In re Name Change of A.LaR.F-R to A.LaR.R.
2017 Ohio 7458
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Child born Dec. 17, 2008; parents never married. An affidavit of paternity signed at birth listed the child as A.L.R.
- Father later used a 2010 Franklin County magistrate decision (which referenced a different name) to change the birth certificate and Social Security record to A.L.R-F (hyphenated form).
- Mother (resident of Licking County) filed a probate-court application on Sept. 2, 2016, to change the minor's name to A.L.R.; Father sought injunctive relief in Franklin County to prevent the change.
- Franklin County initially issued an ex parte restraining order, then vacated it and entered an order (Jan. 25, 2017) altering the child’s name to A.L.F-R.
- Licking County Probate Court held a hearing and, finding the child had used A.L.R. since birth (school records, immunizations, passport), ordered the child’s name restored to A.L.R.
- Father appealed, arguing (1) Franklin County had exclusive jurisdiction and (2) the probate court failed to apply the best-interest factors from In re Willhite.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | Mother’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction over name-change | Franklin County juvenile court (parentage/action) had jurisdiction under R.C. §3111.13(C) and existing Franklin case | Licking Probate had statutory authority under R.C. §2717.01 to hear name-change for resident minor | Licking Probate had jurisdiction to decide the application; father’s jurisdictional challenge rejected |
| Whether probate court abused discretion in granting name change | Probate court failed to consider Willhite best-interest factors; name should remain hyphenated | Probate court considered relevant factors (child’s long use of A.L.R., school, immunization, passport) and acted in child’s best interest | Probate court did not abuse its discretion; name change to A.L.R. affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Bobo v. Jewell, 38 Ohio St.3d 330 (1988) (juvenile court may determine a child’s surname after parentage determination if in child’s best interest)
- D.W. v. T.L., 134 Ohio St.3d 515 (2012) (standard of review and parity between probate and juvenile name-change analyses)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1989) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
- In re Willhite, 85 Ohio St.3d 28 (1999) (factors to consider when assessing whether a minor surname change is in the child’s best interest)