HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-0001 CIVILIN THE MATTER OF: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
OF TYLER ROBERT LOSTRAGLIO
02-0001 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION TO CHANGE THE NAME OF A MINOR
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Bayley, J., April 3, 2002:--
Susan Sheller, age 30, and Robert Lostraglio, age 31, were married in 1996.
They are the parents of Tyler Robert Lostraglio, age 4, born May 9, 1997. The parents
were divorced in October 2001, at which time the mother retook her maiden name
"Sheller". The mother has petitioned to change Tyler's name to Tyler David Sheller.
She testified that she believes that if her son has her last name, which is her family
name, it will make it easier on him. She did not say why she wants Tyler's middle name
to be David. The father is opposed to a change in name. A hearing was conducted on
March 28, 2002.
Tyler is a bright child, who is autistic. His autism results in repetitive behavior,
and necessitates that his daily activities be carefully planned around an established
routine. He attends a preschool operated by the Capital Area Intermediate Unit. It is
the mother's hope that he will be able to attend public schools. The mother and Tyler
have lived with her parents in Carlisle for the last two and a half years. The father, who
is single, lives in Carlisle. He is also the father of a girl, age 8, and a boy, age 7, who
live with their mother in Camp Hill. The father has had many different jobs over the last
99-7348 CIVIL TERM
few years, including being an over-the-road truck driver. This past January, he
obtained a local truck driving job. He pays child support under a court order, although
his payments, at times, have been sporadic due to his change of jobs with intervening
periods of unemployment.
There is no custody order or written agreement between the parents regarding
Tyler. They have an understanding that the father can visit with Tyler at convenient
times. However, the mother has refused to allow him to be with Tyler overnight, or to
be with him without her being present. She also does not allow him to visit in her
home. The mother testified that she has placed these restrictions on the father because
she fears that he will take Tyler away from her. She testified that the father saw Tyler
thirteen times in 2000, six times in 2001, and twice so far this year. The father testified
that he believes he has seen his son four times this year, but he is not sure of the
dates. He testified that he has not pressed the mother for more time with Tyler, or for a
change in the circumstances under which he is allowed to see him, out of consideration
of his son being autistic. He acknowledged that he does not know much about that
condition. He testified that he wants to build up trust between Tyler and himself. He
might, in the future, consider allowing the mother to change Tyler's last name to her
maiden name if he comes to believe that it will make it easier on him, and if he is
allowed more time with him.
A court of common pleas of any county may change the name of any person
resident in the county. 54 Pa.C.S. Section 702. In a plurality opinion of the Supreme
-2-
99-7348 CIVIL TERM
Court of Pennsylvania in In re: Zachary Thomas Andrew Grimes, 530 Pa. 388
(1992), Justice Cappy stated that when considering a petition to change the name of a
minor child, "[I]n accordance with the majority of jurisdictions in the United States we
declare the best interest of the child to be the appropriate focus in such cases." Absent
legislative criteria, courts reviewing petitions for a change of name may exercise their
discretion "in such a way as to comport with good sense, common decency and
fairness to all concerned and to the public." Petition of Falcucci, 355 Pa. 588 (1947).
In In re: Zachary, Justice Cappy stated:
[p]etitioner in such instance must bear the burden of establishing that a
change would be in the best interest of said child.
Specific guidelines are difficult to establish, for the circumstances
in each case will be unique, as each child has individual physical,
intellectual, moral, social and spiritual needs. See generally In re:
Davis, 502 Pa. 110, 465 A.2d 614 (1983). However, general
considerations should include the natural bonds between parent and
child, the social stigma or respect afforded a particular name within the
community, and, and where the child is of sufficient age, whether the child
intellectually and rationally understands the significance of changing his
or her name. (Footnote omitted.)
Tyler is too young to have any understanding of his mother's request to change
his name. In this day and age, we discern little chance that Tyler will suffer any
significant problems because his parents are divorced, and his surname is that of his
father rather than his mother's maiden name. The father does have a relationship with
his son, albeit highly restricted by the mother. It is apparent that he has no intent of
-3-
99-7348 CIVIL TERM
taking Tyler from her.1 Under these circumstances, we are satisfied that petitioner has
not met her burden of establishing that a change of name would be in Tyler's interest.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of April, 2002, the petition to change the name of
Tyler Robert Lostraglio, IS DENIED.
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
John R. Fenstermacher, Esquire
For Susan Sheller
Robert Lostraglio, pro se
111 Media Road
Carlisle, PA 17013
:prs
1 Interestingly, the mother has not thought it necessary to secure the protection of a
custody order.
-4-