Scribd
Upload
495 views

Civ Rev 1 Moore Vs Republic

The Supreme Court of the Philippines denied a petition to change a minor child's surname from his biological father's (Velarde) to his mother's second husband's (Moore). The Court cited provisions of the Civil Code that legitimate children should use their father's surname. It found the government's argument persuasive that allowing the name change could confuse the child's paternity and prejudice him in the community in the long run. The Court also noted the child was still a minor and unable to decide his own feelings on the matter, making the petition premature.

Uploaded by

OM Molins
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
495 views

Civ Rev 1 Moore Vs Republic

The Supreme Court of the Philippines denied a petition to change a minor child's surname from his biological father's (Velarde) to his mother's second husband's (Moore). The Court cited provisions of the Civil Code that legitimate children should use their father's surname. It found the government's argument persuasive that allowing the name change could confuse the child's paternity and prejudice him in the community in the long run. The Court also noted the child was still a minor and unable to decide his own feelings on the matter, making the petition premature.

Uploaded by

OM Molins
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Title: Moore v.

Republic of the Philippines


G.R. No. L-18407 Bautista Angelo, J. Date:  June 26, 1963

Doctrine: Topic:

The government sustains a negative stand for


the reason that our laws do not authorize a
legitimate child to use the surname of a person Paternity and filiation
who is not his father, for, as a matter of fact,
Article 364 of Civil Code specifically provides
that legitimate children shall principally use the
surname of their father.

I. Facts of the case


Elaine A. Moore filed a petition before the Court of First Instance of Rizal praying that her
child by a former marriage, William Michael Velarde, be permitted to change his name so
as to read William Michael Velarde Moore.

After publishing the petition as required by law, trial was held during which the parties
submitted a stipulation of facts. Thereafter, the trial court issued an order denying the
petition whereupon petitioner interposed the present appeal.

Petitioner is an American citizen formerly married to Joseph P. Velarde, also an American


citizen, out of whose wedlock a child by the name of William Michael Velarde was born.
This child, now 14 years old, was born on January 19, 1947 at Los Angeles, California,
U.S.A.

The marriage of petitioner to Velarde was subsequently dissolved by a decree of divorce


issued by the Superior Court of the State of California on May 31, 1949. After said decree
became final, petitioner contracted a second marriage with Don C. Moore on September
29, 1956 at Los Angeles, California, U.S.A., and thereafter the minor lived continuously with
the spouses up to the present time. He was supported by Moore who has always treated
him with love and affection as if he were his true father. In view of this harmonious relation it
is petitioner's desire that the minor be able to use the name Moore after his family name
Velarde.

II. Issues
(1) whether under our laws a minor may be permitted to adopt and use the surname of the
second husband of his mother; and
(2) whether justifiable reasons exist to allow such change of name; and whether petitioner,
as mother of the minor, has the authority or personality to ask for such a change.

III. Ratio/Legal Basis


(1) No. The government sustains a negative stand for the reason that our laws do not authorize
a legitimate child to use the surname of a person who is not his father, for, as a matter of fact,
Article 364 of Civil Code specifically provides that legitimate children shall principally use the
surname of their father. Mention is also made of Article 369 of the same Code which provides
that in case of annulment of avoidable marriage the children conceived before the annulment
she principally use the surname of the father, and considering by analogy the effect of a decree
of divorce, it concluded that the children who are conceived before such a decree should also
be understood as carrying the surname of the real father, which, in this case, is Velarde.

We find tenable this observation of government's counsel. Indeed, if a child born out of a lawful
wedlock be allowed to bear the surname of the second husband of the mother, should the first
husband die or be separated by a decree of divorce, there may result a confusion to his real
paternity. In the long run the change may redound to the prejudice of the child in the community.

(2) No. The fact that the child concerned is still a minor who for the present cannot fathom what
would be his feeling when he comes to mature age. Any way, if the time comes, he may decide
the matter for himself and take such action as our law may permit. For the present we deem the
action taken by petitioner premature.

You might also like