Unpublished Disposition, 878 F.2d 386 (9th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 878 F.2d 386 (9th Cir. 1989)

William E. HUTCHINGS von Ludwitz, et ux., Petitioners-Appellants,v.UNITED STATES of America, et al., and County of Linn,Oregon, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 88-2899.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 21, 1989.Decided June 23, 1989.

Richard M. Bilby, Chief District Judge, Presiding.

Before: HUG, SCHROEDER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


Petitioners William E. Hutchings von Ludwitz and Rosa Patricia Quinonez de Hutchings von Ludwitz appeal from the district court's order denying their petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. We affirm.

The petition in the district court sought to restore the name of the petitioner's daughter, who is in the custody of third parties, to the name that the petitioners originally gave her.

Rosa Patricia Quinonez de Hutchings von Ludwitz is not a proper party to this appeal because of her failure to sign the notice of appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 3(c). See Carter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 784 F.2d 1006, 1008 (9th Cir. 1986) (pro se appellants must personally sign notices of appeal, so as to specify parties taking appeal).

A petition for habeas corpus is not the proper procedure for requesting that a child's name be changed. See Lehman v. Lycoming County Children's Services Agency, 458 U.S. 502, 516 (1981) (federal habeas corpus reserved for instances where there is a strong federal concern with individual liberty). Moreover, federal habeas corpus is not available to challenge or claim parental rights in children whose custody has previously been determined in a state proceeding. Id. at 511.



The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for disposition without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4


This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Circuit R. 36-3