Daily Case Law
Thursday, September 24, 2026 · 12 decisions worth your morning coffee
Massachusetts

Commonwealth v. Williams — SJC vacates murder conviction over gunshot-residue evidence

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Elizabeth N. Dewar (appointment info not available) · 2026-09-22appellate procedureconstitutionalcriminal

Background: The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court vacated Keith Williams's first-degree murder conviction and three related convictions because prosecutors used scientifically negative gunshot-residue tests as affirmative proof that he was the shooter. Justice Elizabeth N. Dewar wrote for the court. The ruling turns on a practical evidentiary limit: when the Commonwealth's own expert says a laboratory result…

Held: The SJC held that the subthreshold particle evidence should not have been admitted to show that Williams, rather than either companion, fired the gun. Massachusetts evidence law permits relevant expert evidence only when the underlying theory or methodology is reliable for the purpose for which it is offered. The court did not announce that below-threshold scientific observations are categorically inadmissible.…

Read the full analysis →

Florida

Beasley v. State — Florida Supreme Court upheld denial of postconviction relief and refused to stay execution

Florida Supreme Court · Couriel, C.J.; Muñiz, J.; Grosshans, J.; Francis, J.; Barrios, J.; Tanenbaum, J.; Labarga, J. (concurring in result) · 2026-09-22civil procedurecriminal

Background: Curtis W. Beasley was convicted of the first-degree murder of Carolyn Monfort, whom the evidence showed he fatally beat before stealing money and her car. A jury recommended death by a 10-2 vote, and the trial court imposed a death sentence after finding that Beasley committed the murder during a robbery and for financial gain…

Held: The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the summary denial of postconviction relief. It held that age and asserted cognitive decline did not provide an Eighth Amendment exemption from execution where Beasley did not claim intellectual disability or incompetence to be executed. Under Florida’s constitutional conformity clause, the court said it could not recognize an age-based protection that the U.S. Supreme Court…

Read the full analysis →

United Kingdom

Cox v DPP — High Court upheld public-nudity conviction under the Public Order Act

High Court (Administrative Court) · Dame Victoria Sharp, P. (Queen Elizabeth II (on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor), 2009) · 2026-09-23criminal

Background: Neil Cox, a naturist, walked completely naked along Middlewood Way near Macclesfield at about 6:30 a.m. He chose what he considered a quiet route while waiting for a business to open, but knew that he might encounter other people and that some people he had encountered while naked in the past had reacted with anger,…

Held: The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal. It held that the Crown Court was entitled to characterize Cox’s conduct as disorderly in the ordinary meaning of that term. Public nudity is not invariably disorderly, but the assessment is fact-sensitive. Here, Cox walked naked on an isolated path used by people travelling alone to work, where those encountering him had no warning…

Read the full analysis →

France

Competition Authority President v. Towercast — Court of Cassation required the Paris Court of Appeal to relinquish the case before ordering further antitrust investigation

Court of Cassation (France) · 2026-09-23civil procedurecompetitionconstitutional

Background: In 2017, Towercast complained to the French Competition Authority that the TDF group had abused its dominant position in the wholesale market for digital terrestrial television broadcasting by acquiring sole control of Itas Tim in October 2016. The Authority’s investigating service alleged that the transaction violated Article L. 420-2 of the French Commercial Code and…

Held: The Court of Cassation held that the appeal was admissible because the Paris Court of Appeal had exceeded its powers. Under Article L. 464-8 of the Commercial Code, once the Court of Appeal annuls an Authority decision, it must in principle decide the notified allegations on both the facts and the law. If evidence is lacking, it may order legally…

Read the full analysis →

Israel

Attorney General v. Anonymous — Court rejected parental-fitness screening for genetic mothers in foreign surrogacy cases

Supreme Court of Israel · יעל וילנר (Judicial Selection Committee of Israel, 2017) · 2026-09-23criminal

Background: Two married opposite-sex couples pursued surrogacy in Georgia using embryos created from each intended mother’s egg and intended father’s sperm. Genetic testing established each intended parent’s biological connection to the resulting child with 99.99% probability. The Attorney General agreed that the fathers could be declared legal parents on the strength of that evidence but argued…

Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed both appeals. A majority concluded that, under Israeli law, a genetic connection alone does not automatically establish legal motherhood when the woman who supplied the egg is not the woman who gave birth. Judicial scrutiny is required to verify the legality and integrity of the foreign-surrogacy process, protect the surrogate’s rights, confirm her informed and…

Read the full analysis →

Colorado

Litterer v. Vail Summit Resorts — Colorado Supreme Court enforces post-injury ski-pass release

Colorado Supreme Court · Justice Berkenkotter · 2026-09-21civil procedure

Background: John Litterer was injured in December 2020 when he collided with a snowmobile while snowboarding at Breckenridge Ski Resort. The resort is owned by Vail Summit Resorts, Inc., and the snowmobile was operated by Vail employee Dwight McClure. Litterer sued, and after several claims were dismissed, his remaining claims included negligence, negligence per se, extreme…

Held: The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed. The majority held that the 2022 agreement operated as a release of vested claims, not merely as a prospective exculpatory agreement. Applying ordinary contract principles, the court found mutual assent and consideration: Litterer electronically signed the conspicuous release as a condition of obtaining the pass and then used the pass. His unexpressed intent not to…

Read the full analysis →

Ireland

Colbeam — High Court refused to certify an appeal over development-plan zoning

High Court (Ireland) · Mr Justice David Holland (Michael D. Higgins, 2021) · 2026-09-23constitutionalreal estate

Background: Colbeam Limited had unsuccessfully sought to quash Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council’s adoption of its 2022–2028 Development Plan insofar as it affected Colbeam’s 2.12-hectare site at Our Lady’s Grove, Goatstown Road, Dublin 14. The challenged measures continued an institutional-lands objective, required relevant open space to be public open space, and rezoned the site from residential use…

Held: Mr Justice David Holland refused to certify any of the proposed questions for appeal. Section 50A(7) required both a point of law of exceptional public importance and a finding that an appeal was desirable in the public interest. The proposed questions did not satisfy those cumulative requirements.

Read the full analysis →

Australia

Norwest Childcare Investment v CPD Baulkham Hills Holdings — NSW Supreme Court lets purchaser discontinue against caveat holders without new costs order

Supreme Court of New South Wales · Kate Williams (of New South Wales, 2020) · 2026-09-23civil procedure

Background: Norwest Childcare Investment Pty Ltd, as purchaser, sued after seeking to rescind a contract to buy property at Norwest. It initially sought declarations concerning the rescission and a charge over the property for repayment of its deposit, as well as a judicial sale. Southern Way International Co Pty Ltd and Supreme Furniture Pty Ltd, the…

Held: Williams J granted leave to discontinue against the fifth and sixth defendants with no order as to costs, except for the costs already awarded to them on 17 April 2026 in relation to their successful informal application to set aside notices to produce.

Read the full analysis →

Montana

State v. Pein — Montana Supreme Court affirms elder-abuse and assault convictions

Montana Supreme Court · Laurie McKinnon (elected 2012) · 2026-09-22criminal

Background: David Allen Pein was convicted after a bench trial of abusing his 80-year-old stepfather, Dennis Harley Kuhfus, a vulnerable adult, and of first-offense partner or family member assault. The elder-abuse conviction rested on evidence that Pein threatened, intimidated, yelled at, and physically abused Dennis over two to three years, causing Dennis to live with fear…

Held: The Montana Supreme Court affirmed. It held that expert testimony is not required to prove “mental injury” under the vulnerable-adult abuse statute. Dennis could testify about his own fear and anxiety, and his daughter could testify about what she observed. Applying an objective reasonable-person standard, the district court had sufficient evidence to find that Pein knowingly caused an identifiable and…

Read the full analysis →

Singapore

Kalen v World Exchange Services — High Court fixes net costs of S$88,703.57 for claimants

Singapore High Court · Lee Seiu Kin (S. R. Nathan, 2006) · 2026-09-23civil procedure

Background: This was a costs decision following an assessment of damages proceeding and two related summonses. In the underlying assessment, the court assessed damages at US$10,126,158.43, with interest at 5.33% per annum from 13 September 2023 until payment. The assessment concerned novel cryptocurrency-valuation issues.

Held: Senior Judge Lee Seiu Kin fixed the claimants' costs for the assessment at S$88,490.37, including S$40,000 for pre-trial work, S$16,000 for the one-and-a-half-day hearing, S$20,000 for post-trial work, and S$12,490.37 in disbursements. The court placed the pre- and post-trial costs above the lower end of the applicable ranges because of the case's complexity and its novel cryptocurrency-valuation issues.

Read the full analysis →

New York

Veliu v. Verizon — First Department sends Scaffold Law trench-injury claim to trial

Appellate Division, First Department · All concur except Rodriguez (appointment info not available) · 2026-09-22employmentpersonal injury tortscaffold law

Background: Imberson Veliu worked for De-Bar Company Construction Corporation as a foreman and “pitman” on a Verizon New York project to install underground cable pipes. A pitman works in an excavation near the backhoe and directs its operator, whose view beneath the bucket is obstructed. Veliu said he was standing in a trench three to four…

Held: A divided First Department reversed and denied Veliu’s motion. The majority first held that the competing descriptions of the accident created a credibility question for the factfinder. On Veliu’s version, a hoisted object was not properly secured. On the coworker’s version, concrete separated from the excavation edge and slid into an inadequately braced trench. Although Labor Law § 240(1) can…

Read the full analysis →

Indiana

Hre v. State — Rental-Car Costs Excluded from Restitution

Indiana Court of Appeals · Pyle · 2026-09-22criminal lawrestitutionstatutory interpretation

Background: Tawk Hre crashed his vehicle into Katie Mumford’s car in January 2025. Testing showed an alcohol concentration equivalent of .277 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood. Hre later pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated. The Marion Superior Court sentenced him to 360 days, with…

Held: The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed. Indiana Code section 35-50-5-3 permits restitution for five specified kinds of loss: property damage measured by actual repair or replacement cost; qualifying medical and hospital costs; certain medical laboratory tests; earnings lost before sentencing; and funeral, burial, or cremation costs arising from a homicide. Because restitution is penal in nature, the court explained, those…

Read the full analysis →

Want this in your inbox every morning, filtered to your jurisdictions?
Subscribe free at dailycaselaw.com →
Full analyses at Case Law Wire. Summaries are AI-generated and are not legal advice.