In the case of In re application for correction of birth record of Adelaide, 2nd Dist. Clark No. 2022-CA-1, an appellate court held that a probate court did not have authority under R.C. 3705.15(A) to change the sex marker on a birth certificate where an individual was identified as one sex at birth but later identifies as the other as R.C. 3705.15(A) only permits corrections to information on the birth certificate that was recorded in error at the time of registration. The appellate court further held that the probate court did not have authority under R.C. 3705.22 to change the sex marker on a birth certificate as R.C. 3705.22 contemplates that a request for an amendment to the birth record must be filed with the Ohio Department of Health as an administrative remedy, not with the probate court.
This case is now before the Ohio Supreme Court on appeal as to the following three issues:
- Does R.C. 3705.15 preclude probate courts from hearing a transgender person’s application to correct the sex listed on the person’s birth certificate?
- Should the statute be interpreted to avoid the constitutional violations found in a 2020 federal court decision on corrections to sex markers?
- Should state courts give persuasive weight to the federal court’s conclusion in that case?
To read the docket entries, memoranda, briefs (including amicus briefs), and other information before the Ohio Supreme Court in the case of In re application for correction of birth record of Adelaide, Case No. 2022-0934, click here.
UPDATE: On April 4, 2023, the Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments in this case, which can be viewed in the following video:
To read the appellate court decision being appealed, click here.
To read our blog entitled, “Ohio to Allow Sex Marker Changes on Birth Certificates,” click here.
To read our blog entitled, “Ohio Department of Health Establishes Procedures for Transgender Individuals to Correct Birth Certificate Marker,” click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.