Court Opinion

ID: 9801595
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 08:51:17.066771+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:53:56.456431
License: Public Domain

Cupp, J.,
dissenting.
{¶ 38} Respectfully, I dissent.
{¶ 39} This litigation arises from two trial court orders. In the first, the trial court found appellee, Julie Smith, to be in contempt of its temporary visitation order and sentenced her to three days in jail, suspending the sentence to allow Smith to purge herself of contempt. In the second order, the trial court found that Smith had failed to purge the contempt and ordered her to serve the three-day jail sentence. However, the behavior underlying the contempt finding and enforcement action has ceased. In February 2012, the trial court issued a judgment entry in which it awarded shared custody of the child to appellant, Julie Rowell, and Smith, along with a specific companionship schedule and other related terms. As of the time of oral argument, no appeal had been taken from this order, and there are no allegations that Smith is presently violating the terms of the custody order. From all appearances, the custody arrangements for this child have stabilized. Consequently, this case is moot and there is no actual controversy pertaining to the contempt proceedings presented to this court in this appeal. I would dismiss this appeal as moot.
O’Donnell, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.