From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Department of Health

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
May 30, 1973
305 A.2d 54 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)

Opinion

Argued May 9, 1973

May 30, 1973.

Mandamus — Jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania — Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act, Act 1970, July 31, P. L. 673 — Illegitimate child — Change of birth certificate — Vital Statistics Law of 1953, Act 1953, June 29, P. L. 304.

1. Pursuant to provisions of the Vital Statistics Law of 1953, Act 1953, June 29, P. L. 304, an illegitimate child of parents who marry subsequent to his birth may seek an amended birth certificate from the Department of Health reflecting the new status, and, if he is a non-resident of Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, pursuant to provisions of the Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act, Act 1970, July 31, P. L. 673, may entertain an original mandamus action brought to compel the issuance of the corrected certificate. [638-9]

Argued May 9, 1973, before President Judge BOWMAN and Judges CRUMLISH, JR., KRAMER, WILKINSON, JR., MENCER, ROGERS and BLATT.

Original jurisdiction No. 1145 C.D. 1972, in case of Clarence E. Jones v. David D. McCullough, Director, Division of Vital Statistics, Department of Health, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Complaint in mandamus in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania to compel issuance of corrected birth certificate. Plaintiff filed motion for summary judgment. Held: Motion overruled. Defendant directed to file answer.

Robert E. Knupp, with him Knupp and Knupp, for plaintiff.

No appearance for defendant.


This strikingly unusual case is before us for argument by direction of this Court. The plaintiff brought this action of mandamus to correct a birth certificate. An action to correct a birth certificate is normally perfectly routine and is brought in the Orphans' Court Division of the Court of Common Pleas in the county where the plaintiff or petitioner resides. The problem presented here is that the plaintiff is a non-resident of Pennsylvania.

Petitioner, according to the complaint, supported by the affidavit of his mother and a marriage certificate, was born an illegitimate child whose mother and putative father were subsequently married and lived together for many years until the death of his father.

Plaintiff has always been known by the name of his father, originally putative, but converted to a legal status by the subsequent marriage. The Vital Statistics Law of 1953, Act of June 29, 1953, P. L. 304, Section 603, 35 P. S. § 450.603, provides specifically that under such circumstances, the Department of Health may "prepare an amended certificate of birth on the basis of proof of the new status."

Under the circumstances, this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Section 401(a)(1) of the Appellate Court Jurisdiction Act, Act of July 31, 1970, P. L. 673, 17 Pa.C.S.A. § 211.401 (a)(1), which confers on this Court original jurisdiction under these circumstances.

Accordingly, we enter the following

ORDER

NOW, May 30, 1973, it appearing that the defendant, consistent with prior practice, has not filed an answer to plaintiff's complaint and that plaintiff has filed a motion for summary judgment, and it being the view of this Court that a hearing should be conducted in all such cases, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied. The defendant is directed to answer the averments of the complaint within twenty (20) days hereof and evidentiary hearing will thereafter be heard on the praecipe of either party.


Summaries of

Jones v. Department of Health

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
May 30, 1973
305 A.2d 54 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)
Case details for

Jones v. Department of Health

Case Details

Full title:Jones v. Department of Health

Court:Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: May 30, 1973

Citations

305 A.2d 54 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. 1973)
305 A.2d 54

Citing Cases

Swartzwelder v. Edmonds

PER CURIAM OPINION, January 17, 1975: Notwithstanding our decision in Jones v. Department of Health, 8 Pa.…

St. Clair v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. Parole

There is also little question that actions in mandamus directed against Commonwealth agencies or officers…