# In re Jane Doe 1

> Ohio Supreme Court · January 24, 1991 · 57 Ohio St. 3d 135

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762914

## Case

- **Full name:** In re Jane Doe 1
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 24, 1991
- **Citations:** 57 Ohio St. 3d 135; 566 N.E.2d 1181
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wright
- **Judges:** Brown, Douglas, Holmes, Moyer, Only, Resnick, Sweeney, Syllabus, Wright
- **Cited by:** 964 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762914

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that “[a]bove all, a reviewing court should be guided by a presumption that the findings of a trial court are correct, since the trial judge ‘is best able to view the witnesses and observe their demeanor, gestures and voice inflections, and use these observations in wei…
- rejecting the suggestion that it adopt “what is essentially a six-factor test for juvenile courts to weigh as factors that are ‘indicative of a minor’s maturity or competence to give informed consent’ ”
- affirming a judgment dismissing an application for judicial bypass

## Opinion text

Wright, J.,
concurring. Appellant’s proposed criteria (b) through (f) for evaluating a complaint brought under R.C. 2151.85 seem to be appropriate. My review of the record using these criteria and other common-sense factors does not disclose an abuse of discretion by the trial court. Accordingly, I concur with the syllabus law and result announced today.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6762914. Public record. Not legal advice.