Legal news archive
Every item ever ingested, 2084 total. Nothing is deleted or overwritten as new items arrive -- this page just paginates further back.
Watts v. Sawadogo
Pro se appellant Miguel Watts challenged the trial court’s custody determination awarding the children to his ex-wife, arguing that the court improperly relied on a parenting evaluation report he failed to cross-examine. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision, holding that Watts violated a local rule by not subpoenaing the evaluator and that the magistrate independently verified the findings of best interests. Consequently, the court adopted the magistrate’s findings and upheld Sawadogo’s designation as the children’s legal custodian.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Eberts v. Eberts
JoAnna Eberts appeals a domestic relations court judgment awarding her $6,500 in attorney fees, which the court deemed equitable due to her ex-husband’s failure to cooperate during the custody proceedings. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision, finding that the judge did not abuse their discretion in awarding the fees despite JoAnna’s failure to present income information or utilize a Lodestar calculation.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Moore v. Moore
Appellant April Bott Moore challenged the trial court’s decision to reappoint the parties’ parenting coordinator, arguing that the court-appointed mediator ignored her input and violated local rules regarding ex parte communications. The trial court upheld the reappointment, finding Moore could not substantiate her claims of one-sided bias or substantive ex parte conversations with the magistrate. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s order to reappoint the parenting coordinator for another term.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State of Maine v. Djvan Carter
Djvan Carter was convicted of aggravated attempted murder, elevated aggravated assault, and kidnapping after attacking his former partner with life-threatening injuries. He appealed, arguing that his statements to police were involuntary and his sentence was excessive, but the Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the convictions and the sentence of life imprisonment. The court found that while Carter claimed to be suffering from drug withdrawal, the record presented no evidence of this condition that would render his waiver of his right to silence involuntary.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Simoneau
Paul Simoneau appeals his conviction, arguing that his guilty plea was not voluntary because the trial court discussed community control despite mandatory prison terms and his counsel was ineffective. The court affirmed the trial court’s findings of guilt and imposition of individual prison sentences but reversed the imposition of postrelease control and remanded for resentencing to provide required Reagan Tokes notifications, though the text cuts off before concluding on the plea colloquy issue.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Genao
Miki Genao appeals convictions for gross sexual imposition, domestic violence, and pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, based on allegations that he sexually assaulted and abused his teenage daughter. The case involved evidence of physical abuse, grooming, and the discovery of a video on Genao’s phone depicting sexual activity. The appellate court affirms the convictions and the judgment from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Damond Wiley, Jr.
Damond Wiley, Jr. appealed the denial of his motions to suppress evidence and conduct an evidentiary hearing following his conviction for possession of a firearm as a felon. The case centered on Illinois State Police officers initiating a stop based on illegal window tint, speeding, and erratic driving, which led to the discovery of a firearm during a search of the vehicle for cannabis. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s judgment regarding these suppression issues.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Deluna
Karina Deluna was convicted of repeatedly and falsely stating on federal forms that she was purchasing firearms for herself when she was actually receiving a commission to purchase them for others. On appeal, she challenged the voluntariness of police interviews, evidentiary rulings at trial, and the reasonableness of her sentence, but the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Craig Chiaccheri v. Zurich American Insurance Company
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that under a statute requiring parity between a named insured and an employee’s underinsured motorist coverage, the maximum coverage available to an employee must be the UIM limit selected by the corporate entity for the named insured, rather than the policy’s general third-party liability limits. The Court further held that endorsements setting UIM coverage below general liability limits do not violate public policy so long as they meet statutory minimums and apply equally to both the named insured and employees.
2026-08-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
EXODUS REFUGEE IMMIGRATION, INC. v. ROKITA, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the State of Indiana
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION - Todd Rokita's Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 30) is DENIED, and Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc's. Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Filing No. 10) is GRANTED. Todd Rokita, in his official capacity as the Attorney General of the State of Indiana, is PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from enforcing the Civil Investigative Demand served in September 2025 or taking any adverse action against Exodus because of its failure to respond to the Civil Investigative Demand. Exodus need not post a bond. As required, the Preliminary Injunction will issue in a separate Order. (See Order.) Signed by District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 08/05/2026. (AJG)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Demontre Lamont Boyd v. State of Indiana
Demontre Lamont Boyd appealed the denial of his motion to suppress evidence found when a police canine jumped into his vehicle during a traffic stop and alerted to narcotics. The Court of Appeals held that the canine search violated his constitutional rights under both the federal and state constitutions, reversing the trial court's denial of the suppression motion.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Segrist v. Lippmann Motors LLC et al
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED no later than August 12, 2026, plaintiff shall file a statement as outlined in this order. See attached Order for complete details. Signed by Judge Krissa M Lanham on 8/5/2026. (NSH)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
USA v. McGee, et al.
MEMORANDUM OPINION as to Echandza Dianca Maxie: Defendant's motions to suppress (Docs. 267, 661 ) are DENIED. Signed by District Judge Terry F. Moorer on 8/5/2026. (mab)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
San Antonio Independent School District v. Laura Becerra, as Next Friend of J.C., a Minor
San Antonio Independent School District appealed a trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction regarding claims filed by a parent on behalf of her son over a school knife incident and potential disciplinary placement. The Fourth Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s judgment, dismissing the parent’s claims against the district.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
USA v. Valdez
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS: Defendant's Motion to Suppress, ECF 23, is DENIED. See attached for further details. Signed on August 5, 2026 by Judge Karin J. Immergut. (gw)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Ritter v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
ORDER: Defendant's 10 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED and the alternative Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default is GRANTED; Plaintiff's 7 Motion for Default Judgment is DENIED as moot; and the Parties are directed to meet and confer no later than August 11, 2026, to determine whether they can agree that service has now been completed. If the Parties cannot reach agreement, Plaintiff will have 30 days from August 11, 2026, to complete service and file proof thereof with the Court. Signed by District Judge Kenneth D. Bell on 8/4/2026. (mek)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
MANDIGORA et al v. THE AMERICAN BOARD OF PEDIATRICS, INC et al
OPINION. Signed by Judge Jamel K. Semper on 8/5/2026. (sks)
2026-08-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Guangdong Lvtong New Energy Electric Vehicle Technology Co. LTD v. John Montague, and Kimberley Hall and Kirby Stewart, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Robert Rowton
Guangdong Lvtong, a Chinese golf cart manufacturer, appealed an interlocutory ruling regarding a wrongful death lawsuit filed after a fatal accident in San Antonio. The Fourth Court of Appeals held that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction in Texas and reversed the trial court, dismissing the claims against the manufacturer.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Ibrahima Dieng v. Orkin, LLC
Ibrahima Dieng sued Orkin for failing to reasonably accommodate his disability after a workplace injury prevented him from working as a pest control technician and for unlawfully terminating him. The Fourth Circuit vacated the district court’s summary judgment on the accommodation claim due to unresolved factual disputes but affirmed the dismissal of the discrimination claim because Dieng failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Consequently, the court remanded the case for further proceedings.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Mark Charlton-Perkins v. Univ. of Cincinnati
Dr. Mark Charlton-Perkins appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the University of Cincinnati and its administrators after the university canceled a hiring search to prioritize female candidates due to concerns about his gender and conflict of interest. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the lower court, ruling that Title IX protections do not apply because the plaintiff was residing in the United Kingdom and that sovereign and qualified immunities bar his equal-protection claims.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Rosenberg v. Nassau Boces
A special education teacher sued Nassau Boces for disability discrimination and failure to provide a reasonable accommodation during the COVID-19 pandemic, alleging she was forced into early retirement. The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant the defendants’ summary judgment, finding that they duly considered her request to work remotely and offered an alternative accommodation that she declined.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Carver v. Carver
The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed a Richland County court’s judgment holding Amanda Carver in civil contempt for claiming a dependent tax exemption after the child turned eighteen, ruling that the trial court retained jurisdiction over the matter despite the child's emancipation. The appellate court determined that civil contempt does not require a willful violation of the court order, finding that Amanda’s reliance on professional tax advice was insufficient to avoid liability. Consequently, the judgment, which mandated a five-day conditional jail sentence and attorney fee reimbursement, was sustained.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Warren Griffin
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the life sentences of four defendants convicted of federal racketeering and murder related to the Gangster Disciples, finding that a district court’s failure to require a specific pretrial proffer to admit co-conspirator statements did not amount to reversible error. Although the appellate judges noted the district court’s approach created an untangled record, they concluded that no ultimate prejudice occurred and affirmed the convictions.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Sean Clemon
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the life sentences of four defendants convicted of racketeering, murder, and firearm offenses stemming from activities involving the Gangster Disciples. While the appeals court expressed concern over the admission of scores of coconspirator statements because the district court had failed to use a pretrial process to comply with Rule 801(d)(2)(E), it concluded that "no ultimate error" occurred in the lower court's handling of the evidence. Consequently, the court upheld the convictions and urged future trials to utilize Santiago proffers to prevent similar evidentiary disputes.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Frank Smith
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the life sentences of four defendants convicted of Gangster Disciple racketeering and violent crimes, writing that the district court did not commit reversible error by admitting coconspirator statements without a pretrial Santiago proffer. Although the court expressed concern about the district court’s approach to the evidence without first requiring a proffer, it determined that no ultimate trial error existed. The court offered guidance to ensure better application of Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E) in future cases of similar complexity.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
United States v. Dominque Maxwell
Frank Smith, Warren Griffin, Dominique Maxwell, and Sean Clemon received life sentences after being convicted of federal racketeering and related crimes associated with the Gangster Disciples, and they appealed the admission of coconspirator statements at trial. Although the appellate court expressed concern that the district court failed to use a Santiago proffer to pre-identify these statements, the court ultimately found no reversible error and affirmed the convictions and sentences.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Com. v. Correa, J.
Jesus Correa appealed convictions for possession with intent to deliver and knowing possession of a controlled substance following a traffic stop where police executed a Terry frisk and recovered fentanyl. The court decided to affirm the judgment of sentence, stating that Correa’s suppression claims were meritless.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Moore
The Court of Appeals affirmed John Charles Moore’s conviction for exposing himself to a minor and his life sentence, finding no error when the prosecutor pointed out inconsistencies between Moore’s trial testimony and his voluntary statements to police. While the court acknowledged the life term was harsh, it determined that prior convictions on nonunanimous verdicts could remain part of his record and that the sentence was not constitutionally disproportionate.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Gudino-Macias
Jose Eduardo Gudino-Macias appeals convictions for reckless driving, assault, and criminal mischief, arguing that issue preclusion barred the state from proving injury after he entered a DUII diversion program. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, finding that the claim was not meritorious because the purported reservation of appellate review was made over the state’s objection and the advice of counsel was that the issue did not arise.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
People v. Haskins
Steven Haskins appealed the summary dismissal of his post-conviction petition, arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective and that his stipulated bench trial was a plea without proper warnings. The Fourth District Appellate Court affirmed the judgment, finding that the lower court properly dismissed the petition at the first stage of proceedings because Haskins failed to state the gist of a claim that his constitutional rights were violated.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Lindsay
Ronald Scott Lindsay, an attorney for Cherokee County Department of Social Services, appeals judgments finding him guilty of obstruction of justice based on allegations that he improperly used Custody and Visitation Agreements to remove children from parents without judicial oversight. The trial court denied Lindsay’s motion to dismiss the indictments, and a jury convicted him of twelve counts of felony obstruction and two counts of misdemeanor obstruction. Since the provided opinion text terminates before the appellate court resolves the appeal, it does not state the Court of Appeals' holding or final disposition.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Jordan v. Neptune
The Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court order finding a premarital agreement valid and denying sanctions based on the lower court’s findings of fact. The appellate court determined that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal regarding the agreement’s validity despite pending counterclaims for equitable distribution and support.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Howze
Defendant J’marius Deshaw Howze appeals a first-degree murder conviction, arguing the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress DNA evidence collected from his shirt during a prior hospital visit. The appellate court holds that the trial court did not err in this ruling.
2026-08-05 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Rios v. United States of America
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION on 28 USC 2255 case Recommending Denial of 1 Motion (Complaint) to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Juniel Barrios Rios. Objections to R&R due by 8/18/2026. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eduardo I. Sanchez on 8/4/2026. See attached document for full details. (EIS)
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Szomor-Dharmasiri v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company
ORDER denying 5 Motion to Remand to State Court. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Laura M. Provinzino on 8/4/2026. (TJC)
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Farmer v. United Parcel Service Co. et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Colin H. Lindsay on 8/4/26 : The Motion to Compel filed by Defendant (DN 34) is GRANTED in part. No later than 8/14/2026, Plaintiff shall revise all of his responses to Defendant's requests for production, both his original responses and his supplemental responses, to clarify which document is responsive to each request for production. No later than 8/14/2026, Plaintiff shall revise his initial disclosures and his response to interrogatory 6 to include a computation of his requested damages, specifying each item of damages Plaintiff is claiming, along with the method of computation. The Motion to Supplement filed by Defendant (DN 37) is GRANTED in part. No later than 8/14/2026, Plaintiff shall serve his tax returns from 2019 through the present, if he has not already done so. No later than 8/14/2026, Plaintiff shall also file proof with the Court that he has done so. No later than 11/27/2026, Defendant shall complete all outstanding items of discovery. No later than 8/28/2026, Defendant may file a motion for an award of fees for any correspondence between the Parties for the purpose of procuring Plaintiff's overdue responses in addition to the filing of the Motion to Compel, Motion to Supplement, and the supporting Reply Briefs. For purposes of this Order, the Court considers any document produced after 12/18/2025, to be overdue. cc: Counsel (DJT)
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Perez-Nicot v. Mullin et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus 1 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 8/4/2026.(TJG)cc: COR
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Lyman et al v. Geary County, Kansas, Board of Commissioners et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 67 Dr. Mitchell's Partial Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 69 Detective Odell's Motion to Dismiss; denying 71 Dr. Frazier's Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Eric F. Melgren on 8/4/2026. (ca)
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
GREEN v. SMC CORPORATION OF AMERICA et al
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS - Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Dkts. 23; 24. It is GRANTED as to Ms. Green's § 1983 claims, claims against SMC Japan, and Title VII claims against the individual Defendants; those claims are dismissed with prejudice. Defendants' motion to dismiss is also GRANTED as to the Title VII claims alleging retaliation, sexual harassment and assault, sex-based hostile work environment, and discrimination on the basis of sex and color; those claims are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Defendants' motion to dismiss Ms. Green's race discrimination claims under Title VII and § 1981 is DENIED. The Title VII claim shall proceed against SMC America, and the § 1981 claim shall proceed against SMC America, Kelley Stacy, Donny Nguyen, Christine Castille, Delaney Larson, Brian Spice, Robert Deakin, Angela Sams, and Maddison Mireles. The clerk is directed to terminate SMC Japan as a Defendant on the docket. The clerk is further directed to correct the spelling of Defendant "Maddison Morales" to "Maddison Mireles" and Defendant "Angela Sims" to "Angela Sams." Ms. Green's motion for a jury demand, dkt. 26, is GRANTED to the extent that she preserved her right to a jury trial by demanding one in her amended complaint. Magistrate Judge Baker is asked to hold a conference to address case management. See dkt. 36. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 8/4/2026. (Copy to p...
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
McMahon v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al
ORDER granting 19 Motion to Remand to State Court. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to (1) remand this case back to the State of Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford, from which it was removed, and (2) close this case. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 8/4/26. (ER)
2026-08-04 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)