in Re Patrick Kent Lindsay Jones
2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 11811
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- In Jan. 2015, Patrick K. L. Jones (pro se) filed a verified petition to change his name from “Patrick Kent Lindsay Jones” to “Patrick Joseph LeBaron,” stating reasons including alleged identity theft and harassment.
- His verified petition represented no unpardoned felony convictions, no charges above a Class C misdemeanor, and that he was not a sex-offender registrant.
- In Apr. 2015 Patrick submitted an unverified proposed order that (1) sought a different name — “Patrick Charles Duval” — and (2) disclosed a prior reckless-driving charge (a Class B misdemeanor).
- The trial court denied the petition, finding Patrick had misrepresented his criminal history in his verified petition.
- Patrick filed a motion for new trial with an affidavit claiming the omission was inadvertent (he said he did not know reckless driving was a Class B misdemeanor); the trial court denied the motion.
- Patrick appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion; the court of appeals affirmed, concluding Patrick failed to satisfy statutory requirements for a name change under Texas Family Code §45.102.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner complied with mandatory statutory requirements for a name-change petition (disclosures, verification, fingerprints, consistent requested name). | Jones: omission of the reckless-driving charge was inadvertent; affidavit proves no intentional misrepresentation and thus the petition should not be denied. | Trial court: Jones failed to include required, verified disclosures (criminal history, fingerprints) and submitted inconsistent requested names; statutory noncompliance justified denial. | Court: Affirmed. Jones did not comply with §45.102 (required verified disclosures, fingerprints, and consistent requested name), so denial was not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Mayol, 137 S.W.3d 103 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004) (establishes abuse-of-discretion standard for name-change petitions)
- Unifund CCR Partners v. Weaver, 262 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. 2008) (appellate courts do not consider factual assertions not supported in the record)