Background: Scott King and Courtenay Carty were in a romantic relationship from 2015 until 2023 and agreed that they had formed a domestic partnership. Under Alaska law, that term describes unmarried cohabitants who intend to share the fruits of their relationship as though married. After the relationship ended, they asked the superior court to classify and…
Held: The Alaska Supreme Court reversed. It first held that Alaska’s domestic-partnership doctrine applies only to property acquired during the partnership. Property acquired before the partnership begins, like property acquired after it ends, remains governed by ordinary property law. Using a separately owned building for a partnership business does not itself transfer ownership to the partnership. The court illustrated the point…
Background: GRO Marketing provided apartment-listing and other marketing services for Texas rental properties owned by COR3 Capital. Another company originally managed the properties and signed the marketing agreement, but COR3 later took over management. After invoices went unpaid, GRO sued COR3 for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, alleging that COR3 had assumed responsibility for the…
Held: The Supreme Court affirmed the default judgment. A defendant seeking Kirtland relief must first present a plausible, complete, and factually supported meritorious defense. COR3 supplied conclusions rather than evidence, and its manager’s affidavit largely repeated those conclusions. More importantly, the defenses were either irrelevant or contradicted by the manager’s own emails reflecting COR3’s intent to pay. Without clearing that threshold,…
Background: The parties entered into three loan agreements in 2018, 2021, and 2024, under which Shimon and Hedva Lavi mortgaged their home to Galam Investments Group Ltd. In October 2025, Galam commenced enforcement proceedings to realize the mortgages, alleging that the L avis owed approximately NIS 3 million plus default-related charges. After the Enforcement Registrar denied…
Held: Justice Ruth Ronnen treated the application as an appeal and allowed it only in part. The Supreme Court declined to disturb the stay itself. It held that the District Court permissibly found that the claim’s prospects were “not necessarily on the low side,” properly weighed the parties’ conduct and the delay in seeking relief, and correctly concluded that the balance…
Background: Wayne Richard Riggins was charged after a family fight in which Dana Haynes was fatally stabbed and Jeff Carley was struck. Riggins maintained that Haynes attacked him with a knife and that he acted in self-defense. A jury convicted him of heat-of-passion voluntary manslaughter and reckless aggravated battery, and the district court imposed a presumptive…
Held: The Kansas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the district court. It held that self-defense immunity under K.S.A. 21-5231(a) is an affirmative defense subject to the filing deadline in K.S.A. 22-3208(4). Because Riggins knew of his self-defense claim but did not timely move for immunity—and the statutory basis for extending the deadline was not established—his motion was…
Background: Nebraska law permits a voting-age U.S. citizen who resides outside the United States, has never resided in the United States, has not registered to vote in another state, and has a parent registered in Nebraska to register and vote in a Nebraska county where either parent is registered. The Republican National Committee, voter Jack Riggins,…
Held: The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed. Relying on the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, the court held that Dingman had common-law standing as a candidate because she had a concrete and particularized interest in the rules governing which votes would be counted in her election. Because one challenger had standing to…
Background: Hattiesburg Medical Park Management Corp. and seven affiliated long-term-care providers challenged the Mississippi Division of Medicaid’s adjustments to their 2015 cost reports. The providers had reported payments received from three insurance-related entities—MHCASIF, CULIC, and LTCEIC—as other income rather than using those payments to reduce reported insurance costs. Medicaid’s adjustments lowered the providers’ prospective reimbursement rates.
Held: On rehearing, the Mississippi Supreme Court withdrew its prior opinions and affirmed Medicaid’s decision and the chancery court’s judgment. The court held that the providers had not established an enforceable agency policy permitting them to treat the insurance payments as nonoffsettable income. Because Mississippi’s Medicaid State Plan did not specifically address the payments, the incorporated federal Provider Reimbursement Manual governed…
Background: Joshua Davenport twice visited physician assistant Nathanael Fuller for abdominal pain and difficulty urinating. Fuller diagnosed probable prostate-related urinary retention and prescribed medication, but Davenport later sought emergency treatment and was diagnosed with acute diverticulitis. He suffered a perforated bowel, feculent peritonitis, and septic shock and remained hospitalized for several weeks.
Held: The Iowa Supreme Court held that physicians licensed under Iowa Code chapter 148 and physician assistants licensed under chapter 148C practice in substantially similar fields for purposes of Iowa Code section 147.139(1) and (2). Under the categorical approach adopted in Jones v. Lindell, a provider’s “field” is tied to the provider’s license, not to a narrower practice setting or area…
Background: FW Aviation (Holdings) 1 Limited was owed approximately US$250 million by VietJet Aviation Joint Stock Company under final orders arising from VietJet’s breaches of four aircraft subleases. Although VietJet was a major listed airline with substantial assets and continued ordering aircraft, it had paid only US$2 million toward the judgment debt. FW Aviation’s enforcement efforts…
Held: Mr Justice Saini granted a post-judgment worldwide freezing order. The Court found solid evidence of past dissipation and a real risk of further dissipation, principally because VietJet had transferred a large portion of its most valuable assets—economic rights associated with aircraft orders—to related parties. In return, VietJet appeared to hold promises from a Cayman company lacking evident commercial substance, while…
Background: Sue-Maree Olsen held shares in Easthaven Limited that entitled her to occupy Unit 54 in a company-title apartment building at Darling Point. After Olsen moved out, her adult daughter lived in the unit without the board’s written consent. Residents and the board complained over several years about conduct attributed to Olsen and her daughter, including…
Held: Sirtes J dismissed Olsen’s claim. The Court held that the extraordinary general meeting was validly called and held, and that its resolution terminating Olsen’s membership was valid and binding. The Court rejected Olsen’s oppression claim and upheld Easthaven’s entitlement under its articles to find a purchaser for her shares, transfer them and receive the purchase price. Olsen will cease to…
Background: James Edward Hall sought allowance of appeal after the Superior Court affirmed a Bucks County judgment of sentence in an unpublished memorandum. His petition asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to review several issues arising from the criminal case. The Court accepted review only on a narrow sentencing question: whether Hall was entitled to resentencing because…
Held: In a per curiam order, the Supreme Court granted allocatur on the illegal-sentence question, vacated the Superior Court’s order, and remanded directly to the trial court for resentencing on the Section 3802(c) conviction in accordance with Section 9756(b)(1). The Court denied allowance of appeal on every other issue Hall presented.
Background: M. [Y] [S] [Z] was placed under formal investigation on June 26, 2026, for violence causing death without intent to kill. When he requested time to prepare his defense before the adversarial hearing on possible pretrial detention, the liberty and detention judge ordered his temporary incarceration that same day.
Held: The Criminal Chamber dismissed the appeal. It held that the Investigation Chamber correctly applied the seventh and eighth paragraphs of Article 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A temporary-incarceration order issued after an accused requests the legally guaranteed period to prepare for a deferred hearing need not contain a substantive justification for detention: the order merely grants that preparation…
Background: Rachelle Wilhelm, also known as Rachele Wilhelm, is the defendant-appellant in a criminal case captioned State of Hawaiʻi v. Wilhelm. The case reached the Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi on certiorari from the Intermediate Court of Appeals, in CAAP-24-0000597, arising from District Court case No. 1DTC-24-005546.
Held: The Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi accepted Wilhelm’s application for a writ of certiorari under Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 602-59(a). The order therefore permits Supreme Court review of the case.