Legal news archive
Every item ever ingested, 2084 total. Nothing is deleted or overwritten as new items arrive -- this page just paginates further back.
In re Estate of Murphy
Letisha Burkitt, an heir to the decedent, appealed the probate court’s order vacating her letter of authority as fiduciary because the court determined she was not named in the will and no hearing had occurred. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, but the provided opinion text cuts off before explaining the reasoning behind finding no error.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Catherine Schuster v. Tushar Nayar
Dr. Catherine Schuster appealed a Jefferson County Family Court decree awarding her ex-husband joint custody, equal timesharing, and declining to award child support. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court, finding that the judge did not abuse discretion or violate Kentucky law in making these custody and support rulings.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
D.M. v. C.S.S.
D.M. appealed a trial court’s modification of a domestic violence civil protection order, arguing the court erred by refusing to apply her fiancé's USCIS Form I-864 affidavit of support in determining financial relief. While acknowledging the affidavit can be considered, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision, ruling the magistrate did not abuse her discretion in modifying the order. The judgment upheld the magistrate’s orders, which recognized C.S.S.'s financial support obligations under the form and distributed specific assets including furniture and health insurance coverage.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Jeffrey Case Meeks v. Leslee Elizabeth Bandy
Jeffrey Case Meeks appealed the Warren Family Court’s domestic violence order to Leslee Elizabeth Bandy, who claimed he repeatedly telephoned and harassed her, followed her, and engaged in unwanted sexual contact. Although Meeks testified that he called Bandy regarding their son’s health check and denied aggressive actions, the Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant the order for Bandy and her children.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Gibson
S.S. appealed a six-month incarceration sentence for her neighbor Stanley Gibson after he violated a protection order, alleging the trial court violated Marsy’s Law and Ohio’s victims’ rights statutes by failing to notify her of a new sentencing date. The court’s opinion indicates the appeal was dismissed under a ruling from August 14, 2026, though the provided text cuts off before explaining the specific legal reasoning regarding S.S.’s standing.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Crossley
Jiyah Crossley appeals his convictions after the juvenile court transferred his case to the general division to prosecute him as an adult, arguing that the juvenile court abused its discretion by determining he was not amenable to rehabilitation. Despite arguments from Crossley, the appellate court ultimately disagreed with his claim and affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Thompson
The United States District Court denied the government’s request for a trial continuance but granted dismissal of Adrian Thompson’s felon-in-possession of a firearm charge due to the government’s own mismanagement and lack of readiness. The court, however, rejected the government's proposal to dismiss the indictment without prejudice. Ultimately, the court ordered that the indictment be dismissed with prejudice.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Johnnie Savory v. Allen Andrews
Johnnie Savory sued former Peoria police officers and a private examiner alleging constitutional violations stemming from a long interrogation that resulted in a coerced confession, but the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of summary judgment. The court ruled that the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because they had arguable probable cause for the detention and no clearly established law deemed their interrogation tactics illegal. Additionally, the court noted that the officers cannot be held liable for claims of fabricated evidence because they have absolute immunity regarding their trial testimony.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Johnnie Savory v. Allen Andrews
Johnnie Savory sued former Peoria police officers and a private polygrapher under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging unlawful detention, coerced confession, and evidence destruction connected to a 1977 murder investigation. The Seventh Circuit reversed the lower court, holding that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for the detention and interrogation tactics and absolute immunity for their testimony regarding fabricated evidence.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Whether the Posse Comitatus Act Prohibits Military Personnel from Making Arrests Outside, but Within the "Immediate Vicinity" of, a National Defense Area for Crimes Committed Within that National Defense Area
Department of War officials requested a legal opinion regarding whether military personnel are prohibited by the Posse Comitatus Act from arresting civilians outside a National Defense Area for crimes committed within that area. The memorandum opinion concludes that the Posse Comitatus Act does not prohibit military personnel from making such arrests outside of a National Defense Area for crimes committed within it.
2026-08-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Griffin et al v. Oliver et al
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Dell N. Griffin, Jr. Objections to R&R due by 8/31/2026. Signed by Honorable Spencer G Singleton on August 13, 2026. (tmc)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
USA v. NELSON
ORDER on Defendant's Motion to Suppress denying 61 Motion to Suppress as to DARRELL NELSON. By JUDGE LANCE E. WALKER. (slg)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Lee v. Lawerence et al
RULING: For the foregoing reasons, 142 143 Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Matthew Wallace and Joseph Carboni are GRANTED, and these Defendants are dismissed from this case with prejudice. The 144 Motion for Summary Judgment by Troy Lawrence, Jr. is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as stated. The 150 Motion for Summary Judgment by the City of Baton Rouge, Parish of East Baton Rouge is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as stated. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Shelly D. Dick on 8/13/2026.(SWE)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
USA v. PARKER
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER as to DEVONTEE PARKER: Upon consideration of [82-1] the motion to compel disclosure of evidence, [83-1] the motion to dismiss the indictment, [101-1] the motion for reconsideration, and the entire record herein, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion to compel is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART. It is further ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the indictment is DENIED, and the motion for reconsideration is DENIED. See text of Order for details. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 8/13/2026. (zed)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Z. v. RK Hospitality, LLC et al
GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART WYNDHAM FRANCHISOR DEFENDANTS' AND DEFENDANT RK HOSPITALITY'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND GRANTING DEFENDANT PATEL'S MOTION TO DISMISS the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. The Wyndham Franchisor Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 53) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Plaintiff's FOSTA claim (Count Two) and her claim under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-127 (Count Three) against the Wyndham Franchisor Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; b. Plaintiff's Colorado Tort Claims (Counts Four, Five, & Six) against the Wyndham Franchisor Defendants are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and c. The Wyndham Franchisors Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 53) is DENIED in all other respects. 2. Defendant Rileshkumar R. Patel d/b/a Days Inn's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Cause of Action (ECF No. 67) is GRANTED and the FOSTA claim (Count Two) asserted against him is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 3. Defendant RK Hospitality's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 112) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Plaintiff's FOSTA claim (Count Two) and her claim under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-127 (Count Three) against RK Hospitality are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; b. Plaintiff's Colorado Tort Claims (Counts Four, Five, & Six) against RK Hospitality are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; andc. RK Hospitality's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 53) is DENIED in all other respects. 4. As set forth in the Scheduling Order entered by Magistrate Judge Maritza Domingu...
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Miles v. Tennessee Valley Authority
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 08/13/2026. Associated Cases: 5:22-cv-00015-CLM, 5:22-cv-00105-CLM, 5:22-cv-00114-CLM(CLD)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Wiseman v. Super Ego Holdings, LLC et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 8/13/2026. (xc: Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(mg)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Taylor v. National Express LLC et al
ORDER: Adopting the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation 40. The Court Denies Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint 34. Signed on 8/13/26 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (gm)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Blust v. Douley et al
ication.)REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - IT IS RECOMMENDED this action be DISMISSED with PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim for relief. It is further RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction/temporary restraining order (Doc. 2) be DENIED as MOOT. Additionally, it is RECOMMENDED that the Court certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) that an appeal of any Order adopting this Report and Recommendation would not be taken in good faith and therefore deny Plaintiff leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 8/27/2026. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 8/13/2026. (km)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notif
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Sandoval v. Unique Insurance Company
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Fouratt granting 25 and 27 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. (vvv)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable
OPINION. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 8/13/2026. (dmr3)
2026-08-13 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
In Re Estate of David Luke Brown v. the State of Texas
This case involves an appeal by the decedent's ex-wife regarding her challenge to the probate of David Luke Brown’s will, which she claimed was a forgery. The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of her will contest because it determined she lacked standing to sue as she failed to demonstrate a legally ascertainable pecuniary interest in the estate that would be materially affected by the probate.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Andrew Wood George v. Ashley Wood George, Jr. and Alyson Hadju
Andrew Wood George appealed a probate court order regarding a motion to transfer and consolidate related proceedings. The court ruled the order was not appealable, finding it was neither a final judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order, and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Nichelle-Marie Guadalupe v. Benjamin Rodriguez
Guadalupe appeals the trial court’s grant of Benjamin Rodriguez’s motion to modify the parent-child relationship, which awarded Rodriguez the exclusive right to designate the children’s primary residence and ordered Guadalupe to pay child support. Guadalupe argues the trial court failed to ensure a record of the children’s in-chambers interviews was made, but the court notes that it does not bear responsibility for ensuring such records are created.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Andrea Potter, Individually and as Next Friend of C.P. and H.P., Minors; And Cordell Potter v. Atmos Energy Corporation
Andrea and Cordell Potter sued Atmos Energy for personal injuries caused by gas leaks, appealing a trial court’s judgment that dismissed their negligence claims. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal because Atmos, as a public utility, is shielded from liability on these facts and did not owe the family the legal duties alleged.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Eddie Stewart v. GES Recycling South Carolina LLC
In this employment discrimination action, Eddie Stewart appeals a district court's award of summary judgment to GES Recycling on his claim of retaliatory discharge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The Fourth Circuit vacated the district court's award of summary judgment to GES on that claim and remanded the case for further proceedings.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Yoder Ford, Inc. v. Esmeralda Espinosa
Esmeralda Espinosa sued Yoder Ford, Inc. after her husband died of COVID-19 while employed at the dealership during the pandemic. The appeals court reversed the trial court’s order denying the dealership’s motion to dismiss the case based on a deficiency in the plaintiff's expert report, remanding for further proceedings.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
U.S. Risk, Inc. v. ISI Contracting, Inc.
This case involves a permissive interlocutory appeal regarding an insurance coverage dispute where U.S. Risk, Inc., sought summary judgment arguing it owed no duty to ISI Contracting, Inc., under the applicable policy and that the statute of limitations barred the suit. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment, and the appellate court affirmed that decision.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In Re Chance
In this dangerous animal case, the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed a circuit court’s order affirming a district court’s decision to euthanize a dog named Chance. The appeals court determined that the district court erred by failing to properly apply the statutory definition of “provoke,” which requires an act or omission that an “ordinary and reasonable person” would find likely to precipitate a bite. The court consequently vacated the order to euthanize the dog and remanded the case for further proceedings.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In re Estate of Ashworth
An Ohio probate court reduced an attorney's request for fees and costs from $30,000 to $6,000 after finding a contingent fee agreement void, a decision affirmed by the Tenth Appellate District Court. The appellate court ruled that the attorney failed to file the necessary transcript of proceedings, preventing the court from reviewing the trial court's alleged abuse of discretion.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Allen-Story v. Story
Jimmy Story appeals the Cuyahoga County trial court's adoption of a magistrate’s decision that granted him fourteen days of makeup parenting time while denying his requests for 50/50 shared custody and other relief. Because Story failed to provide the appellate court with a transcript of the proceedings, the court affirms the trial court’s judgment.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In the Matter of the Marriage of Kathryn Marks Smith and Carey Dennis Smith v. the State of Texas
Kathryn Marks Smith appealed a divorce decree, challenging certain property classifications and claims, but the court dismissed her appeal based on the acceptance of benefits doctrine. The court held that because she voluntarily sold the community property awarded by the judgment, she accepted the benefits of the decree and, as the property cannot be restored for a new division without prejudice to her ex-husband, her request to challenge the ruling is barred.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Parker
In United States v. Parker, the defendant moves to compel the government to disclose evidence held by the Chandler (Arizona) and Dallas (Texas) police departments and dismiss his indictment, arguing that the prosecution is failing its Brady obligations. The court denied the motion to compel regarding those agencies because the defendant failed to demonstrate a "close working relationship" between the federal prosecutors and the local police that would trigger disclosure duties. However, the court ordered the government to disclose three specific family photos found on the defendant's phone if it possesses them.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Ward
Aric Ward appeals his conviction for conspiracy to commit aggravated murder and associated firearm specifications, for which the trial court sentenced him to 21.5 to 27 years in prison. He argues that the indictment was void for failing to sufficiently allege a substantial overt act and contends that other errors warrant reversal, but the appellate court affirms his conviction.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Sims
Lejuan Sims appealed his conviction for first-degree misdemeanor assault, arguing the municipal court improperly accepted his guilty plea because he was not informed that the plea was a complete admission of guilt under Crim.R. 11(D). The appellate court ruled that while the specific advisement was omitted, a guilty plea without an assertion of actual innocence presumed the defendant understood the effect of the plea. Consequently, the conviction was affirmed despite the procedural error.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. McCargo
Marcus McCargo appealed from his guilty plea to involuntary manslaughter and possession of dangerous ordnance, which resulted in an agreed-upon 12-to-18-year sentence. After the trial court held a hearing on McCargo's motion to withdraw the guilty plea, alleging that he was manipulated and lacked mental clarity, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Ayers-Moore
Carvell Ayers-Moore appeals convictions for involuntary manslaughter and related offenses arising from a fatal drive-by shooting he committed when he was 14, and the appellate court affirmed the judgment despite finding a statutory violation involving the calculation of maximum prison terms. Because the two parties did not appeal the final sentence, the court ruled that the sentencing error created by the trial court remained as imposed.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Amy B. Beem v. Nancy M. Temple
Amy B. Beem sued Nancy M. Temple for negligence after a crash involving a utility terrain vehicle caused Beem to fall from her mule and sustain injuries. The Superior Court granted Temple summary judgment based on an equine activity statute, but the Maine Supreme Judicial Court vacated that decision. The court held the statute grants immunity only to equine sponsors, professionals, and those engaged in equine activities, finding Beem had established a prima facie case of negligence.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Gutierrez-Zacatenco v. Herrera
The Nevada Supreme Court held that NRS 52.325 is not the exclusive means of authenticating medical records, ruling that a party may establish authenticity under NRS 52.015 by offering sufficient support for the evidence’s reliability. The Court found that the district court erred by excluding the records due to minor omissions in the record set and a failure to list them in disclosures, concluding that the plaintiff likely knew of the defense strategy. Consequently, the Court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Olivia J. Mack, as Next Friend of M.Y.M., Her Natural Daughter and a Minor-Age Child v. Amber Nicole Martinez
Olivia Mack appeals a summary judgment granted to Amber Nicole Martinez following a personal injury lawsuit alleging assault, emotional distress, and defamation stemming from an interaction at a California science fair, arguing the court applied the wrong law and failed to find genuine issues of material fact. The appellate court reviews the applicable choice-of-law principles and the burden of proof for summary judgment, ultimately stating "We affirm." the trial court’s ruling.
2026-08-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)