Court Opinion

ID: 9515352
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:55:52.088784+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:28.362960
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(dissenting).
[¶ 20.] I would affirm the trial court on all three issues, not just the first and third issues.
[¶ 21.] The trial court considered the matter of the child’s surname and determined that there was “no good cause for changing the child’s surname and ... [that] it is in the best interests of the child that his surname remain the same, Brewer.” (emphasis added).
[¶ 22.] There is no showing that Blase paid any of the medical expenses in connection with the birth of the child. In addition, there is no showing that Blase paid any support for the period from the birth of the child in August 2002 until he was ordered to do so in February 2003. Since then, Blase has been ordered to pay a mere $100 per month child support, when the cost to support the child may be five to ten times that much. Obviously, the mother is not only the primary caretaker of the child but also the primary supporter and the trial court had sufficient reason to leave the child’s surname as Brewer.