Background: The Supreme Judicial Court upheld dismissal of Marshfield's challenge to the MBTA Communities Act, rejecting the town's attempt to avoid the statute's multifamily-zoning requirement. Enacted in 2021 to address Massachusetts's housing shortage, General Laws chapter 40A, section 3A requires municipalities served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to maintain at least one district of reasonable…
Held: The SJC first held that the complaint did not plausibly allege an unfunded mandate. Section 27C covers mandatory direct service or cost obligations exceeding incidental local administrative expenses. Marshfield alleged costs for evaluating and drafting zoning proposals and presenting them at town meetings, but it did not describe the nature, amount, or necessity of those expenses. The pleading therefore did…
Background: Shurat HaDin and 31 other petitioners sought an order requiring state authorities to explain why victims of the October 7, 2023 attacks and their families were not receiving the full rights afforded to crime victims under Israel’s Rights of Victims of Crime Law, 2001. They also sought access to information and involvement in proceedings concerning…
Held: The Court removed the petition because enactment of the 2026 law had materially changed the factual and, especially, the legal foundation on which the petition had been filed. The legislature had directly addressed the subject of victims’ rights in the anticipated October 7 prosecutions and had created a new framework that primarily operates after an indictment is filed and during…
Background: James F. Delgado was charged with three felonies after selling methamphetamine to a confidential informant on three occasions. Under a plea agreement, he pleaded no contest to one Class II felony count of distributing a controlled substance, waived the opportunity to seek a deferred judgment, and agreed to what the parties described on the record…
Held: The Nebraska Supreme Court declined the State’s request to enforce the appeal waiver. Because the record established only that the plea agreement included a “waiver of appeal,” without identifying the rights waived or the waiver’s intended scope, the State did not carry its burden to show clearly and unambiguously that Delgado’s appellate claims fell within the waiver. The court emphasized…
Background: C, a 12-year-old British child, had lived with her British parents in Portugal, where long-running welfare proceedings addressed parental conflict, allegations of domestic abuse, school attendance and C’s relationship with each parent. After the mother retained C in England following a Christmas 2024 visit, the High Court ordered C’s return to Portugal in May 2025.…
Held: Michael Jones KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, rejected both defences and ordered C’s summary return to Portugal. C was habitually resident there, her removal was wrongful, and the Portuguese courts remained seised of her long-term welfare. The judge held that complaints about the fairness of the Portuguese proceedings had to be pursued in Portugal and did not…
Background: Perigus Energy Ireland Midco Limited applied to build a solar farm with a 40-year operational life across five parcels of land in County Laois. Tom and Claire Milner objected during the planning process, raising concerns that included drinking-water impacts, environmental effects and the development’s effect on their home. Laois County Council granted permission subject to…
Held: Humphreys J. dismissed the proceedings. The Court held that a solar farm is not a project listed under the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive and therefore is not an EIA project. The Commission’s decision to conduct a precautionary EIA screening did not make the Directive applicable, so the applicants’ complaints about alleged defects in that screening failed at the outset.
Background: Zackary Matthew Maas entered Gabriel Wagoner’s basement apartment during the early morning after repeatedly threatening Wagoner over allegedly stolen property. Maas was armed, pointed his gun at Wagoner, and later shot Wagoner in the back as the men moved up a narrow stairway. Wagoner died about a month later from complications of the gunshot wound.
Held: The Montana Supreme Court affirmed. It held that Wagoner’s statements at the scene, in the ambulance, and at the first hospital were nontestimonial because they were made while the shooter remained at large and officers were responding to an ongoing emergency. Wagoner’s statements to his brothers also were nontestimonial personal communications. His later statements to Detective Webster from a Seattle…
Background: Matthew Abraham, a University of Arizona professor, made public-records requests between 2018 and 2020 concerning university hiring and appointment practices, including survey data and search-process materials. The University produced some materials, withheld or redacted others, and declined to provide an audio recording of a Committee of Eleven meeting, although it offered Abraham an opportunity to…
Held: The Arizona Supreme Court reversed and remanded. It held that a trial court must review de novo both an agency's asserted legal basis for withholding records and its application of an exemption to particular documents. The reviewing court must independently apply the disclosure balancing test, subject to the strong presumption favoring public access; in camera review remains available where appropriate.
Background: Quintin Koger Kidd and Susan Croutwater submitted an initiative petition proposing a new chapter of Wilmington’s zoning code to regulate data centers and data-center campuses. The proposed ordinance established standards governing matters including noise, lighting, emissions, generator testing, water use and discharge, and heat generation.
Held: The Supreme Court of Ohio denied the writ. Applying its prior decisions, the court held that the board properly determined that the proposed ordinance fell outside the municipal initiative power because municipalities lack authority to create new causes of action.
Background: M. [R], who was riding a moped, was injured in a July 23, 2008 traffic accident involving a vehicle insured by Generali IARD. An initial nonjudicial medical examination determined that his condition had stabilized on January 18, 2010. Generali made compensation offers on December 15, 2011 and March 11, 2014, both of which M. [R]…
Held: The Court of Cassation rejected the argument that the compensation offers interrupted prescription. Because Article L. 211-9 of the Insurance Code legally requires an insurer to make an offer to a person suffering bodily injury, making such an offer does not by itself expressly or implicitly acknowledge the victim's right to compensation. That remains true when the offer does not…
Background: The Office of Lawyer Regulation charged Patrick J. Rupich with eight counts of misconduct arising from his representations of three criminal-defense clients. Two clients, A.G. and M.M., paid $3,000 and $10,000 advanced flat fees, respectively. After each fired Rupich before motions, a plea, sentencing, or dismissal, he did not promptly provide a final accounting, refund…
Held: The Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed the two charges alleging unreasonable fees under SCR 20:1.5(a). Although Rupich told the OLR that his work, calculated at an hourly rate, exceeded the clients' flat fees, the record contained no evidence that he billed, demanded, or collected any amount above the agreed flat fees. An accounting supplied to the OLR was not, on this…
Background: This representative proceeding concerns strip searches conducted by New South Wales Police at music festivals between 2016 and 2022. The lead plaintiff, Raya Meredith, was strip searched at Splendour in the Grass 2018. Her claim, including damages, was determined in Meredith v State of New South Wales (No 5) [2025] NSWSC 1133; an appeal from…
Held: Cavanagh J dismissed the motion. Although the responses were not pleadings within the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, the Court had inherent and statutory power to strike them out if they constituted an abuse of process. That power, however, is exceptional and requires the plaintiff to show that the proposed defence is so untenable that it cannot succeed.
Background: Lawrence Turno, the petitioner and defendant-appellant, sought certiorari review from the Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi following proceedings in the Intermediate Court of Appeals, CAAP-24-0000451, and Circuit Court case No. 2CPC-23-0000168.
Held: Exercising its discretion under Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 602-59(a), the Supreme Court accepted Turno’s application for a writ of certiorari.