Background: Sandra Khalil brought a Philadelphia civil action against Mary Jane Home Enrichment Center and related defendants. During the litigation, Khalil’s attorney moved to withdraw. The Court of Common Pleas granted that request on April 18, 2023. Khalil did not immediately appeal. Instead, on May 17 she asked the trial court to reconsider the withdrawal order,…
Held: In a unanimous opinion by Justice Donohue, the Supreme Court affirmed. A party who chooses to appeal a collateral order immediately must file the notice within 30 days of that order. Filing a reconsideration motion does not stop, restart, or extend the appeal period, and a later order denying reconsideration does not supply a new appealable event. Only a timely…
Background: Donyelle Michael Black was convicted after a 1988 bench trial of first-degree felony murder, armed robbery, and felony-firearm for offenses committed when he was 15. He received life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for felony murder. After the U.S. Supreme Court held that mandatory juvenile life-without-parole sentences violate the Eighth Amendment and made that…
Held: In a unanimous opinion by Justice Noah P. Hood, the Michigan Supreme Court held that when a defendant indicates an intent to present expert psychological evidence based on an examination at a Miller hearing, the trial court may require the defendant to undergo a similar examination by a prosecution expert. That condition does not violate the federal or Michigan constitutional…
Background: Hamad built a two-story structure containing 300 square meters on each floor, another 50-square-meter structure, and a concrete surface on land in the village of Qalandiya, all without a building permit. Authorities issued a stop-work order on August 30, 2022, followed by a final stop-work and demolition order on September 21, 2022. Hamad nevertheless continued…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal under the procedural rule permitting rejection without a full appellate hearing. Justice Alex Stein, writing for the panel, agreed that Hamad’s lack of clean hands independently required dismissal. The Court reiterated that judicial relief is unavailable to a person who takes the law into his own hands, particularly one who follows a “build…
Background: The East Orange Educational Support Professionals’ Association represents custodians employed by the East Orange Board of Education. Their collective bargaining agreement provided that custodians who worked on a day when schools were closed for an emergency would receive their regular pay plus an additional one-and-a-half times their salary.
Held: The Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division. It held that the arbitration award directly contradicted the express mandate of N.J.S.A. 18A:7F-9(e)(1) and therefore was not “reasonably debatable,” the deferential standard ordinarily governing judicial review of public-sector arbitration awards.
Background: John Walsh sought civil legal aid to pursue claims arising from events at a DePaul Ireland hostel, where he had been accommodated. After new residence rules required residents to stay at the hostel for all but three nights each month, Walsh objected that the restriction interfered with his liberty. In August 2024, he was accused…
Held: Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty refused leave to apply for judicial review on every ground. Applying the test in G v DPP, the Court held that Walsh had shown no prospect of success. The Board’s refusal was supported by a detailed counsel’s opinion and was neither irrational nor unfair. The hostel’s minimum-residence condition was not a total restraint on Walsh’s…
Background: Rosalie Fransisca Luxton sought a family provision order from the estate of her husband, John Robert Luxton, who died in March 2024 after they had been a couple for approximately 32 years. The principal asset was John’s half share in their marital home, which the couple owned as tenants in common in equal shares. His…
Held: Bennett J held that the will did not make adequate provision for Rosalie’s proper maintenance or advancement in life under s 59 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW). The short right of residence and limited residual benefit did not adequately provide secure long-term accommodation or sufficient resources for lifestyle expenses and contingencies. The Court also found that John had not…
Background: Janice Graham was killed and Mark Graham was injured when Michael Howell lost control of his vehicle on an icy and slushy U.S. Highway 93, crossed the centerline, and struck the Grahams’ vehicle. Michael’s blood tested positive for marijuana at roughly three times the legal limit for operating a vehicle, and he later was convicted…
Held: The Montana Supreme Court affirmed. On negligent entrustment, the Court held that liability requires the defendant to possess a superior or exclusive legal right to control the property. Because Michael and Victoria jointly owned the vehicle, Michael’s authority to use it arose from his own ownership rather than Victoria’s consent. Victoria therefore could not “supply” the vehicle to him or…
Background: Simon Gibbons pursued a claim for approximately £3.4 million arising from agreements connected with a Gravity-branded indoor entertainment park in Warrington. He alleged that Gravity Franchise Limited, Gravity Fitness (Warrington) Limited and director Paul Harvey Jenkinson made five misrepresentations concerning the project’s maximum cost, projected profitability, the competence of a recommended contractor, a contribution and…
Held: His Honour Judge Richard Carter granted the defendants’ applications, holding that Gibbons’s claims had no real prospect of success and that the amended particulars should also be struck out. The pleaded fraud case identified no adequate primary facts supporting an inference of dishonesty. Several alleged representations were insufficiently specified, amounted at most to forecasts or opinions, were inconsistent with the…
Background: ARLO 67, LLC brought a partition action involving Brooklyn real property. The New York Attorney General intervened because her office was investigating whether ARLO had obtained an ownership interest through deed theft—the use of fraud, forgery, or other illegal means to transfer real estate without the true owner’s informed consent. The Legislature recently added Real…
Held: The Second Department reversed and reinstated the stay. It held that the good-faith showing is deliberately modest: the agency need not establish fraud, probable cause, or even facts that would sustain a complaint. Its investigative approaches must bear a reasonable relationship to the suspected deed theft and the public purpose of the inquiry, and the inquiry cannot be obviously futile…
Background: The Indiana Court of Appeals held that a juvenile court must dismiss a child-in-need-of-services case without prejudice when it fails to complete the dispositional hearing within 30 days of the CHINS finding, a parent moves to dismiss after the deadline and before disposition, and no timely continuance extended the deadline. The decision reverses three Marion…
Held: Chief Judge Dana J. Tavitas, writing for a unanimous panel, concluded that the statutory clock began with the court’s oral CHINS finding on October 17—not with the written order issued October 30. The later order merely memorialized the adjudication already made in court. Measuring from October 17, the November 21 dispositional hearing was untimely, and the parents properly invoked the…
Background: Benjamin Forrest Carter, then incarcerated in the Restrictive Housing Unit at Sussex State Prison, alleged that he endured conditions resembling those previously held unconstitutional at the facility and that the conditions were especially harmful because of his serious mental illnesses. He filed informal complaints and grievances seeking reclassification and transfer into reentry programming.
Held: The Fourth Circuit vacated the judgment. It held that when a prisoner first adds a new claim through an amended complaint after exhausting available administrative remedies for that claim, the PLRA does not bar the claim. Because Carter completed the grievance process before asserting his First Amendment claims in the amended complaint, those claims were properly exhausted. The court expressly…
Background: Carlos Enrique Luna Lam and Iglesia Cristiana Casa de Dios sued Univision Communications, Inc., related Univision entities, and reporter Gerardo Reyes for defamation. In 2022, the circuit court denied Univision’s motion to dismiss the operative complaint under Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute. At the time, that nonfinal ruling was not immediately appealable, and the Third District dismissed…
Held: The Third District dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Rule 9.130(a)(3)(J) authorizes an interlocutory appeal from an order that denies an Anti-SLAPP motion, but the circuit court’s order struck Univision’s motion without adjudicating its merits. Because an order striking a motion under Rule 2.515 is not among the appealable nonfinal orders listed in Rule 9.130, the appellate court lacked…