Isom v. Circuit Court of Tenth Judicial Circuit, 82-2714
| Decision Date | 07 September 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-2714,82-2714 |
| Citation | 437 So.2d 732 |
| Parties | Gregory ISOM, Appellant, v. The CIRCUIT COURT OF the TENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Gregory K. Isom, pro se.
No appearance for Appellee.
Appellant, Gregory Isom, appeals from the circuit court's final order dismissing his petition for change of name. We reverse.
While an inmate at Avon Park Correctional Institution, appellant petitioned the court to change his name from Gregory Keith Isom to Talib Muhammad Abdullah. Appellant's petition was sworn to and facially complied with all of the requirements of section 68.07, Florida Statutes (1981).
In dismissing appellant's petition the court stated that "to permit the change of name at this time would obviously create problems for the Department of Corrections and conceal from law enforcement officers his past record." Appellant filed a motion for rehearing stating, among other things, that:
[T]aking on the muslim name of Talib Muhammad Abdullah would not imply that all the records within the Department of Corrections will have to be changed. In fact, petitioner will not force officials of the Department of Corrections to alter the records by placing his new name on them.
In an amicus curiae brief requested by this court, the Department of Corrections takes the position that the decision to grant a change of name is a matter between the petitioner and the court so long as the court does not issue an order to the Department. Should the court consider issuing an order affecting the Department's procedures, the Department adds, it would request a hearing to explain in detail the administrative burdens and costs in changing some, or all, of its records. 1
At common law a person could adopt another name at will, absent a fraudulent, criminal, or wrongful purpose. Moskowitz v. Moskowitz, 118 N.H. 199, 385 A.2d 120 (1978). The codification of this common law right was intended primarily to aid the individual's right to a name change at will, giving the advantage of a public record to document the change. 57 Am.Jur.2d Name § 11; In re Application of Knight, 36 Colo.App. 187, 537 P.2d 1085 (1975); 79 A.L.R.3d 559.
In keeping with the common law tradition, in Florida a person may adopt a name other than his or her own as long as no fraudulent or wrongful purposes are involved. See Adoption of Long, 56 So.2d 450 (Fla.1952). However, adherence to the statutory requirements affords protection to both the applicant and the general public. Therefore, a petition under this statute should generally be granted unless sought for a wrongful or fraudulent purpose. In re Application of Knight; 65 C.J.S. Names § 11; see also In re Hooper, 436 So.2d 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); § 68.07(j), Fla.Stat. (1981).
Here, appellant's petition states that he desires to change his name only for religious purposes, and that he has no intention to further an ulterior or illegal...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Childers-Gray
..."sought for a wrongful or fraudulent purpose," In re Porter , 2001 UT 70, ¶ 8, 31 P.3d 519 (quoting Isom v. Cir. Ct. of the Tenth Jud. Cir. , 437 So.2d 732, 733 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) ), and (2) they are supported by objective evidence of a sex change, which includes, at minimum, eviden......
-
Suber, In re
...The statutory amendment disadvantaged appellant, depriving him of a liberty interest. See Isom v. Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit, 437 So.2d 732, 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)(concluding that the name change statute codifies the common law right to "adopt another name at will, absent a......
-
In re Porter
..."`should generally be granted unless sought for a wrongful or fraudulent purpose.'" Id. (quoting Isom v. Circuit Court of the Tenth Jud. Circuit, 437 So.2d 732, 733 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983)). ¶ 9 The reasons offered by the district court for denying Porter's petition included that the name "S......
-
Gosby v. Third Judicial Circuit
...purpose. See In re Keppro, 573 So.2d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Davis v. State, 510 So.2d 1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Isom v. Circuit Court, 437 So.2d 732 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The real issue in this case is whether the trial court can make Gosby's physical presence at a hearing a condition preced......