IN RE THE NAME CHANGE OF EVAN JAMES ZIMMER
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.
Evan James Zimmer petitioned to change his name to Simon James Templar but the trial court denied the request based on his criminal history and unpaid judgments. The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that a facially sufficient name-change petition cannot be denied merely because the petitioner has prior convictions and outstanding debts without evidence of an ulterior or illegal purpose.
A facially sufficient petition for a name change should be granted absent evidence of wrongful or fraudulent purpose. A trial court cannot summarily deny such a petition merely because the petitioner has prior convictions and outstanding debts; the court must set forth a factual basis showing how the name change would further an ulterior or illegal purpose.
[1] A trial court's decision on a petition for a change of name is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.
[2] A facially sufficient petition for a name change should ordinarily be granted absent evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Ordinarily, a facially sufficient petition for name change should be granted in the absence of evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose.”
Establishes the default rule that name-change petitions that are facially compliant should be granted unless fraud or wrongful purpose is shown.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceZimmer petitioned for a name change from Evan James Zimmer to Simon James Templar. In his petition, he disclosed prior misdemeanor convictions, two ou…
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 Petition For Name Change cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Evan James Zimmer, petitioned to change his name to Simon James Templar.1 Zimmer, in his petition, stated that he had prior misdemeanor convictions, had two outstanding judgments entered against him, and his civil rights were not suspended. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Zimmer’s request because of his “criminal history and unpaid creditor’s judgments.” Zimmer appealed.
We review a trial court’s decision whether to permit a name change for abuse of discretion. See Coolidge v. Ulbrich, 733 So.2d 1092, 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Section 68.07, Florida Statutes (2015), sets forth the requirements for a petition for a change of name. “Ordinarily, a facially sufficient petition for name change should be granted in the absence of evidence of a wrongful or fraudulent purpose.” Hoyos v. Singletary, 639 So.2d 631, 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Where a trial court denies a facially sufficient petition, the factual basis for doing so must be set forth in its order. Barton v. Cir. Ct. of Nineteenth Jud. Cir., 659 So.2d 1262, 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). For example, in Barton, the trial court stated it was denying a petition for a change of name because “the reason for the change was ‘for an ulterior purpose.’” Id. This court noted that the court’s order was insufficient.
Initially, Zimmer contends that there was no evidence he was seeking the change for an unlawful purpose. However, Zimmer fails to provide us with a sufficient record of the proceedings below.2 Our review is therefore limited to errors appearing on the face of the final judgment. See Monacelli v. Gonzalez, 883 So.2d 361, 362 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
*1008Zimmer’s petition was facially sufficient as it complied with section 68.07. The lower court denied the petition and failed to set forth its factual basis for doing so. Simply indicating Zimmer has prior convictions and is a judgment debtor does not establish that he is seeking the name change for an “ulterior or illegal purpose.” § 68.07(3)(k), Fla. Stat. (2016); see also Name Change of Wages v. State, 160 So.3d 100, 101 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (explaining that a trial court may not summarily deny a facially sufficient petition for a change of name even where the petitioner had a criminal history and poor credit).
We therefore remand this case to the lower court. If on remand the court decides to deny Zimmer’s petition, it must set out a factual basis for how the name change would further an “ulterior or illegal purpose.”
Reversed and remanded.
Gerber and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re the Name Change of Ronald Russell Johnson Vs, 259 So. 3d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
-
In re Name Change of Sheikera Williams vs (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
-
A. T. v. In re Name Change of A. T. (Fla. 2d DCA 2023)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Barton v. Cir. Court OF the Nineteenth Jud. Cir., 659 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Coolidge v. Ulbrich, 733 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
- Kathalina Monacelli v. Gonzalez, 883 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Hoyos v. Singletary, 639 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- The Name Change OF James Patric Wages, Jr. v. State, 160 So. 3d 100 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)