Legal news archive
Every item ever ingested, 2119 total. Nothing is deleted or overwritten as new items arrive -- this page just paginates further back.
In re the SUPERVISED Estate of Lori Jean Bogren
The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s decision to void a disclaimer executed by a father regarding his interest in a promissory note, holding that the statutory requirement to describe the interest does not mandate a specific value. The court determined that Minnesota Statutes section 524.2-1107(c) allows for a flexible interpretation of "describe," meaning a disclaimer that conveys an idea of an interest’s qualities is sufficient even without a stated monetary amount.
2025-04-28 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
The Petram Group, LLC et al v. Purified Resource Partners
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 11 Motion to Dismiss. Because this order disposes of all claims asserted in the complaint, the Clerk of Court shall close this case. Signed by Judge Leonard T Strand on 4/25/2025. (jag)
2025-04-25 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Casey v. Gillson Trucking Inc et al
ORDER by the Honorable Scott P. Klosterman, United States Magistrate Judge, granting in part and denying in part 50 Motion for Protective Order. (Court Staff, snjs)
2025-04-17 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Henry Lee Brown, Appellant
Henry Lee Brown appealed his conviction for criminal vehicular homicide for leaving the scene of a fatal collision, arguing that the State was required to prove he possessed volitional control over the vehicle at the time of the accident. The Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the automatically applicable statute does not require the State to prove the defendant was operating a motor vehicle at the exact time of the collision, as driving before the incident suffices to meet the legal requirements.
2025-04-16 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Felts v. City of Rochester
Raymond Felts sued the City of Rochester after his wife was killed while crossing a painted crosswalk on North Main Street that lacked warning signage. The City argued that pedestrian warning signs and traffic controls are outside the statutory definition of "highway," which would grant it immunity under RSA 231:92. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire ruled that warning signs, crossing signals, and traffic controls are indeed included within the definition of "highway" and vacated the trial court's order to remand the case.
2025-04-16 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Janice L. Ruiz v. Butts Foods, L.P.
Janice Ruiz sued her joint employers for sexual harassment, retaliation, and other claims, asserting that the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act rendered her arbitration agreement unenforceable. The trial court denied the motion to compel arbitration, concluding that the harassment became sufficiently severe to be a dispute under the act after its effective date. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision to reject arbitration.
2025-04-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Robert Caldwell v. Champlain College Incorporated
Employee Robert Caldwell sued his former employer, Champlain College, for Fair Employment Practices Act disability discrimination and promissory estoppel after being fired due to poor fundraising performance following a diagnosis of kidney disease. The trial court granted Champlain’s motion for summary judgment on those claims, and the Supreme Court has now affirmed that decision.
2025-04-11 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Markey v. Enright
ORDER AND REASONS granting 7 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Eldon E. Fallon on 4/10/2025. (mmm)
2025-04-10 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Shook v. Wilson
In this extraordinary writ proceeding, three out-of-state law firms challenged the exercise of "conspiracy jurisdiction" against them for alleged participation in a tobacco industry fraud, arguing it violated due process. The Supreme Court of New Mexico concluded that conspiracy jurisdiction is constitutionally valid if it focuses on a defendant’s conduct in joining a conspiracy targeting the forum state, though the plaintiffs failed to establish sufficient jurisdictional grounds over the Law Firms in this case. Consequently, the Court ruled that the Law Firms must be dismissed and prohibited the district court from asserting jurisdiction over them.
2025-04-10 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Patrick Dale Burton-Hill v. State of Alaska, Jerald Dwayne Burton Jr. v. State of Alaska, Marcus Djaun Howard v. State of Alaska
Three inmates convicted of riot and criminal mischief following a 2017 disturbance at a Fairbanks prison appealed, and the court reversed their riot convictions because jury instructions misstated the elements of participating with five or more others and tumultuous conduct, finding these errors were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Regarding the criminal mischief charges, the court identified material flaws in the jury instructions regarding the State’s vicarious liability theories and specific intent, but the provided text does not state the court's final ruling on that conviction.
2025-04-04 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Berg v. Greenwalt et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas S Kleeh on 3/27/2025. (cnd)
2025-03-27 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
State v. Cardenas
Cristal Cardenas appeals convictions for first-degree murder, conspiracy, and solicitation, where the Supreme Court reverses the verdict due to an evidentiary error that allowed the State to question her about her child’s positive methamphetamine test. The Court rejected the claims of insufficient evidence and double jeopardy and remanded the case for a new trial on those charges. Although the Court finds the district court also violated the First Amendment by seizing a trial observer’s notes, it does not reverse the convictions on that basis.
2025-03-27 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Lewis v. Kraemer et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND [ECF NO. 5] AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS [ECF NO. 3]. Count III for Battery in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [ECF No. [1-5]] remains. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas S. Kleeh on 3/19/2025. (jb)
2025-03-19 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
USA v. Glenn
ORDER denying 44 MOTION for Order Allowing Defendant Access to Recorded Phone Calls Outside Presence of Counsel as to Charles Glenn (1). So Ordered by Judge Paul J. Barbadoro. (jwb)
2025-03-12 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
State v. Coleman
Corey Coleman, a former building official, was convicted of violating a state public records statute for keeping photographs he took while employed, and he appeals the district court’s denial of a motion to arrest judgment. The Utah Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s decision without deciding whether the statute applies to photographs, noting the State failed to adequately address Coleman’s arguments.
2025-03-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Jennifer Alonso and Irasema Ramos Encinas v. Alpha Phi International, Inc. (Appeal from Tuscaloosa Circuit Court: CV-23-160).
Jennifer Alonso and Irasema Ramos Encinas appeal a circuit court summary judgment in favor of Alpha Phi International, Inc. on a breach-of-contract claim and the striking of their amended answer, counterclaim, and third-party complaint. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals decided to "affirm the circuit court's judgment in part and reverse it in part."
2025-02-28 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Williams Jr. v. City and County of Honolulu et al
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PROPOSED SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND GRANTING LEAVE TO FURTHER AMEND re 22 - Signed by JUDGE MICAH W.J. SMITH on 2/26/2025.For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES the FAC, DENIES leave to file the proposed SAC, and GRANTS Williams leave to file a Second Amended Complaint.If Williams elects to file an amended complaint, he must comply with the following requirements:(1) the deadline to file an amended complaint is March 28, 2025;(2) the amended complaint should be titled "Second Amended Complaint";(3) Williams should not name HPD as a defendant or bring counts under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 or 242, given the Court's grant of Defendants' motion to dismiss those aspects of the FAC with prejudice; and(4) Williams must cure the deficiencies in the proposed SAC that have identified above.Williams is cautioned that failure to timely file an amended complaint that conforms with this Order will result in automatic dismissal of this action. COURT'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE - Steven Williams, Jr. shall be served by First Class Mail to the address of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) on 2/27/2025. Pro Se (Non-Prisoner) Litigants that have consented to receive documents and Notices of Electronic Filings by email, have been served electronically at the e-mail address listed on the (NEF).(jni)
2025-02-26 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Rasmussen v. Burnett et al
RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella on 25 February 2025. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the Motions to Dismiss [#5, #6, #7] be GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Burnett- Johns be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of personal jurisdiction. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Lalicker and Burnett be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Summary Judgment Motion [#18] be DENIED AS MOOT. (cmadr, )
2025-02-25 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
CONNER v. STATE
Claudia C. Conner sued the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission for employment discrimination, adding claims under the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act after her previous claims were dismissed. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss based on material conflicts between the act and the Governmental Tort Claims Act, but the Supreme Court of Oklahoma has reversed that decision. The Court held that no material or irreconcilable conflicts exist between the two statutes regarding notice provisions and remanded the case for further proceedings.
2025-02-25 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Appeal of Estate of Menke
The New Hampshire Compensation Appeals Board denied a widow's request to be added as a dependent to her deceased husband's benefits, finding her request barred by the statute of limitations because it constituted a separate claim. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that adding a dependent to an open claim does not constitute a new claim and that the Workers’ Compensation Law sets no time limit for such a request.
2025-02-19 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Triple R. Dev. LLC v. Stinebaugh
The Court of Appeals reversed prior judgments in an eviction case, concluding that the metropolitan court lacked jurisdiction because a question of title was directly involved. The appellate court remanded the case to the metropolitan court with instructions to dismiss the petition for forcible entry or unlawful detainer.
2025-02-13 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Commonwealth v. Roberto Lopez-Ortiz
Roberto Lopez-Ortiz appeals his 2017 conviction for felony-murder, arguing that the prosecutor exercised a peremptory challenge against a prospective juror based on the juror's Hispanic ethnicity rather than legitimate race-neutral reasons. While the defendant contends the prosecutor's explanations were not race-neutral, the appeals court determined that the judge's finding that the reasons were "genuine" and "adequate" was correct. The court affirmed his judgment, holding that the prosecutor did not err in striking the juror.
2025-02-12 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
USA v. Balles
ORDER DENYING 43 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 41 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS as to Kelly Balles (1). Signed by Judge Mary K. Dimke. (BM, Case Administrator)
2025-02-05 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Sonmez v. WP Company, LLC
Felicia M. Sonmez, a reporter for The Washington Post, sued the newspaper and its editors for alleged violations of the D.C. Human Rights Act, claiming that they unlawfully discriminated against and retaliated against her. The appeals court reversed the dismissal of the count in her complaint charging discrimination but affirmed the dismissal of her hostile work environment and retaliation claims, finding that the allegations did not arise from acts protected by the Anti-SLAPP Act.
2025-01-30 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Garsiyya-Bey v. Family Court of Delaware Inc. et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER: Defendants Dybowski and Smith-Hagans' Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 8) is GRANTED. The claims against Defendants Family Court of Delaware Inc., Judge Joelle Patricia Hitch, and the State of Delaware must likewise be dismissed. The or Procedural Violations and Parental Alienation (D.I. 25) is DENIED. (See Order for complete details). Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Hall on 1/28/2025. ***Copy mailed to Pro Se Plaintiff 1/28/2025*** (ceg)Court shall give Plaintiff 14 days from the issuance of this Order to file a Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (D.I. 12) is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Court Order and Request for Remedy f
2025-01-28 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)
Sandra J. Rusch and Brenda Dockter v. Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium and Alaska National Insurance Company
Workers’ compensation claimants Sandra J. Rusch and Brenda Dockter appeal the Alaska Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission’s fee awards after the Board previously awarded amounts significantly lower than requested. The Supreme Court vacates the Commission’s fee award and remands the case for further consideration, finding that the Commission’s refusal to strike evidence, allowance of all claimed hours, and decision regarding a $450 hourly rate required reversal.
2025-01-17 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In re CVS Health Corporation Securities Litigation
This consolidated securities action involves plaintiffs alleging that CVS Health Corporation’s registration documents from the 2018 Aetna merger contained misrepresentations regarding the long-term care segment and accounting practices. The Supreme Court of Rhode Island affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment dismissing the complaint, though the text provided cuts off before explaining the specific reasoning for this decision.
2025-01-14 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Christopher A. Gore
Christopher A. Gore appeals his conviction for homicide by use of a vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration, arguing that the circuit court erred by denying his motion to suppress blood draw results because an officer read him the Informing the Accused form without probable cause to believe he was operating the vehicle. The Court of Appeals reversed the suppression ruling and affirmed the conviction, finding that officers did have probable cause that Gore was intoxicated, meaning a failure to consent could have resulted in an arrest and license revocation.
2025-01-07 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
State v. Farook
State v. Farook involves an appeal from convictions of felony hit and run and second-degree murder, where the defendant argued there was insufficient evidence for murder, a violation of his speedy trial rights, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court concluded by stating "we affirm in part and reverse and remand in part," though the provided text cuts off before detailing the reasoning for these specific outcomes.
2024-12-31 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Paul Westcott v. MacK Molding, Co., Inc.
The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Mack Molding Co., Inc. after employee Paul Westcott was fired for secretly recording workplace conversations and lying about it. The court ruled that Westcott could not sustain claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, or retaliation under the Fair Employment Practices Act because his recording activities were not protected by the law.
2024-12-20 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In re Stancil
The D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the Board on Professional Responsibility’s recommendation to suspend William S. Stancil for ninety days after finding that he violated multiple professional conduct rules. The court decided the matter on the record alone because Stancil filed insufficient exceptions and failed to submit a brief as directed. Consequently, the court ordered a ninety-day suspension, with reinstatement conditioned on Stancil demonstrating fitness to practice law.
2024-12-19 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In the Matter of Nadeau & Nadeau
This divorce appeal involves the husband challenging the trial court’s property division and denial of alimony, as well as his parents’ challenge to their addition to the case for discovery purposes. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirms the trial court's decisions, rejecting the husband's argument that the settlement agreement was considered in distributing property and finding no reversible error regarding the alimony denial. The text provided does not contain the Court's final determination regarding the dispute over the transferred properties.
2024-12-19 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Dittus v. Black Hills Care & Rehab and Avantara
Krista Dittus appeals an order striking her response to a motion for summary judgment and granting judgment in favor of Avantara North following her claim of wrongful termination. The Supreme Court of South Dakota has dismissed the appeal entirely for lack of jurisdiction because Dittus failed to serve the required notice of appeal on the opposing party through the court’s electronic filing system, an error the court deemed fatal to her arguments.
2024-12-18 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Matta v. Dakota Provisions
Angel Matta sued Dakota Provisions for wrongful termination after being fired following an on-the-job injury and a period of missed work the company attributed to his attendance. The circuit court had granted the employer summary judgment, but the Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed in part and reversed in part.
2024-12-11 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In Re Thomas Velde, Jr. (State of Vermont, Appellant)
The Vermont Supreme Court considered an appeal from a trial court’s decision to vacate Thomas Velde, Jr.’s enhanced life sentence based on his history of prior convictions. The Court determined that Velde waived his right to collaterally attack those predicate convictions by entering a voluntary guilty plea in 2018. Consequently, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded the case for consideration of Velde’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.
2024-12-06 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Sarah Massucco v. James M. Kolodziej and Barbara H. Kolodziej
Plaintiff Sarah Massucco sued defendants James and Barbara Kolodziej for reformation of her deed regarding a parcel of land that the Kolodziews purchased from the Adams heirs and for slander of title after occupying the property. The trial court reformed the deeds to include the disputed parcel and ruled that Mr. Kolodziej slandered Massucco's title, though it ruled in favor of the defendants on the claim for breach of the covenant of title. The defendants now appeal these rulings, contesting the summary judgment, the slander finding, and the award of attorney's fees.
2024-11-27 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Susan Inouye v. Estate of Patricia McHugo
The Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s dismissal of a breach-of-contract claim regarding a mutual-wills agreement, holding that unilateral notice of intent to revoke did not render the contract unenforceable. The court found insufficient evidence that the deceased testator consented to rescind the contract despite having knowledge of the other testator’s plan to change her estate plan. Consequently, the case was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
2024-11-22 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
Bowlding v. Mack
This case involves an appeal by Gregory Bowlding over third-party custody of S.M., the child of a mother who was allegedly killed by the father in front of the child, where Bowlding argued he qualified for custody despite not physically living with the minor. The appellate court affirmed the trial court dismissal by rejecting both of Bowlding's claims, namely his argument that the statute should be read to include "constructive" living and that the statute fails to extinguish the court's common-law jurisdiction.
2024-10-24 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael Benson
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a civilly committed person may waive the right to counsel under statute 253D.20 if deemed competent to enter a knowing and intelligent waiver. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the lower panel for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
2024-10-23 · via CourtListener (Free Law Project)
USA v. Troiano et al
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO REDUCE SENTENCE UNDER THE FIRST STEP ACT (COMPASSIONATE RELEASE) (ECF NO. 383) as to James Troiano (1)- Signed by SENIOR JUDGE HELEN GILLMOR on 10/23/2024. (eta)
2024-10-23 · via GovInfo (US GPO / USCOURTS)