 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahearn v. Ahearn12/14/1999
Appeal from the District Court of Platte County: The Honorable Barton R. Voigt, Judge
*Retired November 2, 1998.
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in Pacific Reporter Second. Readers are requested to notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Building, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002, of any typographical or other formal errors in order that corrections may be made before final publication in the permanent volume.
LEHMAN, Chief Justice.
Acting pro se, as he did in the district court, Francis Ahearn appeals from three orders entered by that court. After consolidating these cases and reviewing Ahearn=s various claims, we conclude that the district court=s rulings were appropriate in all respects. We affirm.
ISSUES
Appellant Francis Ahearn recites multiple issues in each of these cases. In case No. 98- 39, he presents the following issues for our review:
I. Can a Court Order one and only one parent to provide all of the child support for both children and not hold the other parent accountable for equal support of the children?
II. Can a Court Order child support funds from a savings account to be returned to the savings account after the funds have been given to the children for their support when the funds have been expended in accordance with the Divorce Decree?
The appellee in case No. 98-39, Francis Ahearn=s former wife, Kathleen Ahearn, states the issues in this fashion:
1. Did Mr. Ahearn, Appellant, take the money out of his children[=]s college funds in violation of the Judgment and Decree?
2. Did the court err in ordering the Appellant to refund the money taken from the college funds?
In case No. 98-40, Francis Ahearn advances five issues:
I. Does a person who is NOT a party to a Divorce Decree, and who bears no legal or family relationship to either of the parties or their children have any legal standing to monitor how child support payments are to be spent on the children?
II. Does delivery of a recorded Notice of Default of an Agree-ment for Warranty Deed to a client=s attorney constitute legal notice and due process when that client is in default, and has
departed the area, and has left no forwarding address and directed the parties to conduct business through his attorney in his absence?
III. Does a bank which is serving as escrow agent and who has an obligation to account for and disburse funds to the Sellers have the right to refuse to disburse funds to the Sellers in direct opposition to the written escrow instructions?
IV. Are escrow funds that are NOT disbursed to the Sellers in accordance with the escrow instructions allowed to be construed by the Court as having been received by the Sellers when, in fact, the escrow agent=s records and sworn testimony show that such funds have not been received by the Sellers?
V. Is it a conflict of interest for an attorney to represent both the Buyer and one of two Sellers in a contested escrow case where the results will clearly benefit one party and serve as a loss to the other?
One of the appellees in case No. 98-40, Chuck Lewis, condenses the issue to one:
1. Did the court err in granting Appellee=s, Mr. Lewis=, Petition for Declaratory Judgment and finding that Mr. Ahearn, Appel- lant, failed to give proper notice of default to Mr. Lewis under the 1987 Agreement for Warranty Deed?
The second appellee in case No. 98-40, First State Bank of Wheatland, believes there are two issues:
1. Did the First State Bank o
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Wyoming Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|