supreme court Archives - Ohio Family Law Blog

Commissions and Ohio Child Support – A New Ohio Supreme Court Decision

Ohio Supreme Court Rules One-Time Commisions To Be Excluded In Gross Income Calculation Of Child Support

Under the new Supreme Court Decision, A.S. v. J.W., 2019-Ohio-2473, which was decided on June 25, 2019, commissions that are one time award are not to be included when calculating gross income for child support calculations.

When child support is calculated for a divorce settlement, the court bases the amount on the a number of things, including the gross income of each parent. Gross income, according to the statute (O.R.C. 3119.05(D)) includes the yearly average of pay, plus the average of any bonuses or overtime earned. The Court then can either average those totals from the past three years, or use the most recent year’s information.

The issue that the Court grappled with was to whether commissions are to be included in the calculation of ‘bonuses or overtime’ earned. In part of the statute, it is included in the list, and not included in another part of the statute. This leads to what us lawyer types call ‘confusion’.

To sort through the statute, the Supreme Court looked at the specific case before them. In this case, Mother had primary custody and sought a … Read More... “Commissions and Ohio Child Support – A New Ohio Supreme Court Decision”

Gay Marriage Alert: Masterpiece Cakeshop Court Case is Finally put to Rest…For Now

PUBLISHERS NOTE: I want to thank Ashlyn Gallant, a third year law student at the University of Dayton School of Law, who researched and wrote this same-sex alert blog article. She is externing with us for the summer. Well done Ashlyn!

Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Baker In Same-Sex Religious Freedom Case

It seems as though it was just yesterday that the news came out stating that a baker in Colorado refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple’s wedding due to his religious beliefs against same-sex marriage. Outrage broke out on both sides of the spectrum. LGBT+ activists took to their platforms and religious freedom was put to the test. As of June 4, 2018, the case has been decided, but not for the reasons one would think.

The Supreme Court released their decision and as a result, some are in complete disbelief. The Court’s narrow holding allowed the Baker to walk away vindicated after six long years of turmoil. However, the true issue is one that will still remain undecided because while the Court decided the case for the Baker, they didn’t decide it in his favor because they agreed that his religious freedom trumped … Read More... “Gay Marriage Alert: Masterpiece Cakeshop Court Case is Finally put to Rest…For Now”

Another Same-Sex Parenting Rights Issue Upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Supreme Court Same-Sex Custody Case Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on February 22, 2018, to hear an appeal of a case where the Arizona Supreme Court found that a lesbian woman should be recognized as the legal parent of the child she and her former wife conceived through artificial insemination during their marriage.

The case, stems from a custody dispute between Kimberly McLaughlin and Suzan McLaughlin. The couple was legally married in California in 2008, and chose to have a child via artificial insemination and an anonymous sperm donor. In 2011, Kimberly gave birth to the couple’s son. Two years later, she left with the child and cut off all communication between Suzan and their son. Upon filing for divorce, Suzan sought parenting time based upon an Arizona law regarding the presumption of parentage. Specifically, the law states that a child born to a woman within 10 months of her marriage is presumed to be biologically related to the father. However, Kimberly claimed that she cannot be required to share custody of her biological child because this presumption clearly states that it only applies when the other spouse is a man.

U.S.

Same-Sex Marriage Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Birth Certificates

Supreme Court Rules States May Not Treat Same-Sex Marriage Couples Differently From Others When Issuing Birth Certificates

On Monday, June 26, 2017, the United States Supreme Court reversed a decision from the Arkansas Supreme Court. The decision that was just overruled by the United States Supreme Court was monumental in that the Supreme Court reaffirmed its 2015 decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, recognizing constitutional rights to same-sex marriage. The Supreme Court ruled that states may not treat married same-sex couples differently from others when issuing birth certificates. The case in question, Pavan v. Smith, concerns an Arkansas law that treated same-sex couples differently than opposite sex-couples.

In Pavan, married lesbian couple had jointly planned their child’s conception by means of an anonymous sperm donor. However, when the parents went to list both moms as parents on the birth certificate, Arkansas state officials would only allow the biological mom to place her name on the certificate. Unfortunately, under Arkansas law, same-sex couples were unable to have a same-sex spouse listed as a parent, whereas an opposite-sex couple could automatically have a non-genetic father listed on the birth certificate. The court ruled this unjust as there was a violation … Read More... “Same-Sex Marriage Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Ruling on Birth Certificates”

Gender Equality: U.S. Supreme Court Rules for Unwed Mothers and Fathers

Supreme Court Rules Federal Citizenship Rules Unconstitutional, Gender Equality Prevails

Recently the Supreme Court has made a ruling that has progressed society forward and upheld gender equality. On June 12, 2017, in the case of Sessions, Attorney General v. Morales-Santana, the Supreme Court ruled that the current federal citizenship rules were unconstitutional. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote for the majority. This decision is a major victory for the justice, who for 20 years battled unsuccessfully for equal treatment of men and women seeking to pass citizenship on to their children.

The current federal citizenship rules state that a child born to an unwed mother automatically becomes a citizen of the United States if the mother previously lived in the United States for at least one-year. However, if a child was born to an unwed father, that child could not become a United States citizen unless the father had lived in the United States for at least five continuous years and two of which the father had to be over the age of 14. In essence, an unwed mother’s child was given preferential treatment over an unwed father’s child.

Supreme Court Enacts New Rule In The Case Of Gender