PRESENT: MARTOCHE, J. P., SMITH, FAHEY, SCONIERS, AND GREEN, JJ.

DOCKET NO. OP 10-02045

IN THE MATTER OF MARK LEWIS BROOKS, PETITIONER.

Petitioner having moved, upon the return of an order to show cause granted by the Honorable Elizabeth W. Pine on October 6, 2010, for review of the ex parte order of Supreme Court entered in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Cayuga on February 4, 2009, pursuant to CPLR 5704 (a), or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to this Court,

Now, upon reading and filing the affirmation and memorandum of law of Toi M. Frederick, Esq. dated October 4, 2010, said show cause order with proof of service thereof, and the statement of Martin A. Hotvet, Esq., dated October 21, 2010, and due deliberation having been had thereon,

It is hereby ORDERED that the order of Supreme Court entered February 4, 2009, is reversed on the law without costs, the petition is granted, and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Cayuga County, for further proceedings not inconsistent with the following Memorandum: Petitioner, an inmate at a correctional facility, is allegedly a transgendered individual who was born male but now is self-identified as a female. Petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking to assume the name "Jessica Marie Brooks," thus leaving petitioner's existing surname intact. Supreme Court denied the petition on the ground that granting the petition of a convicted felon who is presently incarcerated "would create record-keeping problems," citing the decision of this Court in Matter of Holman (217 AD2d 1012). We reverse.

A court must grant a petition requesting judicial authorization of a name change in the event that the court is "satisfied . . . that the petition is true, and that there is no reasonable objection to the change of name proposed" (Civil Rights Law § 63). " �Given this limited power of review, courts ordinarily grant petitions by adults unless there is a demonstrable reason not to do so' " (Matter of Golden, 56 AD3d 1109, 1110; see Matter of Austin, 295 AD2d 721; Matter of Waters, 264 AD2d 910; Matter of Madison, 261 AD2d 738), and we perceive no demonstrable reason to deny the instant petition. Indeed, the Attorney General's Office has notified this Court by letter dated October 21, 2010 that the New York State Department of Correctional Services "will not be filing an objection to the present motion and . . . takes no position with respect to the inmate's application for a name change." We thus conclude that this case is distinguishable from our prior decision in Holman, inasmuch as in this case the Office of the Attorney General has expressly stated that it will not be filing an objection to the petition and thus does not appear to be concerned with any of the record-keeping problems described in Holman.

Finally, in remitting the matter to Supreme Court for issuance of the appropriate order, we note that such order should set forth that the name change order may not be used as evidence that the gender of petitioner has been changed from male to female.

Entered: November 24, 2010

Patricia L. Morgan, Clerk