GREGORY LOUIS HOOVER, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Gregory Hoover appealed an order denying his motion to enforce a 1991 paternity judgment that established him as the father of Jennifer Nicole Hoover and directed issuance of a corrected birth certificate. The trial court refused enforcement based on alleged clerical error and the child's established name as Jennifer Nicole Leggett. The appellate court reversed, holding that the 1991 judgment's determination of the child's surname must be given legal effect and the Office of Vital Statistics must amend its records accordingly.
The appellate court held that because the child's surname Hoover was determined in the 1991 paternity action by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with Florida Statutes section 382.013(6)(c), and a birth certificate was properly issued showing that surname, the judgment must be given its legal effect and cannot be disregarded based on claims of clerical error. The Office of Vital Statistics must amend its records consistent with the uncorrected 1991 judgment.
[1] A court of competent jurisdiction may determine a child's surname in a paternity action.
[2] A judgment establishing paternity and a child's surname remains legally effective until it is corrected by legal action.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Because the child's surname, Hoover, was determined in the 1991 paternity action by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with section 382.013(6)(c), Florida Statutes (1991), and a birth certificate was issued showing that surname and showing appellant as the child's father, we reverse.”
Establishes the core holding that the 1991 judgment's determination of the child's surname must be enforced as a valid court determination
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1991, a final judgment established Hoover as the biological father of Jennifer Nicole Hoover, and a birth certificate was issued reflecting this ju…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clerical Error In Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
We withdraw our opinion of October 11, 1996 and substitute this opinion in its stead.
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion to enforce a final judgment. Pursuant to a 1991 judgment establishing appellant as the father of Jennifer Nicole Hoover, a proper birth certificate was issued showing appellant as the father and Stacey A. Leggett as the mother of the child, Jennifer Nicole Hoover. Upon inquiry to appellee, appellant later learned that a certified statement of final judgment of paternity, a form of appellee’s signed and sealed by the clerk of the circuit court, had been filed indicating the child’s name was Jennifer Nicole Leggett. Appellant filed a motion to enforce the 1991 judgment establishing him as the child’s father for the purpose of requiring the Office of Vital Statistics to correct its records. The trial court refused on the grounds that 1) the 1991 judgment contained a clerical error in which the child was mistakenly referred to as Jennifer Nicole Hoover; 2) the child’s name was Jennifer Nicole Leggett, as established by an amended birth certificate issued in 1989; and 3) there had been no legal action to change her name. Because the child’s surname, Hoover, was determined in the 1991 paternity action by a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with section 382.013(6)(c), Florida Statutes (1991), and a birth certificate was issued showing that surname and showing appellant as the child’s father, we reverse. If the 1991 judgment obtained by HRS contained an error it was necessary for HRS to undertake to correct it. Because the judgment stands uncorrected, it must be given its legal effect. As noted by the trial court, there has been no legal action to change the child’s name. On remand, the trial court should direct the Office of Vital Statistics to amend its records, including any birth certificate issued, consistent with this opinion.
ORDER REVERSED; REMANDED.
HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.