Jeanette Moll: Zanesville-Ohio Guardian ad Litem Faces Allegations of Bias
Photo Credit: Jeanette Moll The Repository (www.cantonrep.com)
Who Is Jeanette Moll?
According to sources, attorney Jeanette Marie Moll was admitted to the Ohio bar in 1996 and is routinely appointed as a guardian ad litem (GAL) in juvenile and probate matters across east-central Ohio, including Coshocton, Guernsey and Muskingum counties. As a GAL, she files reports that can decide where children live, how often parents see them, and what services a family must complete. Source: law.justia.com
The 2012 Campaign-Ethics Sanction
Allegedly, during a 2012 bid for a seat on the Fifth District Court of Appeals, Moll distributed a flyer showing herself in a judicial robe—although she had not served as a magistrate for five years. Ohio’s Commission on Grievances and Discipline ruled the flyer “false and misleading,” imposed a $1,000 civil fine, $2,500 in attorney fees, and a permanent cease-and-desist order. Her law license was not suspended, leaving her “in good standing” for further GAL work. supremecourt.ohio.govsupremecourt.ohio.gov
How Guardian ad Litem Oversight Works in Ohio
Critics argue this patchwork structure lets allegedly biased or careless GALs continue receiving appointments because docket speed often outweighs quality control.
Allegations of Bias and Minimal Accountability
According to sources, parents who have appealed Moll’s recommendations—such as in In re Z.W. (2021)—claim her reports closely mirrored agency positions and allegedly lacked independent investigation. Although appellate courts upheld those custody outcomes, the cases spotlight the limited avenues families have to challenge a GAL’s work. Source: law.justia.com
Because Moll’s 2012 sanction involved campaign conduct rather than child-welfare practice, it triggered no automatic bar on future GAL service—illustrating what reform advocates call a dangerous loophole.
Why GAL Recommendations Matter
Ohio judges are not bound by GAL conclusions, yet they routinely cite these reports as persuasive evidence. A single GAL recommendation can:
shift a child’s plan from reunification to permanent state custody;
trigger supervised-visitation orders;
dictate mandatory medical or psychological treatments.
Most parents cannot afford independent experts to rebut a GAL report, leaving enormous—and largely unchecked—power in one individual’s hands.
Calls for Reform
Statewide “strike list” flagging any GAL with sustained misconduct findings.
Automatic peer-review GAL assessments in high-conflict or termination-of-rights cases.
Public performance metrics—annual statewide data on GAL caseloads, training compliance and grievance outcomes.
Until such measures pass, families in Zanesville and beyond remain subject to a system where the watchdog may not always be watched.
What Parents Can Do (Information only—not legal advice)
File a written objection under Sup.R. 48(G) detailing alleged bias or investigative gaps.
Request the GAL’s training certificates and time logs—courts must keep these on file.
Submit a grievance (with documentation) to the Ohio Disciplinary Counsel.
Ask for an in-camera hearing so the judge can place the GAL’s methodology on the record.
Bottom Line
Attorney Jeanette Moll of Zanesville, Ohio continues to serve as a guardian ad litem despite a confirmed 2012 campaign-ethics violation. While no new public misconduct findings exist, reform advocates argue that Ohio’s current framework leaves GALs—Moll included—largely unaccountable for alleged bias or investigative shortcuts. Until oversight tightens, families must navigate custody cases knowing that critical child-welfare decisions may rest on reports that receive minimal external review.
Sources
In re Judicial Campaign Complaint Against Moll, 135 Ohio St.3d 156 (2012) supremecourt.ohio.govsupremecourt.ohio.gov
Ohio Supreme Court, Guardian ad Litem FAQ (2023) supremecourt.ohio.gov
Rule 48, Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio aamlohio.com
Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Annual Reports (2020–2024) odc.ohio.gov
In re Z.W., 2021-Ohio-–– Fifth District Court of Appeals law.justia.com
