Background
Robin and Drew Hertlein dissolved their marriage in Belmont County, Ohio in 2019. Their separation agreement designated Mother as the residential parent, recognized that she resided in Virginia and Father in Ohio, and stated that jurisdiction for custody modifications would “remain with Belmont County, Ohio.” Mother and the three children had lived in Virginia since the dissolution.
After years of escalating disputes about parenting time, Mother moved to transfer the case to Louisa County, Virginia. Father opposed, arguing the parties’ jurisdictional agreement, pending contempt motions, and Mother’s alleged misconduct. The magistrate granted the transfer, finding Ohio was an inconvenient forum. Father objected, arguing the court failed to address the R.C. 3127.21(B) factors and denied him an evidentiary hearing.
The Court’s Holding
The Seventh District affirmed the transfer. The court held that under the UCCJEA (R.C. Chapter 3127), a hearing is not required before an inconvenient forum determination — the statute requires only that parties have the opportunity to submit information, which both parties did through affidavits. Citing its own precedent in Esaw v. Esaw and the Fifth District’s Kemp v. Kemp, the court confirmed that sufficient undisputed facts in the record are adequate.
On the merits, the court found the trial court properly weighed the R.C. 3127.21(B) factors. The children and Mother had resided in Virginia for over five years, most witnesses were in Virginia, neither party lived in Belmont County, and the parties’ contractual jurisdictional agreement was entitled to “little weight” under the UCCJEA framework, which prioritizes the children’s connections to a state over parental preferences. The court also rejected Father’s argument that Mother’s conduct constituted “unjustifiable conduct” under R.C. 3127.22.
Key Takeaways
- Under the UCCJEA, an evidentiary hearing is not required for an inconvenient forum determination — affidavits and submissions provide a sufficient factual basis when the relevant facts are largely undisputed.
- Contractual provisions in separation agreements retaining jurisdiction in a specific Ohio county are entitled to “little weight” under the UCCJEA’s inconvenient forum analysis when neither party nor the children reside in that county.
- The UCCJEA’s focus is on the children’s current connections to each state, not on the parents’ litigation preferences or prior agreements about forum.
Why It Matters
Family law practitioners drafting separation agreements should note that jurisdictional-retention clauses may have limited practical effect under the UCCJEA once children establish connections with another state. The opinion also clarifies procedural requirements for inconvenient forum motions — a full evidentiary hearing is not necessary, which streamlines the process but may disadvantage parties who cannot fully develop their factual positions through affidavits alone. Practitioners representing parents opposing transfer should focus on demonstrating active connections between the children and the current forum state rather than relying on contractual provisions.