Legal news archive
Every item ever ingested, 2119 total. Nothing is deleted or overwritten as new items arrive -- this page just paginates further back.
Commonwealth v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
The Supreme Judicial Court determined that the Communications Decency Act does not bar claims that Meta Platforms, Inc., engaged in unfair business practices by designing Instagram to induce child addiction and misleading consumers about safety. The court reasoned that the protections of the statute apply only to liability for third-party information, not to the company's own conduct and misrepresentations.
2026-04-10 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Plain v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue
Kowan Plain appealed the Kansas Department of Revenue's denial of a driver's license because he had outstanding out-of-state suspensions and revocations, arguing the agency misapplied the Kansas Driver License Compact's distinction between those penalties. The appellate court affirmed the decision on April 10, 2026, though the provided text cuts off before concluding on the specific issue of whether one can be simultaneously suspended and revoked.
2026-04-10 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Arkansas Highway Police, a Division of the Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department v. Raunona Mays
Officer Raunona Mays sued the Arkansas Highway Police alleging employment discrimination and retaliation, prompting an appeal regarding whether the state’s sovereign immunity barred the suit. The court reversed the lower court's decision on claims under Section 1983, Section 1981, and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act, ruling that these actions must be brought against persons rather than agencies, but it affirmed the lower court regarding Title VII because Mays pleaded sufficient facts to survive the motion to dismiss.
2026-04-09 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Romanyshyn
Richard Romanyshyn appealed his criminal charge for violating a disorderly conduct restraining order, arguing that a prior court decision invalidated the order and that the district court failed to provide sufficient factual findings. The court ruled that the dispute centered on a matter of law, rendering factual findings unnecessary, and affirmed the amended criminal judgment.
2026-04-09 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
CHABOT (WACEY) v. STATE (CRIMINAL)
Wacey Chabot appealed his convictions for attempted murder and battery, arguing that the district court wrongly prevented him from introducing evidence of the victim's prior stabbings to support a self-defense claim. The Nevada Supreme Court agreed that the evidence exclusion was an error but determined it was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, ultimately affirming Chabot’s convictions.
2026-04-09 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Charles Bunning v. Ernest Romero
Charles Bunning sued Ernest Romero for failing to yield the right of way after a collision, but the district court concluded both drivers breached their mutual duties and that Bunning was over fifty percent at fault under Wyoming’s comparative fault statute. The trial court barred Bunning from recovering any damages due to his degree of fault, though the provided text cuts off before the appellate court’s decision is stated.
2026-04-09 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Carol Angela Banks and David Banks v. Residence Inn by Marriott
This case involves an appeal of a summary judgment dismissal of a personal injury suit against a Residence Inn based on a malfunctioning air conditioning unit that allegedly caused the plaintiff to develop asthma. The trial court ruled against the plaintiffs because they failed to present competent evidence of the alleged defect, notice of the defect, or causation, dismissing the case with prejudice. The provided opinion text does not contain the appellate court's final ruling on the appeal, as it cuts off before the court addresses the arguments.
2026-04-08 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Hanke v. Electric Boat Corp.
Stuart Hanke appealed a trial court judgment granting summary judgment to Electric Boat Corporation on his claims of disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation. The court affirmed the decision, holding that there was no material issue regarding Hanke’s fitness to perform his essential job functions and that he failed to initiate the required process to request reasonable accommodation.
2026-04-07 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Earp v. Federal Express Corporation
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT (ECF NO. 16). The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to FILE SEPARATELY Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas S Kleeh on 4/7/2026. (dk)
2026-04-07 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Mark Walsh v. Jennifer Walsh
Mark Walsh appealed the Family Court’s ancillary divorce rulings, specifically its order to sell the marital home, divide assets including retirement accounts, and award permanent alimony. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Family Court’s judgment, finding it did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance to the trial, ordering the property sale because Ex-Husband refused to buy out Ex-Wife’s share, and crediting Ex-Wife’s retirement account against Ex-Husband’s share.
2026-04-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
BLAIS v. MILLS et al
ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS granting in part and denying in part 9 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting 15 Motion to Dismiss By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (CCS)
2026-04-03 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
USA v. Merino Lopez
OPINION AND ORDER denying 60 Motion to Suppress Evidence as to Jose Merino-Lopez (1). Signed by Chief District Judge Christina Reiss on 4/3/2026. (law)
2026-04-03 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
In the Matter of Whitehead & Whitehead
This case involves a divorce dispute where the husband challenged the division of Canadian structured settlement annuities and the denial of his alimony request. The court ruled that New Hampshire law properly applied to classify the annuity payments as marital property, but it vacated the denial of alimony for failing to account for the husband’s health needs and earning capacity, remanding the case for further proceedings.
2026-04-02 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Washburn v. C6-Zero, LLC et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 198 Motion to Set Aside Default Entry and 203 Partial Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Counts I through VI and Counts VIII through XI against Defendant Lavigne are hereby dismissed. This case shall proceed against Lavigne on Count VII only. Signed by Judge Leonard T Strand on 4/2/2026. (jag)
2026-04-02 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Maya Torres v. Baker et al
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Matthew J. Maddox on 3/17/2026. (heps, Deputy Clerk)
2026-04-01 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Tackett v. Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center et al
ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Defendant Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center's Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 172 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant Kavitha Chaganur's Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 175 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 179 is DENIED. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Rice. (SG, Case Administrator)
2026-04-01 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
State v. Spry
Richard and Susan Spry were indicted and convicted by a jury of grand theft and conspiracy for handling a deceased uncle’s finances by transferring his funds from a joint bank account to their personal account in Texas. Following appeal, the court ruled to reverse the convictions and remand the case for further proceedings.
2026-04-01 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Roger D. Silk v. Baron Bond et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Adam B Abelson on 3/31/2026. (dass, Deputy Clerk)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
BLANTON v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, [Filing No. 57], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendants' Motion, [Filing No. 57], is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Vanihel, Vanvleet, Brock, Mills, and Andis and DENIED as to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Russell and Henderson, and the state law claims against all Defendants. The Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Russell and Henderson and Plaintiff's state law claims will be resolved by settlement or trial. (SEE ORDER.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia on 3/31/26. (NAD)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Scanlan v. State Actors and Officials
ally at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF).FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS AND DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT re 3, 12 - Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER on 3/31/2026. Based on the foregoing, the Court FINDS that Plaintiff is unable to pay the required fees and RECOMMENDS that the district court GRANT the IFP Application. However, the Court FINDS that the Complaint fails to state a claim and RECOMMENDS that the FAC be DISMISSED without prejudice with leave to amend. (eta)COURT'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Dana Scanlan has been served electronically to the email address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) on March 31, 2026. Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronic
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Howard v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC et al
ORDER granting ECF No. 54 Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons described in the attached ruling, Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The Court does not grant Plaintiff leave to amend, given the failure to respond to the motion to dismiss and the fact that Plaintiff has not requested leave to amend. See Murphy Med. Assocs., LLC v. Yale Univ., 120 F.4th 1107, 1114 (2d Cir. 2024) (affirming district court's decision not to grant leave to amend, where the plaintiff did not request it). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment for the remaining Defendants and close this case. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 3/31/2026. (Glover, S)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Lieberenz v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Saguache, Colorado et al
ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys Fees and Prejudgment Interest [Doc. 335] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Attorney's fees in the amount of $1,165,478.95 are AWARDED to Plaintiff Sarah Lieberenz, as personal representative of the Estate of Jackson Maes, and against Defendant Kenneth Wilson, in his individual and supervisory capacity, and Defendant Dan Warwick, in his official capacity, with no prejudgment interest. Plaintiff's Motion for Review of Clerk's Taxation of Macias' Bill of Costs [Doc. 346] is DENIED. By Judge Nina Y. Wang on 3/21/2026. Text Only Entry (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit, # (2) Exhibit, # (3) Exhibit)(nywlc8, )
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Scott v. HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 66). Defendants' Motions for Protective Orders (ECF Nos. 78, 79) seeking to stay discovering pending a ruling on the subject motion are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas S Kleeh on 03/31/2026. (dk)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Miles et al v. Clackamas County et al
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons stated, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs' motions for summary judgment against the County Defendants (ECF No. 121), Trooper Cole (ECF No. 122), and Officer Mawson (ECF No. 123), GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the County Defendants' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 159), DENIES Officer Mawson's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 186), and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Trooper Cole's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 189). The Court DISMISSES Plaintiff D.M.M. and the Doe Defendants. The Court also GRANTS Plaintiffs' unopposed motion to unseal Exhibits Y, Z, and AA (ECF No. 127) and directs the Clerk to unseal Attachment 1 to the Joint Declaration of Mohammad Hamoudi (ECF No. 125-1); and DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion for Imposition of Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence Pursuant to Rule 37(e) (ECF No. 140) with leave to propose an adverse inference jury instruction in Plaintiffs' proposed jury instructions pursuant to the Court's Civil Trial Management Order and with leave for Deputy Ferguson to oppose the proposed jury instruction. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on March 31, 2026 by Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman. (gw)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Perez v. New Mexico Children Youth and Families Department
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL by District Judge David H. Urias. (fs) Modified as to Document Type on 4/13/2026 (kw).
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Brunstad v. Brunstad
///ORDER re: 39 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. The defendant's motion to dismiss (document no. 39) is denied as to Counts Two, Four, and Seven, denied without prejudice as to Counts One and Six, granted in part and denied in part as to Counts Three and Five, and granted as to Count Eight. So Ordered by Chief District Judge Samantha D. Elliott.(vln)
2026-03-31 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
HOLT v. CENTURION HEALTH et al
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT - This case cannot proceed as presented. Mr. Holt cannot represent the interests of another as a non-attorney. Therefore, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Final judgment shall now issue. (See Order.) Signed by District Judge Justin R. Olson on 3/30/2026. Copy to Plaintiff via US mail. (JSR)
2026-03-30 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Givens v. Delia
N PART. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Sharon L. Gleason on 3/30/2026. (JDS, COURT STAFF)ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment at Docket 96 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment at Docket 120 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED I
2026-03-30 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Kawleski v. USA
ORDER that Alexander W. Kawleski's motions for an extension of time, Dkt. 2, and to compel BOP to produce supporting documentation, Dkt. 3, are denied as unnecessary. Kawleski's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Dkt. 1, is denied without prejudice. Kawleski may have until April 13 to file an amended motion. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 3/30/2026. (rks),(ps)
2026-03-30 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
In re A.E.
The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s order requiring the Department of Human Services to pay for transportation costs for a special needs child’s periodic visitation with his grandparents after permanency was established. The court held that circuit courts lack explicit statutory authority to impose financial obligations on the DHS for such visitation-related expenses following the conclusion of an abuse and neglect proceeding.
2026-03-27 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Glassie v. Doucette et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : In summary, for these reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motions for Summary Judgment of Defendants John Taft (ECF No. 168) and Thomas Glassie (ECF No. 172). Defendant Paul Doucettes Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 176) is GRANTED with respect to Counts I, II, IV, V, VI, and VII of the Complaint but DEFERRED with respect to Count III. Georgia's Request for Judicial Notice and Supplemental Briefing (ECF No. 198) is GRANTED. The remaining parties are ordered to provide supplemental briefing within 45 days of this Order, specifically regarding (1) whether the Court should dismiss Count III under the Colorado River doctrine; (2) the preclusive effect, if any, of the Newport Superior Courts decision; and (3) whether summary judgment is otherwise appropriate with respect to Count III. So Ordered by District Judge Mary S. McElroy on 3/27/2026. (Potter, Carrie)
2026-03-27 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
MARSH v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' partial motion to dismiss, Dkt. 17, is GRANTED. See document for details. Signed by Judge Randolph D. Moss on 3/26/2026. (lcrdm3)
2026-03-26 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Hankins v. Bryant et al
ORDER ADOPTING 65 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; granting in part and denying in part 50 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by District Judge Susan O Hickey on March 26, 2026. (tls)
2026-03-26 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Stanley v. Stanley
OPINION AND ORDER granting 1 Petition to Return the Child; PS shall be returned to Australia for an Australian court to decide issued related to PS's custody and in no event no more than 30 days from day of this Opinion and Order; respondent shall file a plan for safe return of PS by 4/3/2026 at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Chief District Judge Christina Reiss on 3/26/2026. (law)
2026-03-26 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Jordan v. Pfizer Inc.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 2, 14; objections to R&R due within 14 days; signed by Magistrate Judge Maarten Vermaat (Magistrate Judge Maarten Vermaat, rbk)
2026-03-25 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
McDonald v. State of Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection et al
ORDER. For the reasons stated in the attached Order, the Motion to Dismiss 80 and Motion to Dismiss 81 are GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Kari A. Dooley on 3/24/2026. (Lacina, A)
2026-03-24 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Legacy Probate International Inc v. Does 1-10
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 8 Ex Parte Motion to Expedite Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 03/23/2026. (sg)
2026-03-23 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Phillip Duke v. Walmart, Inc., and Qeon Gray
Phillip Duke appeals a Pike Circuit Court summary judgment in favor of Walmart and its employee Qeon Gray after Duke was struck by a delivery truck while jogging off-duty at a distribution center. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the summary judgment, reviewing whether the exclusive remedy provisions of the Alabama Workers' Compensation Act barred Duke's tort claims. While Duke argues the Act does not apply to his off-duty status, the trial court concluded that his acceptance of benefits with counsel estopped him from pursuing subsequent remedies.
2026-03-20 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Talley v. Earth Fare 2020, Inc.
James Talley appealed a North Carolina Business Court order that held he was not an employee of Earth Fare because he proposed an independent deal seeking equity rather than an expansion of his current job. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision, upholding the finding that the Wage and Hour Act did not apply to his capital-raising efforts while confirming his six-figure verdict for unjust enrichment.
2026-03-20 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Union Carbide Corporation v. Paul Williams, Individually
This case concerns the Estate of Vickie Williams suing manufacturers Union Carbide and Schneider Electric USA (formerly Square D) regarding alleged "take-home" asbestos exposure tied to her father's work clothes. The Supreme Court of Kentucky affirmed the lower court and ruled that duty cannot be negated via summary judgment when foreseeability depends on disputed facts that must be viewed in the plaintiff's favor. Additionally, the court held that the Workers’ Compensation Act’s exclusivity provision does not bar the suit because the injury stemmed from non-occupational household contact rather than employment-related injury.
2026-03-19 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)