Background: Andrew Clark ran a red light and struck Nadia Marin’s vehicle. Marin sustained multiple serious injuries, including chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in her right hand — a neurological pain condition diagnosed through process of elimination after several surgeries. She sued Andrew Clark for negligence and his mother, Tracy Clark, for negligent entrustment of the…
Held: Capriati overruled; contingency fees are incurred as work is performed. Writing for a unanimous en banc court, Justice Stiglich reversed the attorney fee award and overruled Capriati on the key point. NRCP 68 authorizes an award of reasonable attorney fees “actually incurred by the offeror from the time of the offer.” Capriati reasoned that a contingency fee does not “vest”…
Background: This dispute arose from Michael Gibson's third lawsuit against members of his own family over the Gibson Family Limited Partnership (GFLP), established by his mother Delores in 2002 to manage roughly 2,060 acres of South Dakota farmland. As GFLP's sole general partner, Delores had previously defeated two earlier suits brought by Michael — one in…
Held: The circuit court dismissed Michael's case with prejudice as a sanction under SDCL 15-6-41(b), which authorizes involuntary dismissal for failure to comply with the rules of civil procedure in Chapter 15-6. It found that Sortland had "blatantly and in bad faith" disregarded Rule 45, that his arguments at the hearing were cavalier and unremorseful, and that dismissal was the only…
Background: One afternoon, D.W. was standing with six others near a breezeway at the Geraldine apartment complex in Southeast Washington, D.C. Four Metropolitan Police Department officers on routine patrol—not responding to any specific report—stopped their cruiser at the entrance of a long walkway leading to the complex. Two uniformed officers stepped onto the walkway approximately 100…
Held: The en banc court affirmed D.W.'s convictions, holding that officers possessed the requisite reasonable articulable suspicion when Officer Ewing seized D.W. Writing for a 6-1 majority (with one judge concurring in the judgment only), Judge Deahl identified three factors that, taken together under the totality of the circumstances, justified the seizure. The first and most significant was D.W.'s immediate, unprovoked…
Background: Two men domiciled in Canada entered into a surrogacy agreement with a woman in Canada in 2010. Following that arrangement, a child was born on February 28, 2011, in Ontario, conceived using sperm from one intended parent and eggs from a third-party donor. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued an order on March 29,…
Held: The Court of Cassation, sitting in full assembly, reaffirmed that France's prohibition on surrogacy is a core principle of French public policy, rooted in protecting human dignity against servitude and degradation. However, the Court held that this prohibition cannot be applied in isolation when evaluating exequatur for a foreign surrogacy filiation judgment. France's public policy also encompasses rights guaranteed by…
Background: The Plaintiffs are six entities associated with the Congregation of the Edmund Rice Christian Brothers, which operated schools across Australia for decades. The entities face catastrophic liability from child sexual abuse claims: the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse identified 1,015 claims between 1980 and 2015, with 763 resulting in redress payments.…
Held: Nixon J granted the Moratorium Order sought by the Plaintiffs, effective upon the Court's order on 2 July 2026. The order restrains "all further proceedings in any action or civil proceeding (whether or not such proceedings have been commenced, and including enforcement of any judgment) against one or more of the Plaintiffs" until the earlier of: (1) the date the…
Background: Jacqueline Harris died from an acute pulmonary embolism approximately 30 days after undergoing a total knee replacement performed by orthopedic surgeon Dr. Jack Lennox. Harris's estate sued Lennox, his employer Tri County Orthopedics, and Beaumont Hospital, alleging that Lennox's failure to prescribe a prescription-strength anticoagulant constituted malpractice causing her death. The complaint was supported by…
Held: In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Zahra, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the Dean factors are the wrong standard for evaluating a motion to amend a witness list. The governing standard is the "good cause" requirement of MCR 2.401(I)(2), which states that a court may bar an unlisted witness from testifying "except upon good cause shown." The Dean…
Background: In the early morning hours of September 12, 2021, Honolulu Police Department officers responded to a noise complaint at Maili Beach Park and observed a white Honda leave the area. Officer Joshua Nahulu allegedly led a vehicle pursuit of the Honda along Farrington Highway in Makaha. The Honda eventually skidded off the road, struck a…
Held: On the vagueness issue, the court first held that Nahulu lacked standing to mount a facial challenge to HRS § 291C-12(a) because the statute does not implicate free speech rights or otherwise burden a substantial amount of constitutionally protected conduct. A facial challenge is available only when the statute chills expression or reaches significant constitutional freedoms; absent those factors, a…
Background: Tobias Gay held licenses to practice both architecture and professional engineering in Nebraska. When his continuing education compliance was selected for a random audit, Gay submitted a log claiming completion of 19 web-based courses along with unsigned certificates of completion. The Board's investigation revealed that Gay had not attended courses on several of the reported…
Held: The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, rejecting all four of Gay's assignments of error. On the procedural preservation issue, the court clarified that Neb. Ct. R. § 6-1518(B)'s statement-of-errors requirement applies only to appeals from county court to district court — not to APA judicial-review proceedings. Under § 84-917(2)(b)(vi), a petitioner must include all grounds for relief in the petition for…
Background: Richard Wallace Rhodes was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1984 killing of Karen Nieradka, whose strangled body was discovered in construction debris in St. Petersburg, Florida. At trial, the State's case rested heavily on the testimony of several jailhouse informants — including Edward Cottrell and Harvey Duranseau — who claimed…
Held: The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of all four claims. On the Brady claim, the court deferred to the postconviction court's credibility findings — supported by competent, substantial evidence — that Cottrell and Duranseau were not believable witnesses, and therefore Rhodes failed to establish that any exculpatory or impeaching evidence had been suppressed. The court further held that even…
Background: David L. Miller, a Wichita attorney admitted to the Kansas bar in October 2016, simultaneously represented two clients whose interests were potentially intertwined in a dangerous way. In January 2022, D.S. retained Miller on criminal drug charges arising from a search of his home, which had been supported by a probable cause affidavit referencing a…
Held: The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the hearing panel's recommended discipline of published censure, but agreed with the ODA on one disputed point: Miller's violation of KRPC 1.6 was committed knowingly, not merely negligently. The court found that Miller, who was aware of the potential conflict and understood the sensitivity of G.M.'s status as a confidential informant, made a knowing choice…
Background: In 2014, the New Jersey Legislature simultaneously enacted two related statutory provisions: a requirement that municipal police vehicles acquired after March 1, 2015 and primarily used for traffic stops be equipped with mobile video recording systems (MVRS), N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118.1, and an amendment to the DWI statute, N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(i), raising the DWI surcharge by $25 —…
Held: Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Noriega held that the Council on Local Mandates is subject to judicial review when it acts outside the scope of its constitutional authority, and that the Council did so here. The Court reasoned that the constitutional and statutory provisions shielding Council decisions from judicial review as "political determinations" — Article VIII, Section 2, Paragraph…
Background: Dublin City Council adopted a rezoning motion in November 2022 as part of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022–2028. Pat O'Donnell and Company ("the applicant") had submitted a proposal concerning the rezoning through its planning agent, Doyle Kent Ltd. Section 12(8)(b)(i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 required the Chief Executive to list the…
Held: The Supreme Court allowed Dublin City Council's appeal and upheld the rezoning decision. Justice Hogan, with whom the other judges agreed, held that listing the applicant's planning agent constituted adequate compliance with the statutory requirement. The Court reasoned that the applicant had retained Doyle Kent Ltd. as its agent and was fully aware of the submission, so the applicant could…