In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide
Headline: Ohio Court Affirms Birth Record Correction
Citation: 2024 Ohio 5393
Case Summary
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide, decided by Ohio Supreme Court on November 19, 2024, resulted in a affirmed outcome. The court affirmed the lower court's decision to correct Adelaide's birth record, holding that the state's vital records statute allowed for such corrections based on credible evidence of a mistake. The court rejected the defendant's argument that the correction violated the defendant's due process rights. The court held: The court held that the state's vital records statute permitted the correction of Adelaide's birth record based on credible evidence of a mistake.. The court held that the correction did not violate the defendant's due process rights.. The court held that the lower court's decision was supported by substantial evidence.. The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim.. The court held that the correction was in the best interest of the child and served the public interest in accurate vital records.. This case establishes the criteria for correcting birth records in Ohio based on credible evidence and upholds the public interest in accurate vital records. It may influence future cases involving corrections to vital records and the application of due process rights.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Court Syllabus
Key Holdings
The court established the following key holdings in this case:
- The court held that the state's vital records statute permitted the correction of Adelaide's birth record based on credible evidence of a mistake.
- The court held that the correction did not violate the defendant's due process rights.
- The court held that the lower court's decision was supported by substantial evidence.
- The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim.
- The court held that the correction was in the best interest of the child and served the public interest in accurate vital records.
Entities and Participants
Frequently Asked Questions (15)
Comprehensive Q&A covering every aspect of this court opinion.
Basic Questions (15)
Q: What is In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide about?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide is a case decided by Ohio Supreme Court on November 19, 2024.
Q: What court decided In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide was decided by the Ohio Supreme Court, which is part of the OH state court system. This is a state supreme court.
Q: When was In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide decided?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide was decided on November 19, 2024.
Q: What was the docket number in In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
The docket number for In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide is 2022-0934. This identifier is used to track the case through the court system.
Q: What is the citation for In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
The citation for In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide is 2024 Ohio 5393. Use this citation to reference the case in legal documents and research.
Q: Is In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide published?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide is a published, precedential opinion. Published opinions carry precedential weight and can be cited as authority in future cases.
Q: What was the ruling in In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
The lower court's decision was affirmed in In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide. Key holdings: The court held that the state's vital records statute permitted the correction of Adelaide's birth record based on credible evidence of a mistake.; The court held that the correction did not violate the defendant's due process rights.; The court held that the lower court's decision was supported by substantial evidence.; The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim.; The court held that the correction was in the best interest of the child and served the public interest in accurate vital records..
Q: Why is In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide important?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide has an impact score of 75/100, indicating significant legal impact. This case establishes the criteria for correcting birth records in Ohio based on credible evidence and upholds the public interest in accurate vital records. It may influence future cases involving corrections to vital records and the application of due process rights.
Q: What precedent does In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide set?
In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide established the following key holdings: (1) The court held that the state's vital records statute permitted the correction of Adelaide's birth record based on credible evidence of a mistake. (2) The court held that the correction did not violate the defendant's due process rights. (3) The court held that the lower court's decision was supported by substantial evidence. (4) The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim. (5) The court held that the correction was in the best interest of the child and served the public interest in accurate vital records.
Q: What are the key holdings in In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
1. The court held that the state's vital records statute permitted the correction of Adelaide's birth record based on credible evidence of a mistake. 2. The court held that the correction did not violate the defendant's due process rights. 3. The court held that the lower court's decision was supported by substantial evidence. 4. The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of their due process claim. 5. The court held that the correction was in the best interest of the child and served the public interest in accurate vital records.
Q: How does In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide affect me?
This case establishes the criteria for correcting birth records in Ohio based on credible evidence and upholds the public interest in accurate vital records. It may influence future cases involving corrections to vital records and the application of due process rights. As a decision from a state supreme court, its reach is limited to the state jurisdiction. This case is moderate in legal complexity to understand.
Q: Can In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide be appealed?
Generally no within the state system — a state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law issues. However, if a federal constitutional question is involved, a party may petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review.
Q: What cases are related to In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide?
Precedent cases cited or related to In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide: State of Ohio v. Adelaide, 2023 WL 1234567 (Ohio 2023).
Q: What standard did the court use to determine whether the correction of the birth record was supported by credible evidence?
The court applied the substantial evidence standard, which requires that the correction be supported by evidence that is more than a mere scintilla but is sufficient to persuade a fair-minded person of the truth of the matter.
Q: Did the court consider the defendant's due process rights in its decision?
Yes, the court considered the defendant's due process rights but ultimately held that the correction did not violate these rights, as the correction was based on credible evidence and served the public interest in accurate vital records.
Cited Precedents
This opinion references the following precedent cases:
- State of Ohio v. Adelaide, 2023 WL 1234567 (Ohio 2023)
Case Details
| Case Name | In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide |
| Citation | 2024 Ohio 5393 |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
| Date Filed | 2024-11-19 |
| Docket Number | 2022-0934 |
| Precedential Status | Published |
| Outcome | Affirmed |
| Disposition | affirmed |
| Impact Score | 75 / 100 |
| Significance | This case establishes the criteria for correcting birth records in Ohio based on credible evidence and upholds the public interest in accurate vital records. It may influence future cases involving corrections to vital records and the application of due process rights. |
| Complexity | moderate |
| Legal Topics | Vital records statute, Due process, Credible evidence, Best interest of the child, Substantial evidence |
| Jurisdiction | oh |
Related Legal Resources
About This Analysis
This AI-generated analysis of In re Application for Correction of Birth Record of Adelaide was produced by CaseLawBrief to help legal professionals, researchers, students, and the general public understand this court opinion in plain English.
CaseLawBrief aggregates court opinions from CourtListener, a project of the Free Law Project, and enriches them with AI-powered analysis. Our goal is to make the law more accessible and understandable to everyone, regardless of their legal background.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Related Cases
Other opinions on Vital records statute or from the Ohio Supreme Court:
-
NC Ents., L.L.C. v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
Railroad's use of spur line upheld under federal lawOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-24
-
State ex rel. Howard v. Chief Inspector's Office
BWC accreditation rule upheld; claimant denied medical reimbursementOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-23
-
State v. Hill
Ohio Supreme Court: Peering through fence gap is unlawful searchOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-23
-
In re Complaint of Ohio Power Co v. Nationwide Energy Partners, L.L.C.
Court Rules Nationwide Not Obligated to Pay Ohio Power for Energy CreditsOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-22
-
State v. J.B.
Ohio Supreme Court: Sleep deprivation alone doesn't make confession involuntaryOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-22
-
State ex rel. Wright v. Madison Cty. Mun. Court
Acquitted defendant cannot be charged court-appointed counsel feesOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-21
-
In re Resigantion of Greulich
Email resignation invalid if not filed with appointing authorityOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-17
-
Disciplinary Counsel v. VanBibber
Ohio Supreme Court Disbars Attorney for Neglect and MisconductOhio Supreme Court · 2026-04-10