In re Zeiser
Ohio Court of Appeals
728 N.E.2d 10 (1999)
- Written by Katrina Sumner, JD
Facts
Corrine Walsh (defendant) was a single mother who regularly left her eight-year-old son, Douglas, and her six-year-old son, Keith, home alone while she was at work. Both boys were home alone for two hours after school each Monday through Friday, and Keith was home alone all day on Wednesdays and Fridays until his older brother Douglas got home from school, because Keith was not in kindergarten on those two days. Eight-year-old Douglas was placed in charge of babysitting Keith when the boys were home alone. Walsh had previously received assistance from the government that covered childcare during the prior summer. However, this aid ended when Keith began kindergarten. A social worker visited Walsh after someone filed a confidential complaint regarding the children being unsupervised. At a hearing, the social worker testified that Walsh had acknowledged during the social worker’s initial visit that her children were latchkey children. The social worker also insisted that Walsh admitted that Keith had been left home alone on the two days that he did not have kindergarten for the past five months. The social worker testified that she notified Walsh that she was eligible for latchkey services or for protective care for which Children’s Services would pay. However, Walsh declined the offer, indicating that she did not need the services and that she wanted her children to stay at home. Walsh believed that her children were responsible and extremely mature for their ages. Walsh testified that she had contacted the police department and was told that there was no particular age at which it was illegal to leave children unsupervised. Walsh stated that a director of a day-care center also told her that leaving the children alone at home was appropriate. Walsh testified regarding the instructions she gave the boys, the telephone numbers, and the guidance on when to call 911. A juvenile court judge found Walsh guilty of neglect of Douglas and Keith. Walsh appealed, arguing that the evidence did not support a finding of neglect.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Christley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
