Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 Misc. 392

In re Nigri

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1900

New York Supreme Court · decided 1900-08-15

<p>Naturalization — Change of name after issue of certificate — Remedy.</p> <p>The court will not amend a naturalization certificate so as to make it conform with a new Christian name which the petitioner has since been legally permitted to assume.</p> <p>The petitioner will be permitted either to renaturalize under his new name, upon surrendering the old certificate and filing with the original declaration a certified copy of the order changing his name, or he may annex a certified copy of the order to the certificate already issued.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 1925

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1900-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McAdam, J.

¶1The petitioner was naturalized in the New York Superior Court October 23, 1891, under the name of Patrick *393Nigri. Thereafter, and on July 27, 1900, he obtained an order changing his name to Fabrizio Nigri; and he now moves to amend his certificate of naturalization to conform to the change. The order was made in an independent proceeding, and in no way necessitates or even permits an amendment of the certificate of naturalization. Amendments are sometimes allowed in naturalization as in other special proceedings, but only to correct some error existing at the time of naturalization; and the sole purpose is to make the record a truthful one. The petitioner may have recourse to one of two remedies. He may renaturalize under the new name upon surrendering the old certificate and filing with the original declaration a certified copy of the order changing his name; or he may annex a certified copy of said order to the naturalization certificate already issued, and the two documents read together will constitute one truthful history and make a record that answers all legal requirements. The only effect of the order of this court was to permit the petitioner to thereafter bear a new name. It took from him none of his legal rights, and did not impair those flowing from or growing out of the naturalization. To change the record in the manner sought would insert in a document issued in 1891 a name which the petitioner did not then bear. The application in the present form must, therefore, be denied.

¶2Application denied.

/32/misc/392 · .json · Public domain