Background: Jeremy Garcia faced nine criminal counts after an altercation with his girlfriend. He pleaded no contest to aggravated assault and battery and strangulation of a household member, each of which carries a maximum prison term of ten years under Wyoming law. In exchange for the pleas, the State dismissed the other counts. The Carbon County…
Held: The Wyoming Supreme Court unanimously affirmed. Justice John G. Gray explained that Rule 35(b) gives a defendant a second opportunity to place information before the sentencing judge, but it does not require the judge to reduce an otherwise lawful sentence. Appellate review is highly deferential: the reviewing court asks whether the record supplied a rational basis for the decision, not…
Background: The Indiana Department of Transportation sought to take part of Jeremy Willis’s Harrison County property for a State Road 11 project. After the circuit court rejected Willis’s objection to the taking, it directed the parties toward mediation but first appointed statutory appraisers. Their report was filed and mailed on March 25, 2026. Indiana Code section…
Held: The Supreme Court granted mandamus. In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that an appraisers’ award becomes conclusive when no party files exceptions within the statutory 45-day period. Although older cases sometimes described the consequence as a loss of “jurisdiction,” the more precise point is that the trial court no longer has discretion to litigate or alter damages. A…
Background: A jury convicted Edward Robinson, Jr., in 2004 of first degree murder and use of a deadly weapon to commit a felony for the shooting death of Herbert Fant. Joe Lockett was the only eyewitness at the scene who identified Robinson as the shooter. The defense extensively cross-examined Lockett about his criminal history and his…
Held: The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed. It explained that a defendant seeking an evidentiary hearing on a newly discovered evidence claim must satisfy every applicable requirement: the motion must comply with statutory form and content rules, be timely, concern evidence that existed at trial but could not reasonably have been discovered and produced, and allege facts so substantial that they likely…
Background: The petition challenged the Central District Attorney’s June 11, 2026 decision to close the investigation into an October 7, 2018 karting accident at Beit Berl. Ofek Shalom, then approximately 11 years old, was injured in the accident. The closure was the third such decision, following two successful appeals that had led to additional investigative work.…
Held: The Court unanimously dismissed the petition in limine. Section 64 provided a statutory avenue to appeal the closure decision to the legally designated authority, but the petitioners had submitted an “exhaustion of remedies” letter instead of using that procedure. Their two earlier successful appeals did not justify departing from the rule that the Court ordinarily will not entertain a petition…
Background: GTLK Malta Four Limited owned seven vessels chartered to Pola Logistics Limited under ten-year bareboat charters. The defendants guaranteed and indemnified Pola Logistics’ obligations. After sanctions were imposed on GTLK’s Russian parent and associated entities in 2022, Pola Logistics stopped paying hire and purported to terminate the charters, alleging that the sanctions prevented use, insurance…
Held: The court held that the charters were finance charters and that their “hell or highwater” clause allocated to Pola Logistics the risk that the vessels might become unavailable or unusable. Because the contracts addressed that risk, the defendants had no real prospect of establishing frustration. In any event, sanctions affecting payment suspended the payment obligation rather than frustrating the agreements,…
Background: Jeffrey J. Hepworth represented an employee in a federal employment-discrimination case. A non-retained expert witness, Justine Sweet, testified on cross-examination that she was being paid "$40" for her testimony. In closing, Hepworth told the jury that Sweet had come to court for $40 and was not a "high-paid hired gun." The jury returned a $664,275.40…
Held: The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed all six violations. It held that the Committee properly applied issue preclusion to the federal court's findings and that substantial and competent evidence supported violations of Rules 3.3(a)(1), 3.3(a)(3), 4.1(a), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d). Although Sweet's isolated statement about being paid $40 might have been truthful in one sense, Hepworth knowingly used and amplified a misleading…
Background: Derek Jones and James Ricketson attended a demonstration near Sydney Town Hall on 9 February 2026 during a visit by the President of Israel. Both alleged that police assaulted and injured them. They commenced judicial review proceedings challenging alleged directions, instructions or authorisations concerning police use of force, arrests and crowd-control measures at the demonstration.
Held: Chen J struck out the summons because it failed to comply with r 59.4. The pleading assumed that relevant directions must have existed but did not identify whether a reviewable decision had been made, its terms, when it was made or who made it. The State was also improperly joined because the summons pleaded no basis for relief against it.…
Background: Choice Broadcasting operates an Irish radio station aimed at listeners aged 45 and over. Its station has used names including “Classic Hits Radio” and “Ireland’s Classic Hits Radio,” and Choice owned an Irish registration for the trade mark “Classic Hits.” Bauer Audio Ireland intended to launch an Irish version of its UK “Greatest Hits Radio”…
Held: The High Court rejected Choice’s passing-off claim. Although Choice had established goodwill and reputation in its radio station under the names “Classic Hits Radio” and “Ireland’s Classic Hits Radio,” it had not shown that the descriptive words “Classic Hits” had acquired a distinctive secondary meaning. The court found that Choice had not proved a misrepresentation by Bauer that led, or…
Background: In 1970, the predecessors of M. [F] [X] sold six parcels to the predecessors of the [Z] family. By a separate instrument executed the same day, the seller granted a right of way over two parcels so that the purchased land could reach a public road. The dominant land later came to be owned by…
Held: The Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal. Under Article 701 of the Civil Code, the owner of land burdened by an easement ordinarily may not relocate it. But when its original location has become more burdensome or prevents advantageous work, that owner may offer an alternative location that is equally convenient, which the owner of the dominant land may not…
Background: Eugene police responded to reports that an assailant had struck two people with a stick. Witnesses described the suspect as a Black man about 45 to 50 years old, with one bystander adding that he wore a gray hooded sweatshirt and had fled in a particular direction.
Held: The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the denial of suppression. It held that the stop occurred when Mueth activated her emergency lights and parked near Humphrey, not later when the officers exited their vehicles. In the circumstances, multiple patrol cars with activated lights parked near the only person in the area constituted a show of authority that would lead a reasonable…
Background: Scott Belt, chair of the Pottawattamie County Board of Supervisors, organized and planned to emcee a county town hall meeting in Carson in November 2025. Before the meeting, he drank alcohol at a local bar. At the meeting, witnesses described Belt as smelling of alcohol, speaking incoherently and loudly, struggling with the microphone, and disrupting…
Held: The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed. On de novo review, it held that the evidence—including video and audio recordings, testimony about Belt’s drinking before the meeting, and witnesses’ observations of his speech, conduct, and appearance—clearly, convincingly, and satisfactorily established that he was intoxicated at the town hall.
Background: The Florida Bar’s Civil Procedure Rules Committee proposed amendments to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.410, governing subpoenas, and 1.442, governing proposals for settlement. It also proposed revisions to five forms addressing claimant affidavits, diligent searches, mortgage foreclosures, fact information sheets, and satisfactions of judgment.
Held: The Court adopted the proposed amendment to rule 1.410 and the revisions to Forms 1.914(c), 1.924, 1.944(b), 1.977, and 1.981. Amended rule 1.410(d) requires a person serving a subpoena to make proof of service consistent with section 92.525, Florida Statutes. The form revisions standardize signature-block information and align notarial certificates with section 117.05(13), Florida Statutes.