Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2002

Publication Source

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

Abstract

Two years ago, the Ohio Supreme Court amended its rules and those of Ohio's intermediate appellate courts in order to fast-track appeals of cases involving termination of parental rights ("TPR") and adoption of minor children. Three of Ohio's twelve appellate districts already had local rules to expedite or accelerate these types of appeals, but in some districts, the amended rules established procedures that were entirely new.

The major impetus behind the court's amendments to the rules was to move children out of foster care and into permanent adoptive homes more quickly. Further, by amending the rules of the intermediate appellate courts, the court attempted to impose a greater consistency in the progress of these types of appeals across the state.

Both sets of amendments expressly abbreviate the time allowed to complete various stages of the appeals process. If the deadlines established by the rules were met, both courts would achieve the goal of accelerating the resolution of TPR and adoption cases. The amendment to the intermediate appellate court rules also prescribes a more consistent process across the twelve appellate districts. But, substantial differences in the progression of TPR and adoption cases from one appellate district to another persist because courts implement the amendments with their own internal operating procedures and practices.

This Article analyzes the mechanisms for expediting TPR and adoption appeals in Ohio. Part II discusses the background and the rationale for promulgating the amendments to the rules. Part III describes the amendments to Ohio's Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio. This section also evaluates the success of the amendments in meeting the declared goals of speed and consistency. Part IV concludes that Ohio's bold decision to promulgate amendments that detail the progression of expedited appeals should be followed by state-wide efforts to define and measure their success, for the amendments can best serve dependent children if their ramifications are carefully evaluated and considered.

Inclusive pages

257-276

ISBN/ISSN

1533-4724

Document Version

Published Version

Comments

This document has been made available for download by permission of the publisher. Subscription information.

Permission documentation is on file.

Publisher

University of Arkansas at Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law

Volume

4

Issue

1

Volume

4

Issue

1

Place of Publication

Little Rock, AR


Share

COinS