Background: The Wyoming Supreme Court publicly censured Gillette attorney Corrie Lynn Lamb after approving a stipulated disciplinary resolution arising from a sustained pattern of missed or late court appearances, inadequate preparation, deficient filings, and delayed responses to court personnel. The proceeding began after four Sixth Judicial District judges jointly admonished Lamb in October 2025. Bar Counsel…
Held: The Supreme Court approved, confirmed, and adopted the Board's report and recommendation under Rule 12 of the Wyoming Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, the rule governing stipulated discipline. It ordered that Lamb receive a public censure and pay $50 in costs plus a $750 administrative fee by November 2, 2026. The Court also authorized the Wyoming State Bar to issue the…
Background: The appellant constructed a 150-square-meter stone building in the West Bank without a building permit. After a stop-work order was issued on June 15, 2022, he did not attend the ensuing hearing, and the supervisory planning subcommittee issued a final stop-work and demolition order. Because a permit application was then pending, enforcement was deferred until…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal. Justice Ofer Grosskopf held that a person challenging administrative action must approach the court with clean hands and ordinarily will not receive relief after acting unilaterally and presenting the authorities with a completed fact. Here, the appellant had initially built without a permit or even a permit application, continued construction after stop-work and…
Background: A voter in Tokyo’s Koto Ward challenged the June 22, 2025 Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly election. The voter sought, among other relief, to invalidate the election in the Koto Ward district, arguing that Tokyo’s electoral ordinance unlawfully preserved a single-seat special district combining the Izu and Ogasawara island municipalities and unlawfully allocated assembly seats among the…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal and upheld the Tokyo High Court’s judgment. It held that retaining the island district was a reasonable exercise of the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly’s discretion. The islands differ substantially from the rest of Tokyo in their natural environment and social and economic conditions, have distinctive administrative needs, and face significant geographic obstacles to combination…
Background: John Hambel sought records from the Franklin County Prosecutor’s Office, the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office, and the City of Columbus Division of Police concerning criminal cases involving his incarcerated nephew, James Conway III. The requested materials included trial exhibits, a ballistics report, surveillance records, witness statements, grand-jury testimony, telephone records, personnel records, jail policies, and…
Held: The court denied the writ against the prosecutor’s office and police department. It found clear and convincing evidence that Conway was using Hambel to obtain records that Conway could not obtain directly without satisfying R.C. 149.43(B)(8). Hambel requested several of the same records shortly after Conway’s requests were denied and used nearly identical wording. Applying its precedent that an inmate…
Background: Beneficiaries of the estates of Mustafa s/o Majid Khan and Samsuddin s/o Mokhtar Ahmad held shares in Mohamed Mustafa & Samsuddin Co Pte Ltd. After finding several acts of minority oppression, the High Court ordered Mustaq Ahmad and Ishret Jahan to buy the estates’ respective 25.4% and 25.7% shareholdings at prices determined by an independent…
Held: The High Court dismissed both summonses. It held that the plaintiffs had not established any obvious and indisputable error capable of affecting the valuation. Their criticisms were principally disagreements between their expert and the court-appointed valuer over methodology, assumptions, evidential assessment, and the appropriate scope of investigation. Such differences of professional judgment did not meet the demanding standard of manifest…
Background: John and Anne Carlon operated a sheep and cattle grazing property at Uralla, New South Wales. In 2016 they bought pasture seed from Grazag Pty Ltd that had been manufactured by Barenbrug Australia Pty Ltd. Barenbrug later advised them that the seed contained an endophyte toxic to grazing stock and instructed them to remove livestock,…
Held: Smith J dismissed Grazag’s stay application. A permanent stay was an exceptional, last-resort remedy, and Grazag had not shown actual prejudice making a fair trial impossible or the proceedings unjustifiably oppressive. The defective seed had been a significant and known issue since 2016, Grazag could plead to the allegations, no specific lost evidence or unavailable witnesses were identified, and Grazag…
Background: The Société de chasse de Saint-Bois, a hunting association, notified member Mr. [V] in June 2020 that its board had considered alleged misconduct, including shooting during a drive, insulting the association’s president and other members, unacceptable behavior, and breaches of its internal rules. The board warned that no further misconduct would be tolerated and that…
Held: The Court of Cassation held that the non bis in idem principle—under which no one may be prosecuted, convicted, or punished twice for the same act—does not apply to sanctions imposed by an association on one of its members for breaching obligations arising from the association agreement. Applying that principle in this contractual setting would interfere unnecessarily and disproportionately with…
Background: The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa Incorporated challenged regulations prohibiting new prescriptions of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, commonly called puberty blockers, for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria or gender incongruence. The regulations permitted existing patients to continue treatment and did not restrict use of the same medicines for other medical conditions.
Held: La Hood J held that the regulations were unlawfully made and set them aside. The consultation failed to satisfy s 105 of the Medicines Act because participants would not have understood that a prohibition on new prescriptions was proposed, and gender-diverse young people were not consulted directly despite there being insufficient urgency to justify that omission. The Court considered that…
Background: AL, aged five, had lived throughout her life in Spain with her British parents, who hold permanent residency there. In March 2026, her mother took AL to England for what was agreed to be a short visit to maternal grandparents, but later retained her there. The parties accepted that the retention was wrongful, that it…
Held: Mr David Rees KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court judge, ordered AL’s return to Spain. The mother had not established that return would expose AL to a grave risk of physical or psychological harm, or otherwise place her in an intolerable situation, within Article 13b.
Background: Jeremy Daggett appealed from a judgment awarding Taylor Richards primary residential responsibility, establishing parenting time, and ordering him to pay child support. He challenged those determinations and the district court’s denial of his expedited motion to withdraw deemed admissions and vacate an order in limine restricting his evidence.
Held: The North Dakota Supreme Court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Daggett’s motion as untimely. Daggett neither sought modification of the scheduling order nor adequately explained why he waited more than three months after the April 29 order—and until one week before trial—to move to withdraw the admissions and vacate the evidentiary restriction.
Background: Seabrook police were investigating reported drug sales at the Seabrook Apartments. Police had received information linking a red Chevrolet Cruze, registered to a woman who lived there, to drug activity. An officer also knew that confidential informants had previously bought drugs in Seabrook that originated from a separate apartment complex in Methuen, Massachusetts.
Held: The New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed. Under the totality of the circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion that the Cruze’s occupants were engaged in drug activity, making the investigatory stop valid under Part I, Article 19 of the New Hampshire Constitution.
Background: A Mooresville police sergeant was driving behind Anthony Durham’s Ford Fiesta in Morgan County when the sergeant smelled burnt marijuana for a prolonged period. After seeing the Fiesta cross to the left of a lane marker, the sergeant initiated a traffic stop. The odor remained strong at the driver’s window. Durham acknowledged that a can…
Held: The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed. Judge Pyle explained that Durham waived an ordinary admissibility challenge by failing to object when the exhibits were offered. That left only fundamental-error review, an exceptionally narrow doctrine reserved for blatant errors that make a fair trial impossible or create an undeniable and substantial potential for harm. The doctrine does not give a litigant…