TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COME DARRELL DONALD DOLSON JR., ELBERTA LOUISE DOLSON ECKERMANN, DORIS DOLSON SHAPIRO, DIANA LYNN DOLSON AND ROBERT G. MAYEUR (herein after “Defendants”) would respectfully show as follows:
I.
On October 21, 2014, the Special Commissioners filed their finding with the court in the above captioned case. Pursuant to the Award of Special Commissioners, The State of Texas (herein after “Plaintiff”) deposited the amount of Three Hundred and Ten Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($310,000.00) into the Registry of the Court on December 2, 2014.
Under § 21.018(a) of the Texas Property Code, the deadline for filing an objection to the Special Commissioners Award has since passed. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants
…show more content…
Plumley Trust, Exhibit “A”, establishes that Defendant Darrell Donald Dolson Jr., Elberta Louise Dolson Eckermann and Doris Irene Shapiro each hold one fourth (1/4) of Lillian E. Plumley’s undivided one fortieth (1/40) interest in the condemned property, or an undivided one one-hundred-sixtieth (1/160) interest in the condemned property. Exhibit “B” conveys to Defendant Darrell Donald Dolson Jr., Elberta Louise Dolson Eckermann and Doris Irene Shapiro each one fifth (1/5) of Alta B. Murray’s undivided one fortieth (1/40) interest in the condemned property, or a one two-hundredth (1/200) interest in the condemned property. Exhibit “C” establishes that Defendant Darrell Donald Dolson Jr., Elberta Louise Dolson Eckermann and Doris Irene Shapiro each inherited one fifth (1/5) of Frances May Dolson’s one fortieth (1/40) interest in the condemned property, or a one two-hundredth (1/200) interest in the condemned property. Combined, Defendant Darrell Donald Dolson Jr., Elberta Louise Dolson Eckermann and Doris Irene Shapiro each hold thirteen one-hundredths (13/100th) interest in an undivided one eighth (1/8th) interest of the condemned property, or an undivided thirteen eight-hundredths (13/800th) interest in the condemned property. Therefore, Defendant Darrell Donald Dolson Jr., Elberta Louise Dolson Eckermann and Doris Irene Shapiro seek to withdraw a total of thirty-nine eight-hundredths (39/800th) of $310,000.00, or …show more content…
Mayeur seeks to withdraw one eightieth (1/80th) of $310,000.00, or $3,875.00 in condemnation damages. Defendant Robert G. Mayeur is the child of Zelta Mayeur, deceased. Attached as Exhibit “I”, The Last Will and Testament of Zelta Mayeur, signed February 9th, 1972, establishes that Defendant Robert G. Mayeur holds a 10% interest in an undivided one eighth (1/8th) interest in the condemned property. Exhibit “I” conveys to Defendant Robert G. Mayeur one half (1/2) of Zelta Mayeur’s undivided one fortieth (1/40) interest in the condemned property, or an undivided one eightieth (1/80) interest in the condemned property. Therefore, Defendant Robert G. Mayeur files a motion to withdraw one eightieth (1/80) of $310,000.00, or $3,875.00 in condemnation
Facts: Plaintiff Donald Eschbach and Defendant Rite Eschbach were married in 1963 and divorce in 1979 the courts granted Plaintiff Eschbach the divorce on the basis of the couple lived separate and apart pursuant to a separation agreement for one year. The custody of the couple three children was granted to the mother to an oral stipulation of the parties entered in the minute of the court at inquest of the hearing held on January 1979. The stipulation, which also provided visitation rights for the children’s father, was incorporated but not merged in the judgment of the divorce.
1. Case name: Geringer v. Wildhorn Ranch, Inc., 706 F. Supp. 1442 - Dist. Court, D. Colorado 1988
Case name: Peter K. Dementas v The Estate of Jack Tallas, 764 P.2d 628 (1988)
Authors Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld founded the innocence project at a law school in New York City, which has assisted in the exoneration of an astonishing number of innocent individuals. As legal aid lawyers, they blithely engaged in conflicts that implicated
(B) "Texas v. Johnson Certiorari To The Court Of Criminal Appeals Of Texas." Blacula. (1989): 20pp. Online. Internet. 16 Nov. 1999.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas San Angelo Division. United States v. Emerson. URL: http://www.azstarnet.com/~sandman/emerson.htm. 7/20/00.
...son, Chief Justice Wallace B. The State of the Judiciary in Texas. Austin, 20 February 2007.
"SOSSAMON v. TEXAS." Sossamon v. Texas. N.p., 21 May 2014. Web. 29 May 2014. .
Though there is no need for either party to use the word trust, the courts must be able to construe some sort of positive intent that the equitable interest was not to reside in the transferee. However Lord Millett later in Twinsectra Ltd denounces the emphasis previously placed on the party’s intent. Twinsectra involved a borrower seeking short term finance for the purchase of land and Lord Millett in this case states that Quistclose trusts are resulting trusts which arise by operation of law. His conclusion is based on the theory that resulting trust emerges when there is a transfer of property in circumstances in which the transferor did not intend to benefit the recipient. Carnworth J, however contends that from Twinsectra it seems that the parties place no real significance to the purpose so even applying Lord Millett’s newly configured resulting trust analysis, there is no real intent on the lenders part to ensure that the recipient does not receive the money at his free disposal. Furthermore, a key aspect of any intent to create a trust always revolves around the funds being held separately and so by devaluing this factor Lord Millett is detracting from traditional trust law principles and in the process is making it much easier to find a Quistclose trust in situations where it was never
5. A Motion for Pendente Lite Relief was filed by Plaintiff on August 28, 2013.
The 20th is the only time I will have access to the property per the Chancery Court.My sister Patti Kennedy AKA Elisha Kennedy and her property manager Frank Williams do not want to cooperate with the city period they will not let the City have an inspection of the whole property. miss Yvonne Davis called the tenants association on Patti Kennedy for various reasons and concerns of her apartment, the running water in basement and raw sewage smell among other things. All violations are Patti AKA Elisha Kennedy the deed is in her name. The lentils were repaired not replaced its a lot of shady mess going on over there. Miss Williams stated in front of Jose Estrada that she told them it was problems in her apartment I was to do a walk threw with
468 N.E.2d 1171 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1037, 105 S. Ct. 1410, 84 L. Ed. 2d 799 (1985).
Turner, Billy. 1986. “Race and Peremptory Challenges During Voir Dire: Do Prosecution and Defense Agree?” Journal of Criminal Justice 14: 61-69.
Up until 1968 there was little complaint on what the Texas Legislature and Texas Education Agency had to say about school finances. It was in 1968 that San Antonio’s Independent School District (SAISD) filed the first lawsuit against the state; this particular lawsuit was filed because SAISD felt the fundin...
Convicted for the murders of his wife and two kids, thirty-four years ago, Dr. MacDonald still endures the agony of being accused of killing his family. Even after twenty-four years of imprisonment and several unlawful court hearings, additional documentation continues to up hold Dr. MacDonald’s testimony.