| THE SAINT PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSBernie Jay Nelson, petitioner,Respondent, vs. Kristi Sue Nelson, Appellant. PETERSON, Judge In this appeal from an order modifying custody, appellant-mother argues that the district court's findings of fact are not supported by the evidence and that the findings of fact do not support the decision to modify custody. We affirm. = = = = A05-2528 M.B.E., Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, et al., Respondents, Minnesota Construction Conference of Teamsters, intervenor, Respondent. PETERSON, Judge In this appeal from a summary judgment dismissing appellants' complaint in a declaratory-judgment action challenging the validity of two statutes and the administrative rules adopted to implement and enforce the statutes, appellants argue that the district court erred in ruling that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the declaratory-judgment action. Because the district court did not have original jurisdiction to determine the validity of an administrative rule in a pre-enforcement declaratory-judgment action and appellants failed to show that the statutes have been, or are about to be, applied to their disadvantage, we affirm. = = = = A06-858 In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: J. L. M. and R. D. J., Sr., Parents. HALBROOKS, Judge On appeal from the district court's termination of his parental rights, appellant R.D.J., Sr., challenges the district court's conclusions that (1) termination is justified by the statutory factors of (a) neglect of or refusal to comply with parental duties, (b) appellant's palpable unfitness to be a parent, (c) reasonable efforts were unsuccessful to correct conditions requiring the foster-home placement and (d), the child is neglected and in foster care; and contends that (2) it is not in the child's best interests to have his parental rights terminated; and (3) the district court should have transferred legal and physical custody of his son to the sister of his fiancee. We affirm. = = = = A05-2338 In re the Matter of: Gregory Beauchamp Washington, II, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Valencia V. Anderson, Respondent. MINGE, Judge Appellant Gregory Washington challenges the district court's decision (1) increasing his child support obligation; (2) addressing retroactive modification of support; (3) applying the increase retroactively; (4) simultaneously creating a child support arrearage and entering judgment for the arrearage; (5) awarding respondent attorney fees; and (6) imposing a lien on appellant's properties to secure future child support payments. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. = = = A06-114 Ricardo Regis, Relator, vs. J. B. Hunt Transport, Inc., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. WRIGHT, Judge Relator challenges the unemployment law judge's determination that relator is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because he was discharged for employment misconduct. We affirm. = = = = A06-956 In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jeffrey Kim Kirckof. DIETZEN, Judge Appellant Kirckof challenges the district court's judgment committing him as a sexually dangerous person and a sexual psychopathic personality, arguing that (1) the determinations were not supported by clear and convincing evidence; (2) the district court abused its discretion by incorporating proposed findings and conclusions prepared by respondent; and (3) his indeterminate commitment violated principles of double jeopardy, ex post facto law, and equal protection. Because the district court decision was supported by clear and convincing evidence, and the court properly applied the law and did not abuse its discretion, we affirm. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| By visiting this page or clicking the "submit" button above, you agree that you have read and accept this "disclaimer". |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright ©
Michael E. Douglas, Attorney at Law, Saint Paul MN. All Rights
Reserved. Minnesota Lawyer representing Personal Injury, Car / Auto Accident, Workers Compensation, Medical Malpractice, Social Security Disability claims. Dedicated to Injured Workers, Victims of Negligence, Car Accidents, Victims of Fraud, and those in need of legal assistance. |
