Summary
The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed an order allowing a parent to change a minor child’s surname. The court held that the district court properly considered the child’s best interests, provided adequate statutory notice, and did not violate the incarcerated parent’s due process rights by declining to order the Department of Corrections to facilitate his telephonic appearance. The court also denied the request for appellate costs because the appeal was not shown to be frivolous or dilatory.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by considering the nature of Narvais's crime, the potential stigma associated with the surname, Narvais's paternity-test request, and related circumstances in determining the child's best interests.
- Whether the district court was required to apply each best-interest factor listed in N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.2(1) when deciding a petition to change a minor child's surname under N.D.C.C. § 32-28-02.
- Whether Jackson provided the notice required by N.D.C.C. § 32-28-02(4).
- Whether Narvais's procedural due process rights were violated when the district court did not order the Department of Corrections to facilitate his telephonic or interactive-television appearance.
Holdings
- The district court did not abuse its discretion by considering the type of crime Narvais committed, the potential social stigma and negative consequences associated with the child's surname, and Narvais's paternity-test request in evaluating the child's best interests.
- N.D.C.C. § 32-28-02 does not require a district court to address each best-interest factor listed in N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.2(1). The court must instead determine whether there is proper and reasonable cause for the name change, including consideration of the child's best interests.
- The notice was sufficient because the petition was physically published in the official newspapers of the relevant counties, and notice was mailed to Narvais at the State Penitentiary.
- Due process was satisfied because the district court provided Narvais an avenue to appear telephonically or through interactive television; the court was not required to ensure his actual presence or order the Department of Corrections to facilitate it.
Key quotations
“Procedural due process requires fundamental fairness, which, at a minimum, necessitates notice and a meaningful opportunity for a hearing appropriate to the nature of the case.” (895 N.W.2d at 750-751)
“Due process only requires the district court to give a prisoner an avenue to appear for the proceeding; it has no duty to ensure the prisoner’s presence.” (895 N.W.2d at 751)
Factual background
Charlotte Jackson-Narvais and Shawn Narvais were married and had a child, L.Z.N., born in 2014; the parties divorced in 2015. Shortly after the child's birth, Narvais pleaded guilty to four counts involving possession of prohibited materials and was incarcerated. Jackson sought to change the child's surname because of the stigma associated with Narvais's crimes, the child's desire to share a surname with Jackson and maternal relatives, and Narvais's limited involvement and support. The district court granted the petition after finding proper cause and considering the child's best interests.
Procedural history
The parties divorced in 2015. In June 2016, Jackson petitioned to change the child's surname. The district court held a hearing, allowed Narvais to appear by telephone if he made the necessary arrangements, declined to order the Department of Corrections to facilitate his appearance, and granted the petition. Narvais appealed, and the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed.