NY Appellate Division Rules on Transsexual Name-Change Petition

Rejecting a trial judge’s objection that a gendered name-change would cause "confusion," a unanimous panel of the New York Appellate Division, 3^rd Department, ruled on November 26 in _Matter of Earl William Golden III_, No. 504992, that the trial court should have ordered the name change, but should include in its order a statement that the name change could not be used as proof of a change of sex. Franklin Romeo of the Sylvia Rivera Law Project represented Golden on the appeal.

According to an article about the case published in the _New York Law Journal_ on November 28, Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey A. Tait of Broome County received the petition for a name change from Golden, seeking a legal change of name to Elizabeth Whitney Golden, on the ground that the petitioner, who is married to a woman, now identifies as female. Golden’s wife did not object to the name change. Golden presented no evidence of any surgical alteration of sex.

Justice Tait asserted that the change from a traditionally male to a traditionally female name was "fraught with confusion," and dismissed the petition.

Justice Anthony V. Cardona, writing for the appellate panel, noted that under New York’s common law, anybody can assume a new name so long as this is not being done to commit fraud or deception, without going through any legal proceeding, but a state statute authorizes the Supreme Court to grant name change petitions in order to make such a change "speedy, definite, and a matter of record." Having a court order expedites the process of getting other documents, such as driver’s license, social security card, other forms of identification, and passports issued in the new name.

Cardona pointed out that courts have routinely granted non-fraudulent name-change requests unless there is some sort of "reasonable objection" to the selected name. Since a name change will always engender a certain amount of confusion, wrote Cardona, potential confusion is not a ground for refusing to grant the petition, so long as all technical requirements of the law are met. Evidently, the appellate panel felt that the lack of evidence of sex-reassignment surgery was not an impediment, as the issue was not discussed by the court.

Getting a name change is an important step for a transsexual seeking to assert his or her gender identity, for psychological and legal reasons, and the refusal of judges to grant such name changes freely has remained a significant impediment, even in New York where there is a well-established legal tradition of freely granting name-change petitions. Volunteer lawyers in New York staff a special legal clinic under the auspices of the LGBT Community Services Center to provide assistance to transsexuals seeking legal name change orders.