## Facts

- E.F.G. filed a verified complaint/petition in New Jersey Superior Court seeking to assume a new name under N.J.S.A. § 2A:52-1.
- In an affidavit submitted with her petition, E.F.G. swore she was not seeking the name change for any illegal or fraudulent purpose.
- E.F.G. stated she sought the name change because she was a victim of domestic violence and her abuser continued to contact her despite multiple restraining orders.
- E.F.G. submitted materials documenting the abuse and risk, including descriptions of the violence, medical charts, photographs of injuries, and copies of restraining orders.
- E.F.G. moved for relief from the court-rule procedure in Rule 4:72-3 requiring publication of notice of a name-change application, arguing public notice would make it easier for her abuser to locate her.
- In the same motion, E.F.G. asked the court to seal (or otherwise keep confidential) the name-change record for safety reasons.
- The trial court denied the request to waive publication and denied the name-change application because E.F.G. did not publish notice as required by Rule 4:72-3.
- E.F.G. appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a trial court may waive Rule 4:72-3’s publication requirement for a name-change application when a domestic-violence victim presents specific evidence that publication would create a serious risk of harm.
2. Whether a trial court may restrict public access to (or seal) the name-change record to reduce a substantiated safety risk.
3. Whether it is error to deny a name-change petition solely for nonpublication when the applicant satisfies the statutory requirements and shows good cause for confidentiality.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s denial.
- The court ruled that the publication requirement is not absolute in every case and may be relaxed when the applicant shows good cause, including a concrete safety threat supported by the record.
- The court ruled that confidentiality measures—such as sealing or limiting access to the file—may be ordered when needed to protect a domestic-violence victim from being found through the name-change process.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings consistent with allowing the name change with protective conditions.

## Legal Principles

- New Jersey’s name-change statute focuses on good faith and requires an affidavit that the request is not for an illegal or fraudulent purpose; compliance with those statutory requirements is central to the application.
- The publication requirement in Rule 4:72-3 serves notice and anti-fraud functions, but it is a procedural safeguard that can be relaxed when strict enforcement would create an unjust and dangerous result.
- “Good cause” to waive publication can be shown by credible, particularized evidence that public notice would materially increase the risk of harm, including evidence of serious domestic violence and violations of restraining orders.
- Courts must weigh the public’s interest in open proceedings and notice against an applicant’s demonstrated safety risk, and may use narrow measures to address both concerns (for example, waiver of public notice coupled with careful judicial review of the applicant’s sworn non-fraud affidavit and supporting documentation).
- When the record shows a substantial safety threat, denying a name change solely because the applicant will not publish notice is an abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

In re E.F.G. holds that a New Jersey trial court has authority to waive the Rule 4:72-3 publication requirement and to protect the confidentiality of a name-change proceeding when a domestic-violence victim presents well-supported evidence that disclosure would create a serious safety risk, and that a petition should not be denied solely due to nonpublication in those circumstances.


In re E.F.G., 942 A.2d 166 (2008)