Background: Mt. Zion’s Loving Day Care Ministry, a church-based Indianapolis nonprofit, had participated in the federal Child and Adult Care Food Program since 1999. The program reimburses institutions for meals and snacks served to children and other eligible participants, while state agencies administer federal compliance rules. Mt. Zion served more than 100 children, most from underserved…
Held: The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court and reinstated Mt. Zion’s eligibility. Justice Christopher Goff’s opinion recognized that federal regulations required DOE to provide only one corrective-action opportunity after the initial serious-deficiency finding. But the federal program handbook also gave DOE discretion to accept additional corrective action until the administrative hearing began or the hearing officer ruled. DOE did not…
Background: Charles and Nicole Margis divorced in January 2022 under a judgment incorporating their agreement to share physical and legal custody of their two unemancipated children. Nicole sought modification of the custody arrangement in April 2023, and Charles filed his own modification complaint two months later. During the resulting Probate and Family Court litigation, the judge…
Held: The SJC affirmed. Rule 2:21 required Charles to demonstrate that review of the challenged trial-court decision could not adequately be obtained through an appeal from a final adverse judgment or by another available route. He could not make that showing because he had already invoked the statutory mechanism for interlocutory review in the Appeals Court. The fact that the second…
Background: Julie McEwan brought civil claims, including malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office, against the Commissioner of Taxation and six other Commonwealth defendants. The claims arose from a Queensland fraud charge laid against her in 2018 and discontinued in 2021. She separately faced a Commonwealth charge laid in 2019, the prosecution of which was permanently…
Held: Cooper J dismissed the application. The Court applied the objective test of whether a fair-minded, reasonably informed member of the public would conclude that restraining counsel was required to protect the proper administration and appearance of justice. That inherent jurisdiction is exceptional, must be exercised cautiously, and must account for the public interest in permitting a litigant to retain counsel…
Background: Zarina Lotfolaeva, an Uzbek citizen, entered Israel in 2019 on a B/1 visa to work in caregiving. After that visa expired, she unsuccessfully sought status on several grounds, including asylum, conversion-based eligibility for immigrant status, and humanitarian considerations. During proceedings over the humanitarian application, the Appeals Tribunal ordered her to leave Israel. The District Court…
Held: Justice Daphne Barak-Erez denied leave to appeal. The Court applied the restrictive standard governing a “third-round” challenge to an Appeals Tribunal decision, noting that the standard is especially stringent when the challenged ruling is an interlocutory decision concerning temporary relief. The asserted issue concerning the relationship between the Authority’s procedures did not justify further review because prior applications raising that…
Background: Jaquan Fletcher was prosecuted for three shootings in Dover during December 2023. One victim, Fred Tolson, died, while Marvis Colona, Christopher Ulrich, and Tyrone Tribbett survived serious gunshot wounds. Investigators linked shell casings from all three scenes to the same firearm.
Held: The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed. It held that inconsistencies in Ulrich’s accounts and between his testimony and video evidence did not establish that prosecutors knowingly presented false evidence or perjured testimony. Those inconsistencies raised credibility questions for the jury, and defense counsel explored them through cross-examination and closing argument.
Background: The Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court entered into two collective-bargaining agreements with Laborers’ International Union of North America Local 860, covering detention-center employees and other juvenile-court employees. Each agreement stated that it remained effective through December 31, 2019, included an evergreen provision requiring the court to recognize the union and follow the agreement until a successor…
Held: The Supreme Court of Ohio affirmed. The disputes over when the agreements ended and how the evergreen provisions apply are disputes over contract interpretation and application, which fall within the agreements’ arbitration clauses.
Background: Maltby Services Limited lent about £11 million to John Graham Rhoden under a deed dated 3 April 2019. Mr Rhoden died in March 2023. Maltby assigned its rights under the loan to TD Capital Limited (TDC) in November 2024, and TDC later assigned them to MSV Estates Limited in December 2025.
Held: Master Sullivan held that the solicitor rule applies before proceedings are issued where solicitors are acting in pre-action steps toward litigation. The conflict of interest addressed by the rule does not depend on a claim form having been issued: HCL was acting for TDC when the assignment was made, during pre-action correspondence concerning a potential claim against the estate.
Background: Andre Hammond, a Tier I sex offender required to register in Maryland every six months, registered in Charles County in February 2023. He signed a form stating that his next in-person registration was due August 1, 2023. He did not appear or contact the sheriff’s office until after a warrant issued.
Held: The Supreme Court of Maryland affirmed. Under Criminal Procedure § 11-721(a), the State generally establishes that a registrant knowingly failed to register by proving the person had notice of the registration obligation and did not comply. A claim that the obligation was forgotten does not negate that knowledge.
Background: Mme [D] [L] was placed under formal investigation on June 2, 2026, for offenses including receiving stolen property as part of an organized group and aggravated money laundering. A liberty and detention judge ordered her held in pretrial detention.
Held: The Criminal Chamber rejected the appeal. It held that, under Article 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the validity of the record of an adversarial detention hearing requires no signatures other than those of the judge and the court clerk.
Background: Celeste M. Gonsalves filed an original petition for a writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi on July 6, 2026, arising from Case No. 1CTR-23-0000081. She also moved to proceed in forma pauperis.
Held: The Supreme Court granted Gonsalves’s motion to withdraw her petition and dismissed the July 6 mandamus petition without prejudice.
Background: Mt. Lebanon police officer Robert Barnes was seriously injured while responding to the home of George Tratras, a 25-year-old man experiencing paranoid delusions. Tratras had recently undergone an involuntary emergency examination at St. Clair Hospital. His father reported delusions involving witchcraft, threats against his parents, and concerns about firearms. Dr. Jacob McBride evaluated Tratras but…
Held: In a published opinion by Judge Neuman, the Superior Court reversed. The professional-rescuer doctrine did not defeat the statutory duty recognized under the Mental Health Procedures Act. The panel reasoned that applying the doctrine here would improperly narrow the legislature’s protection for people foreseeably injured by grossly negligent mental-health treatment. The claim was not simply that a private person negligently…
Background: Indeck Power Equipment Company leased Ashley Energy LLC a boiler and water-treatment equipment after flooding damaged Ashley’s plant. The lease required Indeck to supply a like-new boiler, a new water-treatment trailer, and start-up assistance, while Ashley agreed to operate and maintain the equipment according to industry standards and pay for repairs beyond ordinary wear and…
Held: The Seventh Circuit affirmed. It held that the district court did not abuse its discretion because the jury’s answers could be reconciled with the evidence. The jury reasonably could have found that Indeck substantially performed by providing the promised equipment and technician, while also finding that defective flowmeters or Indeck’s own technical missteps during start-up caused any boiler damage. Similarly,…