Preview:

IN RE MOKILIGON, 2005-NMCA-021, 137 N.M. 22, 106 P.3d 584
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF
SNAPHAPPY FISHSUIT MOKILIGON
FOR CHANGE OF NAME,
Petitioner-Appellant.

Docket No. 25,202
COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO
2005-NMCA-021, 137 N.M. 22, 106 P.3d 584
December 22, 2004, Filed
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY, Linda M. Vanzi, District Judge
COUNSEL
Patricia A. Madrid, Attorney General, Anderson E. Clipper, Assistant Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Appellee
Snaphappy Fishsuit Mokiligon, Albuquerque, NM, Pro se Appellant

JUDGES
A. JOSEPH ALARID, Judge. WE CONCUR: MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge, CYNTHIA A. FRY,
Judge AUTHOR: A. JOSEPH ALARID

OPINION
ALARID, Judge.
{1} Petitioner, acting pro se, appeals the district court's order denying his request to change his name from "Snaphappy Fishsuit Mokiligon" to "Variable."  The precise basis for denying a request for a name change is a question of first impression for New Mexico, and although this case is assigned to this Court's summary calendar, we are issuing a formal opinion in order to clarify the standard by which the district court grants or denies a request for a name change.  Our notice of proposed disposition proposed to reverse the district court's order denying Petitioner's request. Petitioner has filed a brief statement in support of our proposed disposition, and the State, on behalf of the district court, has filed a memorandum in opposition.  Unpersuaded by the State's arguments, we reverse the district court's order denying Petitioner's request for a name change.
{2} We review the district court's denial of Petitioner's request for a name change for an abuse of discretion. See In re Cruchelow, 926 P.2d 833, 834 (Utah 1996) (stating that "although a trial court normally has wide discretion in matters of this type, the court must show some substantial reason before it is justified in denying a petition for a name change").  "[E]ven when we review for an abuse of discretion, our review of the application of the law to the facts is conducted de novo. Accordingly, we may characterize as an abuse of discretion a discretionary decision that is premised on a misapprehension of the law."  N.M. Right to Choose/NARAL v.

Download 2005-NMCA-021.pdf

New Mexico Law