Court Opinion

ID: 9710780
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:17:38.558769+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:59.942514
License: Public Domain

ROBERTSON, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Knauss’s testimony could properly have persuaded the trial court that a name change was in the children’s best interest because, if they were to be given their father’s surname, then they would benefit from the positive, “paternal feeling” they would get from knowing that society would recognize and accept them as their father’s children. A reversal of this case is a decision that such a determination is, in a word, illegitimate. Knauss presented some evidence that the name change was in the girls’ best interest, and this evidence supports the decision of the trial court. Therefore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered that the children assume their father’s surname.