Background: Melissa Reilly and Kevin Sullivan are the parents of a daughter born in 2020. Reilly lived in Casper and worked night shifts as a radiological technician in Douglas, while Sullivan lived in Big Sky, Montana, and worked as an emergency-room physician. Sullivan traveled to Casper at least monthly, usually for a week at a time,…
Held: The Wyoming Supreme Court unanimously affirmed. Justice Gray explained that a custody ruling is reviewed for abuse of discretion, with the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party. Wyoming’s statutory best-interest factors are nonexclusive, and courts must also consider primary-caregiver status and sibling separation. No single factor controls; the child’s best interests remain the governing question.
Background: Zion Justin Castillo pleaded guilty to robbery after he and another person entered a Metro PCS store, held an employee in a back room with a firearm, and took money from the register. The State dismissed other charges and agreed to make no sentencing recommendation. The sentencing judge imposed a suspended prison term of 24…
Held: The Nevada Supreme Court unanimously affirmed. Justice Bell explained that a properly assigned successor judge’s power to revisit a predecessor’s decision is not a question of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court expressly overruled Rohlfing v. Second Judicial District Court to the extent that decision suggested otherwise. Rohlfing properly used jurisdictional reasoning when a judge who was no longer assigned to a…
Background: The Genesee County Fish and Game Protective Association owns a 200-acre recreational parcel used by about 1,500 members, including permanent residents. Capri and William Dix own an adjoining 45-acre parcel. Godfrey’s Pond Road, the only route for association members, deliveries, and emergency vehicles, runs between the properties. The association owned the western half of the…
Held: The Court of Appeals affirmed. On what it repeatedly characterized as the case’s unique facts, the majority concluded that the association established every element of adverse possession and that defendants did not identify a triable factual dispute. The evidence showed that only the association had plowed, patched, paved, repaired, and otherwise maintained the entire roadway for decades. Those visible acts…
Background: The Israel Land Authority published a tender for lease rights covering 1,234 housing units in the “Mevaseret Adumim South” development in E1, between Jerusalem and Ma’ale Adumim. Although the political echelon had approved advancing the project in October 2025, the tender was published during the 2026 election period, with bids due on October 19—eight days…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed both petitions, finding no established ground for judicial intervention. It held that the restraint applicable to a caretaker government extends across the executive branch and is not confined to elected officials or expressly political decisions. The fact that professional personnel were implementing a policy approved before the election was relevant, but did not exempt their…
Background: Sophia Hemmings suffered cardiac arrest following anesthetic complications during an emergency caesarean section, leaving her with severe and permanent brain damage. Hemmings, through her litigation guardian, and members of her family sued several healthcare practitioners and Scarborough Health Network. The parties agreed on damages, leaving liability as the sole issue at trial.
Held: The Supreme Court dismissed both appeals. A majority upheld the dismissal of the claims against Padmore and the hospital, while six judges upheld Jamensky’s liability. The result was that the Court of Appeal’s disposition remained in place: Padmore and the hospital were not liable, but Jamensky was.
Background: Millers Lane Center, LLC, a Florida company, owned a Louisville warehouse leased to Blue Sky, Inc. After Blue Sky fell behind on rent, Morgan & Pottinger advised the Florida company concerning a lockout and sale of Blue Sky’s property. Blue Sky sued the Florida company and others, including member Mark Brewer. James P. McCrocklin later…
Held: The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of the Kentucky company’s claims because it neither owned the malpractice claims nor established the client-based duty necessary to assert them. The Kentucky company did not exist when the challenged lockout advice was given, was not the warehouse owner or a defendant in the Blue Sky litigation, and had not shown a separate attorney-client…
Background: Pradeepto Kumar Biswas was being tried on a charge of criminal breach of trust under s 406 of the Penal Code concerning funds deposited by RLK Corporation Pte Ltd into the bank account of Servus Coal Private Limited, of which he was the sole director and shareholder. The Prosecution alleged that Biswas caused transfers from…
Held: The High Court dismissed the application and refused permission to seek the prohibiting and quashing orders. It first held that the application was not time-barred. Time ran from 7 July 2022, when the first amended charge was served, because that amendment changed the identified owner of the entrusted property and gave rise to a ground advanced in Biswas’s application. The…
Background: Onecom acquired part of a telecommunications business formerly owned by James Palmer, while the “eve” connectivity product remained subject to a separate Master Services Agreement under which KM Telecom supplied it to a Onecom company for resale. After relations deteriorated, the claimants alleged unlawful means conspiracy and inducing breach of contract. The defendants alleged that…
Held: Mrs Justice Dias dismissed the application as framed. The court held that the 22-year lost-profits claim was not bound to fail. Whether the principle in Lavarack v Woods of Colchester Ltd required proof merely that KM Telecom could have terminated the agreement, or proof that it would have done so, was arguable and required fuller consideration. It was also arguable…
Background: The appellants were residents of Hyogo Prefecture receiving livelihood assistance under Japan’s Public Assistance Act. Between 2013 and 2015, the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare revised the livelihood-assistance standards. Local welfare-office directors then issued decisions reducing or otherwise changing the appellants’ benefits based on those revisions.
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Osaka High Court as to the appellants, set aside the corresponding portion of the first-instance judgment, and canceled all seven challenged benefit-modification decisions. It held that the revisions were unlawful under Articles 3 and 8(2) of the Public Assistance Act because the Minister exceeded or abused his discretion in adopting the deflation adjustment.
Background: Two sisters, B. D. and Z. D., jointly owned an extensive portfolio of real estate. They had received several properties from their parents by gifts made in 1981 and 1992, and later inherited additional properties from their mother, who died in 2009. Their holdings included property in southern France and multiple condominium units, garages, and…
Held: The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal. It held that, under Articles 826 and 830 of the Civil Code, a judge forming partition lots must seek equality in value and should pursue an in-kind allocation that minimizes any equalization payment, assessed in light of the parties’ interests. If requested, the judge may divide an economic unit or group of assets,…
Background: John Deere Financial Limited lent Redzel Consulting Pty Ltd, as trustee for the Redzel Pastoral Company Trust, $227,830.36 under a secured commercial loan agreement dated 15 December 2021. The vendor-finance loan funded industrial vehicles and related equipment, was secured by a chattel mortgage, and was guaranteed by Simon John Quinn.
Held: Elkaim AJ held that John Deere was entitled to possession of the secured assets on two independent bases. At common law, a chattel mortgagee was entitled to possession upon default, consistently with clauses 9.4 and 9.5 of the loan agreement. No defendant disputed Redzel’s default or identified any reason John Deere lacked the right to possession.
Background: Darby Sabin alleged that her grandfather, Steven Sabin, executed a will under which she would receive the share of his estate that would have passed to her predeceased father. Steven also granted his stepson, Shawn Newcomb, broad authority under a financial power of attorney, including authority to transfer property and make gifts.
Held: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court vacated the dismissal as to all counts. Applying Maine’s notice-pleading standard, the court held that Darby adequately alleged the source and nature of her expected inheritance by identifying herself as Steven’s grandchild and a beneficiary under his will and by describing property allegedly diverted from the estate. The court explained that precedent requiring proof of…