Information found in this database includes:. Births and Stillbirths : name of child, date and place of birth, sex, and race; nationality, residence, and ages of parents, occupation and full name of father, maiden name of mother, name and address of medical or other attendant making return; in case of stillbirth, name of undertaker and place of burial. Deaths : date of report, name, sex, color, age, occupation, marital status, nationality, birthplace; date, place, and cause of death; date and place of burial, addresses of undertaker, physician returning certificate.
The Birth and Death Records Database can be searched by entering all or part of a name. It is recommended to enter just the last name. The search engine is designed to search for keywords. Entering "William" will find records containing the first or last name of "William", "Williams", or "Williamson. All records for a county can also be viewed by selecting the county and leaving the name blank.
Skip to main content Advanced Search. Civil War.
aaron brothers arts
Collections and Resources Divided Loyalties Exhibit. Browse Collections. Educational Resources. The judgment admitting the will to probate is affirmed. He committed these criminal acts at two separate dates and in two separate places, thus warranting punishment for two capital murder convictions. A criminal statute that allows separate convictions for separate criminal acts does not implicate, much less constitutionally offend, double jeopardy principles.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The circuit court erred in finding that the guarantor had entered a general appearance by participation in post-judgment enforcement proceedings and had thereby waived any objection to the validity of the default judgment. An appearance after entry of judgment cannot retroactively validate a judgment that was void when rendered for lack of personal jurisdiction over a party.
Nor were there facts in this case to support any estoppel barring the guarantor from raising the defectiveness of the judgment. Because the judgment was concededly void, final judgment is entered on this appeal declaring it so and vacating both the judgment and all later orders seeking to enforce it. His testimony was contradicted by other evidence in the record, and the Director of the Department of Corrections was not negligent, much less grossly negligent, for rejecting extensive documentary evidence at the screening stage in favor of the otherwise uncorroborated, impeached, and self-interested testimony of an inmate and his brother.
The judgment is reversed and the order of dismissal is vacated. This matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The eventual notice of intent to enter explained that completion of the surveys and other activities would require multiple crews over several days, and provided a limited set of dates, the majority of which overlapped, when each crew would be present. As the landowners have not challenged these date ranges as being unreasonable, it cannot be said that the date ranges provided by the notice of intent to enter violated the statute.
FCi Federal, Inc. Because plaintiff was retired at the time he was determined to be physically incapacitated, his incapacity did not prevent the further performance of his duties as a firefighter, because he no longer had firefighting duties to perform.
In this case, a felony conviction is upheld. The statute does not require that a defendant have two predicate convictions at the time he or she commits the offense ultimately charged as a felony, but instead requires that the felony charge must allege that he or she has been previously convicted of two of the listed predicate offenses on different dates within twenty years.
The predicate convictions must exist at the time of the indictment because the Commonwealth must present sufficient evidence of them to enable a grand jury to find probable cause. The Commonwealth must thereafter adduce sufficient evidence at trial to prove them beyond a reasonable doubt, and proof by written order is not required. The Constitution speaks to the result of the districting process, and mandates that districts be compact in the end, but it does not attempt to curtail the legislative process that creates the end result, nor does it require that compactness be given priority over other considerations.
Edgar Bronfman Jr.
Accordingly, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. The judgment dismissing the case without prejudice is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
The judgment is reversed and the matter is remanded. Karverly, Inc.
daririwert.tk The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for retrial. When a tenant takes possession under a defectively executed lease, it is a reasonable inference that the parties intended a tenancy on the terms of the original agreement, and the law implies a new contract between the parties corresponding therewith, so far as it is not in conflict with the statute.
In this case, once the invalid year term is excised from the lease, the tenancy created and the manner in which the rent was received on a monthly basis during the entirety of the lessor-lessee relationship implies a month-to-month tenancy. The tenant, which paid monthly until it vacated the premises, had no further rent obligation to the landlord.
The judgment is reversed, and final judgment is entered for the tenant and its guarantor. None of the allegations in the complaint reasonably imply that the medical defendants participated in a conspiracy or concert of action with a woman who sought to adopt the infant, or were aware of her alleged coercion or misrepresentations. The complaint expressly alleges that plaintiff initiated the adoption plan, contacted the prospective adoptive parents, verbally agreed to proceed with an adoption, and executed a written agreement and consent order authorizing the adopting family to have sole physical custody of the child.
The judgment sustaining demurrers to the claims as against these defendants is affirmed. Accordingly, the decision below is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Accordingly, the judgment of the circuit court granting summary judgment in favor of the law enforcement defendants is reversed.
Any other construction would render most of the operative language meaningless. The judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the matters are remanded for further proceedings. The judgment of the circuit court sustaining the demurrer to the declaratory relief count of the complaint and sustaining its plea in bar and granting its motion for summary judgment as to two other counts is affirmed. In this statute, the General Assembly has determined that a person who commits the acts proscribed and does so unlawfully but not maliciously, causing a death, is guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
Thus, this defendant was twice punished in the same trial of the same offense, in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed and the case is remanded for the Commonwealth to elect between the convictions. The statutory language is plain and unambiguous, proscribing the act of discharging a firearm within an occupied building in such a manner as to endanger the life of a person therein. The statute distinguishes between several levels of the offense and subjects them to punishments that differ according to the mens rea of the offender and the resulting harm.
Further, subsection A 3 does not state that it governs all purchases of electricity by large customers from competitive service providers. Accordingly, customers who satisfy the size requirements of subsection A 3 can purchase electricity from a competitive provider under subsection A 5 , provided that they satisfy the separate conditions of subsection A 5.
The order of the State Corporation Commission is affirmed.
However, it erred by holding that the Illinois holding company must be the entity that pays this tax for the exception to apply. Thus, the petition is dismissed. While the trial court set the verdict aside on the grounds of contributory negligence by the decedent, the judgment is affirmed on the alternate basis that plaintiff failed as a matter of law to establish that the design is unreasonably dangerous.
The conviction is affirmed. The facts underlying the arrest are irrelevant and the petitioner need not show actual prejudice to prevail on her expungement petition. She needs only to demonstrate that the continued existence of an arrest record may cause a manifest injustice. On this record, there is a reasonable possibility that a felony arrest record would hinder her career and her educational opportunities.
It is concluded that the petitioner made the requisite showing of a manifest injustice. The judgment is reversed and the matter is remanded for entry of an order expunging the felony arrest record at issue. It was an abuse of discretion to disqualify this witness from testifying, and the subsequent entry of summary judgment for the defense was error. The judgment is reversed and the action is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. If any of those circumstances are present, the court must deny the petition.
However, even when those circumstances are absent, the court is not required to grant the petition and retains broad discretion in ruling on the petition. The judgment denying the petition is affirmed.
The circuit court should have granted the defense motion to strike the evidence on the basis of lack of causation. The judgment of the circuit court implementing a jury verdict for plaintiff is reversed and final judgment is entered on this appeal for the defendants. Under Rule a , a final judgment forecloses successive litigation of the same claim, but claim preclusion will not bar a claim that does not accrue prior to the litigation triggering the bar.
Thus, the present cause of action had not accrued, and claim preclusion cannot bar it now. Issue preclusion bars relitigation of common factual issues between the same or related parties, but the issue must have been actually litigated and essential to a valid and final personal judgment in the first action and here it is not certain that the issues were actually litigated and decided by the court.
Judicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine intended to prevent litigants from adopting a position inconsistent with a stance taken in a prior litigation. Further, the court did not rely upon his assertions in rendering its decision in the prior case. Thus, judicial estoppel does not apply. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for further circuit court proceedings.
In this case, there was no final order entered regarding the claim that ex-husband is attempting to preclude by his assertion of res judicata. The rule to show cause issued on February 7, is discharged. Therefore, the circuit court erred in dismissing this case on the ground that plaintiff did not timely file his notice of tort claim. In addition, an adverse inference instruction for spoliation of evidence is proper only where the party has acted in bad faith or with intentional conduct calculated to suppress the truth, which was not shown in this case.
Certain testimony of a city code inspector must be excluded in any retrial as lacking in relevancy. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to sever the claims of the most severely injured plaintiff from those of the other three plaintiffs, but it was error to permit amendment of the ad damnum clauses of three plaintiffs after completion of all of the evidence.