COMMITTEE

A recent Supreme Court decision, Bruns v Green, 2020-Ohio-4787, makes clear that a court only needs to consider the best interest of the child(ren) when deciding whether to terminate a shared parenting decree. The court does not need to consider whether there has been a change of circumstances. This decision is based on the plain language of the statute, which indicates that a court may terminate a shared parenting decree if requested by a party or whenever the court determines shared parenting is not in the best interest of the child. R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(c). Then, the court proceeds as if no prior decree had been issued. R.C. 3109.04(E)(2)(d). The Court distinguished this case from its prior decision Fisher v Hasenjager, 116 Ohio St. 3d 53, 2007-Ohio-5589, which holds that modifying the designation of residential parent and legal custodian requires finding a change of circumstances. Id. at syllabus, citing R.C. 3109.04(E)(1)(a). The distinction is fine and comes down to the language used by the appellate court in Fisher when it determined that it was modifying, as opposed to terminating, the decree.