Before the Court is an application by petitioner to change his first and last name to Jerry Jean. Upon the foregoing, the application is denied. The right to petition a name change and the Court’s authority to grant a name change is codified in Article 6 of the New York Civil Rights Law. In support of the application, petitioner submits a verified petition; a resident alien card; social security card; a United States passport; a New Jersey Driver License; a Marriage Certificate from the State of Wisconsin; a bank account statement; a spousal consent; and an Extract of Household Registration translated from the Chinese language. The Court, however, will not consider an annexed one-page copy of a document entitled as Department of State Affidavit Regarding Change of Name, dated September 16, 1992, as this document purports to be merely an application for a name change and is not proof of a decision or order from a governmental agency, nor is it certified. The petition states that petitioner seeks to change his name because he “wants to keep everything uniform”. The petition also states that petitioner was born on December 1, 1981 in Taipei, China. The Court’s review of the U.S. passport shows that the name listed therein is Jerry Jean. The name on the social security card bears the name of Tzu-Hsi Jean. The resident alien card bears the name of Tzu-Hsi Jean. The name on the New Jersey Driver License is Jerry Jean. The name on the marriage certificate bears the name of Tzu-Hsi a/k/a Jerry Jean. Discussion In reviewing a name change petition, Courts must issue such relief if “satisfied…that the petition is true, and that there is no reasonable objection to the change of name proposed”. Civil Rights Law §63. Once an individual submits him or herself in seeking the Court’s permission for a name change, the individual is subject to the court’s discretion in granting said request. See, In re Nawadiuko, 37 Misc.3d 1207(A) (Civ. Ct. Richmond County 2012). “A court should not rubber stamp any application for name change as it is the Court’s obligation to ensure that the name change will not be a source of fraud, evasion or interference with the rights of others”. See, In re Boquin, 24 Misc.3d 473 (Sup. Ct. Westchester County 2009). The Court is cognizant that it is well established law that the right to petition a name change is extended to aliens. See, Matter of Lipschutz, 178 Misc. 113 (Sup. Ct. Queens County 1941). The Court is also cognizant that since naturalized citizens acquire all the civil rights and privileges of a native born, a naturalized citizen acquires the right to petition a name change. See, Matter of Eisenberg v. Strasser, 1 Misc.3d 299 (Sup. Ct. Kings County 2003). Of concern to the Court is that petitioner’s resident alien card and petitioner’s U.S. passport bear two different names. The resident alien card bears the name of Tzu-Hsi Jean and the U.S. passport bears the name of Jerry Jean. Although the Court is not imputing petitioner with fraud or ill motive, the Court has discretion to recognize the realities of the world after the events of September 11, 2001, and the concern for security and compliance with immigration laws. See, Matter of Mohomed, 3 Misc.3d 402 (Sup. Ct. Rockland County 2004). Based on the documents submitted by petitioner, the Court does not have a record of how petitioner’s U.S. passport came to bear the name of Jerry Jean. As the petition is not annexed by a Certificate of Citizenship or Naturalization Certificate, the Court’s record is incomplete. See, In re Beals, 40 Misc.3d 61 (App Term 1st Dept 2013) (holding that a Court is permitted to request additional documentation to further support the court’s review of a name change petition “pertinent background” information needs to be confirmed even when the statutory framework does not require said documentation). Conclusion Accordingly, in the absence of proof of petitioner’s Certificate of Citizenship, Naturalization Certificate, or a document sufficient to show the Court how it was that Tzu-Hsi Jean is now the same individual as Jerry Jean, the instant petition is denied without prejudice. Petitioner has leave to refile upon a properly supported petition. Dated: October 4, 2019
