Plass v. Leithold
| Decision Date | 24 July 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 16405,16405 |
| Citation | 381 S.W.2d 580 |
| Parties | Thyra Lelthod PLASS et vir, Appellants, v. Louis LEITHOLD, Intervenor, appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Turner, Rodgers, Winn, Scurlock & Terry and John H. McElhaney, Dallas, for appellants.
Turner, Atwood, Meer & Francis, J. Glenn Turner, Jr., Dallas, for appellee.
This appeal is from the denial of an application for change of the name of a minor pursuant to Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 5929. The appellant Thyra N. Plass was formerly the wife of appellee Louis C. Leithold. They had adopted an infant who was given the name, Gordon Marc Leithold. They were thereafter divorced and the adoptive mother married Gilbert N. Plass, and they, as next friends of Gordon Marc Leithold, filed this application to change the minor's surname from Leithold to Plass. At the time of the hearing Gordon was four and three-quarters years old and was in the legal custody of the mother. The adoptive father, Louis C. Leithold, intervened and contested the proposed change, denying that it would be in the best interests of the minor.
The statute directs the judge to grant authority for the change of a minor's name 'if the facts alleged and proven satisfy him that such change will be for the benefit and interest of the minor.' The appellants offered evidence to the effect that, in their opinion and in the opinion of a psychologist-witness, the change of name would benefit the minor in that it would relieve him of the embarrassment and emotional upset involved in explaining why he has a different name than that of the household in which he lives. The appellee offered no evidence. The court denied the application. No findings of fact or conclusions of law were filed.
Appellants recognize the well settled rule that in cases of this kind there can be no reversal of the trial court's judgment in the absence of a showing of abuse of its discretion. However, they present four points of error charging abuse of discretion in that: (1) there was no evidence that the name change would not be for the minor's benefit; (2) the decision is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence; (3) the trial court has no discretion to deny a name change if there is 'satisfactory proof' that the change will be for the benefit and interest of the minor; and (4) there is at least some evidence that benefit would result to the minor by the proposed change. We find no merit in any of these points and overrule them seriatim as follows:
(1) The absence of evidence that the name change would not be for the minor's benefit profits appellants nothing; the burden was on them to prove, not by a mere preponderance of the evidence, but by evidence satisfactory to the trial court, that the change would be for the benefit and interest of the minor.
(2) We have carefully studied the entire record and cannot say that the trial court's ruling is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660. The probative force of the testimony offered was for the trial court to determine. If he was not satisfied by the opinion evidence offered, it was his duty and right to reject the same....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris, In re
...of Baldini, 17 Misc.2d 195, 183 N.Y.S.2d 416 (1959); Re Application of Seif, 40 Misc.2d 596, 243 N.Y.S.2d 172 (1963); Plass v. Leithold, 381 S.W.2d 580 (Tex.Civ.App.1964); Application of Trower, 260 Cal.App.2d 75, 66 Cal.Rptr. 873 (1968).For cases in which courts granted a name change reque......
-
In the Matter of Brian Alexander Guthrie
...of Parents Inter Se with Respect to the Names of Their Children, 40 A.L.R. 5th 697 (1996). 4. Newman, 433 S.W.2d at 423-24; Plass v. Leithold, 381 S.W.2d 580, 582 (Tex. Civ. App.-Dallas 1964, no writ); see Gubernat, 657 A.2d at 867; In re Wilson, 648 A.2d 648, 651 (Vt. 1994); Beyah v. Shelt......
-
Bennett v. Northcutt
...Paso 1959, no writ). The same standard of review was applied where the application for change of name was denied. Plass v. Leithold, 381 S.W.2d 580, 581--82 (Tex.Civ.App.--Dallas 1964, no We do not think that the standard of review in such matters has been changed by repeal of article 5929 ......
-
Plass v. Leithold
...theory that the issue was not custody but only one of visitation. (For previous litigation between the parties see Plass, et vir v. Leithold, Tex.Civ.App., 381 S.W.2d 580, where appellants' application to change the name of the minor from Leithold to Plass was Appellee, Louis C. Leithold, a......