Cases

DECISION Before this Court is the petition of Jean Lawton ("Plaintiff" or "Ms. Lawton") seeking to nullify a set of inter vivos and testamentary instruments drawn by her mother, Evelyn Z. Foisy ("Mrs. Foisy") to the exclusive benefit of her sister, Joyce Higgins ("Defendant" or "Ms. Higgins"). Plaintiff contends that Mrs. Foisy lacked the requisite mental capacity to execute the documents. Plaintiff further contends that

ORDER PER CURIAM: Direct appeal from a judgment terminating parental rights pursuant to § 211.447.2, RSMo 1986. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

*530ORDER PER CURIAM: Direct appeal from a judgment ordering custody of a juvenile to the Division of Family Services. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

ORDER PER CURIAM. Natural father appeals from orders terminating his parental rights to his three children, N.W., M.W. and R.L.W. Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

953 F.Supp. 266 (1997) Kathy HIGGINS, Plaintiff, v. KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN, WMCR Acquisition Corporation, and Dennis Gordon Dahlke, Defendants. No. 96-C-0877-C. United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin. January 28, 1997. *267 Victor Arellano, Lawton & Cates, Madison, WI, for Kathy Higgins. Daniel J. Sheridan, Dicki

BILLINGS, Judge. Consolidated suits by taxpayers of Frontenac and University City challenging 1982 property tax ordinances of the two cities as violative of the Hancock Amendment [Article X, §§ 16-24, Missouri Constitution]. The trial court granted declaratory and injunctive relief to taxpayers after finding and determining the tax increases contained in the ordinances had not been approved by the voters as required by the Ame

Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County (Forma, J.), entered May 14, 1998, convicting defendant after a jury trial of, inter alia, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of criminal facilitation in the fourth deg

NO. 07-03-0157-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL E APRIL 2, 2003 ______________________________

—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed with costs to plaintiff Paul A. Restey and new trial granted on damages only in accordance with the following Memorandum: Paul A. Restey (plaintiff) commenced this action against defendants, Timothy Higgins, an Erie County Deputy Sheriff, and the County of Erie (County) alleging causes of action for assault and battery, negligence, false arrest, malicious prosecution and deprivation of civil

—Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs to defendants International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, Local 264, Thomas Dziedzic, Kenneth Brzezinski, Angelo Montante, Paul J. Hejna, Edward McDonald, Edward J. Billittier and Daniel Gale, motion denied and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced an action against International

877 P.2d 1120 (1994) Bob L. MANSELL, Appellant, v. CITY OF LAWTON, Appellee. No. 82589. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. June 28, 1994. As Corrected June 29, 1994. Steven S. Mansell, Oklahoma City, for appellant. John H. Vincent, Lawton, for appellee. SUMMERS, Justice. The trial judge sustained a motion to dismiss, and a judge-signed

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in report of Referee at Supreme Court, Erie County. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gorski, J.—Election Law.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Boomer and Boehm, JJ. (Filed Aug. 20, 1993.)

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s cross motion to the extent that it sought dismissal of the causes of action sounding in negligence and breach of contract as time-barred. Those causes of action stem from defendant’s April 1995 installation of a drainage line across p

—Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Relator contends that Supreme Court erred in denying his writ of habeas corpus based on City Court of Buffalo’s failure to comply with the mandates of CPL 180.80. Because relator has been released and the charges against him dismissed, his appeal is moot. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.—Habeas Corpus.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Do-err and Fallon, JJ.

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus was properly denied. Because petitioner is not entitled to immediate release from custody, the remedy of habeas corpus is not available (see, People ex rel. Mendolia v Superintendent, 47 NY2d 779; People ex rel. Dell v Walker, 186 AD2d 1043 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolf, Jr., J. — Habeas Corpus.

—Motion to proceed as poor person denied; cross motion to dismiss granted. Memorandum: Appellant’s motion for poor person relief is denied on the ground that the appeal is moot (see, People ex rel. Ezbitski v Koehler, 136 AD2d 667; see also, People ex rel. Lane v Infante, 143 AD2d 483). Moreover, we conclude that it is appropriate for the appeal to be dismissed on the same ground. The issues raised on this appeal do not present any excepti

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court, Kane, J. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kane, J. — Contempt.) Present— Denman, P. J., Lawton, Pigott, Jr., Balio and Boehm, JJ. [See, 171 Mise 2d 629.]

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, petition dismissed, and indictment and judgment of conviction reinstated. Memorandum: Relator was convicted, sentenced, then released on bail pursuant to a stay of execution of judgment granted by the trial court in 1983. The 120-day stay expired and was not extended before relator’s appeal was perfected, but relator failed to surrender to the authorities pursuant to CPL 460.50 (4). Relator’s conviction was ultimate

— Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendants contend that Supreme Court erred in denying their motion to dismiss plaintiffs Labor Law § 241 (6) claim because his injuries did not occur in an area where construction work was being performed. Plaintiff was injured when he fell down a set of stairs at his employer’s construction trailer, which was located within approximately 20 to 30 feet of the building under construction. At the time of th

This is an appeal from the district court of Comanche county upon two cases consolidated therein and tried to the court. Plaintiff recovered judgment upon allegations of balances due it under construction contracts, and the defendant city has perfected the appeal. We will refer to the parties as plaintiff and defendant, as they appeared in the trial court. In March, 1930, the defendant city voted bonds in the sum of $600,000 for waterworks improvements. Thereafter plaintiff contracted