Father Has Burden to Prove Name Change in Childs Best Interest

Tennessee child name change case summary.

Trevor Howell v. Kennedy Smithwick

The child in this Tennessee paternity and custody case was born in December 2014, and the father filed a petition to establish paternity in 2015.  After the petition was filed, the parties agreed to an order under which the father had parenting time on Wednesdays and Saturdays.  This order was subsequently modified slightly, and child support was awarded.

A trial was held in early 2016, and the trial court made various rulings.  Among those rulings was that the child’s surname should be changed to that of the father.

The mother then appealed various issues to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.  Among other issues, she argued that the trial court erred in changing the child’s name.  After addressing the other parts of the case, the appeals court turned to the name change.  Under a Tennessee statute, the surname of a child born to an unwed mother is generally the mother’s surname.  In general, the name does not change as the result of a paternity determination, unless the court makes such an order, as happened in this case.

The general rule is that the name should not change unless the change promotes the child’s best interests.  Earlier cases identified a number of factors to be applied in making this determination, and the parent seeking the change bears the burden of proof.  The court noted that the parent’s preference is not a factor.

The lower court had relied upon its finding that the name change would promote a relationship with the father.  It had noted that the mother had not allowed overnight visitation, and the mother had testified that her relationship with the child was more important than the child’s relationship with the father.  For these reasons, the trial court believed that the name change would strengthen the relationship with the father.

The appeals court held that this was insufficient to warrant a name change.  It combed the record and could find no specific evidence supporting the trial court’s conclusion that the name change would strengthen the relationship.  It noted that the burden of proof was on the father on this issue, and that this was the only factor the trial court had used to make its decision.  Therefore, the lack of evidence meant that the name change was inappropriate.

For this reason, the Court of Appeals reversed this portion of the lower court’s order and remanded the case.

No. E2016-00628-COA-R3-CV  (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 1, 2017).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.

See also Tennessee Parenting Plans and Child Support Worksheets: Building a Constructive Future for Your Family featuring examples of parenting plans and child support worksheets from real cases available on Amazon.com.