In re Cohn

New York Supreme Court

In re Cohn

181 Misc. 1021, 50 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1943 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2884

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 12, 1943

StatusPublished

Cited by17 cases

This text of 181 Misc. 1021 (In re Cohn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Cohn, 181 Misc. 1021, 50 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1943 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2884 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Levy, J.

To the extent that the application seeks readjustment of the rights of custody and visitation, it will be denied at this time, primarily for the reason that the children are still of tender age and require continuation of the existing arrangements. However, the grounds urged for such relief merit further consideration.

The primary criticism urged by petitioner is concerned with respondent’s action in adopting on behalf of the children the surname of her present husband. Although the court does not deem it necessary at this time to impugn the motive, it cannot lend its approval to the use of respondent’s current surname as appropriate for the children of the petitioner. The contention that the selection of a name for these infants is but an incident to her general guardianship, which thus gives her freedom of action in the matter, is wholly unsound. They remain members of the father’s family. That status has been in no wise altered, and, in the circumstances here disclosed, remains paramount to any exercise of discretion in favor of respondent. Hntil the children are themselves competent to make a choice, reasons far more compelling than any here shown would be required to justify departure from the customary use of the paternal surname. In Application of Horn (21 N. Y. S. 2d 453) the infant, who joined in the application, was [1022]*1022sixteen years of age, and there was an absence of any close filial relationship.

Bespondent will accordingly be directed to undo the changes already made and will be restrained from further attempts to change the surname of the infants without further order of the court. The school registration shall not, however, be corrected until the close of the present term. Settle order. ■

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Levy, J.

To the extent that the application seeks readjustment of the rights of custody and visitation, it will be denied at this time, primarily for the reason that the children are still of tender age and require continuation of the existing arrangements. However, the grounds urged for such relief merit further consideration.

The primary criticism urged by petitioner is concerned with respondent’s action in adopting on behalf of the children the surname of her present husband. Although the court does not deem it necessary at this time to impugn the motive, it cannot lend its approval to the use of respondent’s current surname as appropriate for the children of the petitioner. The contention that the selection of a name for these infants is but an incident to her general guardianship, which thus gives her freedom of action in the matter, is wholly unsound. They remain members of the father’s family. That status has been in no wise altered, and, in the circumstances here disclosed, remains paramount to any exercise of discretion in favor of respondent. Hntil the children are themselves competent to make a choice, reasons far more compelling than any here shown would be required to justify departure from the customary use of the paternal surname. In Application of Horn (21 N. Y. S. 2d 453) the infant, who joined in the application, was [1022]*1022sixteen years of age, and there was an absence of any close filial relationship.

Bespondent will accordingly be directed to undo the changes already made and will be restrained from further attempts to change the surname of the infants without further order of the court. The school registration shall not, however, be corrected until the close of the present term. Settle order. ■

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

181 Misc. 1021, 50 N.Y.S.2d 278, 1943 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-cohn-nysupct-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack