Court Filings
47 filings indexedRecent court opinions cross-linked with public notices by case number, summarized and classified by AI.
In re Recall of Hobbs
The Washington Supreme Court affirmed the superior court’s dismissal of Tim Eyman’s recall petition against Secretary of State Steve Hobbs. Eyman argued Hobbs failed to transmit a proposed referendum measure as required by statute, amounting to misfeasance and a violation of his oath. The Court held the petition was legally insufficient because the challenged statute was enacted with a valid emergency clause, making the law exempt from referendum and negating any mandatory duty the secretary had to process that referendum. The Court affirmed without reaching factual sufficiency.
OtherAffirmedWashington Supreme Court104,322-8The Boro of W. Chester, Aplt. v. PASSHE
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice concurred with the majority in holding that the Borough’s stormwater charge functions as a tax rather than a fee because the proceeds fund broad, community-wide projects (tree planting, street sweeping, regrading alleys, rain gardens, curb extensions) that benefit the public generally rather than providing specific, measurable services to West Chester University. The concurrence explains that when charges fund generalized environmental and beautification projects remote from the university, the nexus to runoff from university property is too thin to qualify as a fee. The justice reserved judgment on different fact patterns where proceeds are spent solely on direct stormwater remediation or where charges are closely tied to individual property runoff.
OtherAffirmedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania9 MAP 2023Matter of Mishkin
The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Jeremy David Mishkin's request to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed Mishkin's sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's letter, found him eligible under the rules governing attorney disciplinary matters, and accepted his resignation. The court struck his name from the roll of attorneys, prohibited him from practicing or holding himself out as an attorney in New York, and ordered him to surrender any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days. The resignation is effective immediately.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkPM-86-26Matter of Conti-Bediner
The Appellate Division, Third Department granted Jennifer T. Conti-Bediner's application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. The court reviewed her sworn affidavit and the Attorney Grievance Committee's statement that it did not oppose the resignation, determined she was eligible under the court rules, accepted her resignation, and struck her name from the roll of attorneys effective immediately. The court also enjoined her from practicing or holding herself out as an attorney in New York and ordered surrender of any Attorney Secure Pass within 30 days.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkPM-82-26Honey, H. v. Lycoming Co. Offices of Voter Svcs.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that cast vote records (CVRs) are not the "contents of ballot boxes and voting machines" under Section 308 (25 P.S. § 2648) of the Election Code, and therefore are not exempt from public disclosure. The court rejected the Commonwealth Court’s view that CVRs are the digital equivalent of machine contents and found the statute’s plain language dispositive. The Court noted that if policy concerns exist about disclosure, the proper remedy is legislative change rather than judicial construction of a statute enacted in 1937.
OtherAffirmedSupreme Court of Pennsylvania79 MAP 2024Matter of King
The Appellate Division, First Department granted the Attorney Grievance Committee's motion for an immediate interim suspension of attorney William John Lloyd King. The court found uncontroverted documentary evidence — bank records and King's written admission — that he converted or misappropriated $17,420 in a client's funds to satisfy a gambling addiction. The court rejected King's request for diversion or a disability suspension, concluding his misconduct posed an immediate threat to the public and that addiction-based mitigation, restitution, or brief recovery efforts do not prevent an interim suspension pending any formal charges.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkMotion No. 2025-05965|Case No. 2025-07038|David Charles Sussman v. Dustin M. Havens, Assistant State Attorney, Seventh Judicial Circuit, Kathryn D. Weston, Circuit Judge, Seventh Judicial Circuit and Douglas Squire, Assistant Attorney General
The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a pro se appeal by David Charles Sussman. The appeal challenged actions involving the Assistant State Attorney, a circuit judge, and the Assistant Attorney General. The appellate court issued a brief per curiam decision affirming the circuit court without published opinion or extended reasoning. The opinion is final subject to timely authorized post-judgment motions under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330 or 9.331.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida5D2024-2924Lawn v. Graceville Correctional Facility
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Charles J. Lawn, Jr. from a decision of the Circuit Court for Jackson County involving Graceville Correctional Facility. The appellate court issued a per curiam opinion on April 27, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's judgment. No substantive opinion or reasoning beyond the one-word disposition was provided in the published entry; the decision was unanimous and counsel for the appellee and the pro se appellant are noted.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2024-0544Torrey D. Walker v. Circuit Judge Sjostrom of the Second Judicial Circuit Court
The First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Torrey D. Walker challenging actions by a Leon County circuit judge. The court issued a short per curiam decision dated April 27, 2026, and affirmed the lower court's ruling. No extended opinion or reasoning appears in the record beyond the single-word disposition and concurrence by three judges. The decision notes the appellate process remains open for any timely, authorized post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-1380Matter of Hess
The Appellate Division affirmed Surrogate's Court's order dismissing petitioner Barrett Hess's petition to probate the will of Janet Hess. The court reviewed the surrogate's dismissal of the probate petition following respondents' motion to dismiss and agreed with the surrogate's reasoning. The appellate court concluded there was no reversible error in the surrogate's disposition and therefore upheld dismissal, awarding costs to respondents.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York287 CA 24-02071Matter of Heller
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department accepted Attorney Franklin William Heller's application to resign for non-disciplinary reasons and ordered his name removed from the roll of attorneys. The court treated the submission as a voluntary resignation not prompted by disciplinary charges and granted the request, ending his authority to practice law in New York. There is no indication of misconduct findings or ongoing disciplinary proceedings in this decision; the court's action was procedural and limited to removing Heller's name from the attorney list.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York&mdashMatter of Cunningham
The Appellate Division confirmed a referee's findings that attorney Diana G. Cunningham neglected two client matters, failed to communicate with clients and a court referee, and did not timely comply with attorney registration rules. The court found multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and registration statutes. Because Cunningham has a substantial disciplinary history with similar prior misconduct, the Court suspended her for three years and until further order, but it stayed the suspension on conditions including compliance with registration rules, participation in mental health monitoring and an attorney mentoring program, quarterly reporting, and limits on active cases.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkHall v. Solaris Healthcare Lake City, LLC, and Premier Group Insurance
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by Sheila Hall from a decision of the Office of Judges of Compensation Claims concerning a workplace injury dated December 12, 2023. The panel issued a unanimous per curiam opinion on April 24, 2026, and affirmed the lower tribunal's ruling. The opinion is brief, provides no extended explanation in the published text, and notes that the judgment is subject to any timely post-judgment motions under Florida appellate rules.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-0341Lane v. State of Florida
The Second District Court of Appeal reviewed Mark Alan Lane’s appeal from a Pasco County Court decision and, without published opinion, affirmed the lower court’s ruling. The panel issued a short per curiam disposition—Affirmed—indicating they found no reversible error in the county court’s handling of Lane’s matter. The decision is final as issued by the appellate panel; no further reasoning or discussion was provided in the opinion beyond the affirmation and concurrence by the three judges.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-0453Osorio v. Osorio
The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision in an appeal brought by Vincent H. Osorio against Elizabeth Osorio. The appellate court reviewed the circuit court's ruling in Pasco County and, after considering the parties' briefs and record, concluded there was no reversible error and upheld the lower court's judgment. The opinion was issued per curiam without a published written opinion, and the three-judge panel concurred. No further reasoning or detailed findings were included in the short docketed opinion.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2256Paris Demetrius Evans v. State of Florida, Orange County Sheriff's Office, and Clerk of the Court for Orange County
The Sixth District Court of Appeal treated Paris Demetrius Evans’s petition for writ of certiorari as an appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c) from the trial court’s January 6, 2026 order dismissing his petition for writ of mandamus. The appellate court reviewed the order and affirmed the trial court’s dismissal. The per curiam opinion states only the procedural conversion to an appeal and the affirmance, without extended reasoning, and the decision was issued April 24, 2026.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida6D2026-0332Matter of Screen (A & K Automotive)
The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision disqualifying Peirce Screen from receiving unemployment benefits because his employment was terminated for misconduct. The appeal was brought by Screen (pro se) against his former employer A & K Automotive and the Commissioner of Labor. The court issued a short order affirming the Board's ruling without opinion or costs, leaving the Board's finding of misconduct and resulting disqualification in place.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkCV-25-1443Teryleisha Wright v. Ricky D. Dixon, Secretary of Florida Department of Corrections
The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal summarily affirmed a lower-court judgment in a case brought by appellant Teryleisha Wright against Ricky D. Dixon, Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections. The appeal arises from a Palm Beach County circuit court matter (case no. 502025CA006838XXXAMB). The appellate court issued a short per curiam decision simply stating "Affirmed" without issuing a written opinion explaining its reasoning, and noted the decision is not final until any timely motion for rehearing is resolved.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida4D2025-2491In re D.W.
The Ninth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court’s award of legal custody of two-year-old D.W. to the child’s paternal grandmother and her partner. The juvenile court had previously adjudicated D.W. dependent and placed the child in temporary custody after concerns about Mother’s methamphetamine use, unstable housing, and association with a drug-using boyfriend. The appellate court found the record shows Mother failed to comply with her case plan (substance use and mental health treatment, drug screens, and housing stability), while custodians provided a stable, supportive home and facilitated parental visitation. The court concluded the award was supported by the greater weight of the evidence and was in the child’s best interest.
OtherAffirmedOhio Court of Appeals31586Matter of Thomas B.
The Appellate Division affirmed a Supreme Court order that authorized involuntary administration of psychotropic medication to Thomas B., an involuntarily committed patient who denied having a mental illness. The court reviewed a petition brought by the State and held that the petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that Thomas B. lacked the capacity to make a reasoned decision about treatment and that the proposed medication was narrowly tailored to protect his liberty interest. The court deferred to the hearing court’s factual findings, including the treating psychiatrist’s testimony diagnosing schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder with violent symptoms.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York2024-03383In the Matter of Leonard Richard Medley, III
The Georgia Supreme Court accepted attorney Leonard Richard Medley, III’s petition for voluntary surrender of his law license after he pled guilty in federal court to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud (a felony). Medley admitted his conviction violated the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct and asked the Court to accept surrender of his license, which is equivalent to disbarment. The Court reviewed the Special Master’s recommendation, noted no exceptions were filed, relied on precedent treating felony financial-crime convictions as warranting disbarment, and removed Medley from the roll of attorneys licensed in Georgia.
OtherAffirmedSupreme Court of GeorgiaS26Y0660State ex rel. Wright v. Madison Cty. Mun. Court
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Twelfth District Court of Appeals’ dismissal of Ramone Wright’s mandamus petition asking the Madison County Municipal Court to vacate a prior traffic conviction. Wright argued he could not have committed the traffic offense because he was allegedly jailed on another matter at the time, and said his time to appeal had passed. The Supreme Court held Wright had an adequate remedy at law—direct appeal or postconviction procedures—and therefore mandamus was not available. The municipal court’s motion to dismiss the appeal was denied as procedurally improper but its brief was considered on the merits.
OtherAffirmedOhio Supreme Court2025-1393Matter of Gerlach (Marino)
The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the Surrogate's Court order denying objectant Michael Marino’s motion for summary judgment challenging executor Janet Marino Gerlach’s accountings for two accounting periods. The court held objectants failed to prove, as a matter of law, that Gerlach’s decisions caused financial loss, that she overpaid herself fees, or that she failed to withhold estate tax to certain beneficiaries. The court found triable issues of fact based on Gerlach’s investment strategy, will provisions granting broad discretion, competing expert opinions on fees, and an attorney affidavit about tax withholding, so summary judgment was inappropriate.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkFile No. 0234/07B, 0234/07H|Appeal No. 6414|Case No. 2025-01851|In re A.M.D.
The Twelfth District Court of Appeals affirmed the juvenile court's denial of Mother's petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking return of four children removed to protective custody. The children were adjudicated in juvenile court after a May 31, 2023 shelter-care removal; Mother later revoked consent to a proposed legal custody transfer and pursued various postjudgment motions and appeals. The juvenile court denied habeas relief because Mother had an adequate remedy at law (a motion for further disposition and appeals) and the lack of notice of the initial shelter-care hearing did not strip the juvenile court of jurisdiction. The appellate court found no reversible error.
OtherAffirmedOhio Court of AppealsCA2025-08-073H.H.E. v. State of Florida
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal by a child identified as H.H.E. from a decision of the Circuit Court for Jackson County. The appellate court issued a short per curiam opinion on April 20, 2026, summarily affirming the lower court's judgment. No written opinion explaining the court's reasoning was published; the decision states only “AFFIRMED” with all three judges concurring. The ruling ends this appeal unless a timely motion for rehearing or other authorized relief is filed.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida1D2025-2888In re Resigantion of Greulich
The Ohio Supreme Court accepted the resignation of attorney David Paul Greulich Jr. under the rule for resignation when disciplinary action is pending. The court treated the filing as a resignation with disciplinary action pending and ordered that Greulich be immediately prohibited from practicing law in Ohio, surrender his admission certificate, and have his name stricken from the roll. The court also imposed post-resignation obligations: notify clients and opposing counsel, deliver client files, refund unearned fees, refrain from handling client funds, reimburse the Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection if applicable, and file proof of compliance with the court and disciplinary counsel.
OtherAffirmedOhio Supreme Court2026-0355Shirley v. Shirley
The Second District Court of Appeal reviewed a pro se appeal by Monika Margarethe Shirley from an order of the Sarasota County Circuit Court. The appellate court, in a brief per curiam decision, affirmed the lower court's ruling. No written opinion explaining the court's reasoning was published beyond the single-word disposition, and no appellee participated in the appeal. The panel of judges Silberman, Morris, and Black concurred in the affirmance.
OtherAffirmedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida2D2025-2697In the Matter of D.A. v. the State of Texas
The Second Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed a juvenile court's order committing D.A. to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department after a modification hearing. D.A. had admitted to delinquent conduct, was placed on probation, then repeatedly absconded and violated probation terms; the juvenile court found she violated lawful orders and made the required findings to commit her. On appeal she argued the trial court refused to consider the full range of dispositions by denying a psychological evaluation and prejudging the case. The appellate court found no preserved due-process complaint about the evaluation and no evidence the court predetermined disposition, so it affirmed.
OtherAffirmedTexas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)02-25-00566-CVMatter of Ogunsanya
The Appellate Division, Third Department granted the Attorney Grievance Committee’s motion to immediately suspend Adebukola Ogunsanya from practicing law in New York while it investigates multiple misconduct complaints. The court found she failed to respond to some complaints, did not appear for an examination under oath, and did not produce requested records. Because refusal to comply with investigative demands threatens the public interest and the disciplinary process, the court concluded interim suspension was warranted until further order, with warnings about possible disbarment if she continues not to cooperate.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkPM-68-26Matter of Ocasio v. Shields
The Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed Supreme Court's dismissal of Juan Carlos Ocasio's CPLR article 78 petition challenging his honorable discharge from the New York Guard and related FOIL claims. The court held that the challenge to discharge implicated military order and discipline and was therefore nonjusticiable under the intra-military immunity doctrine. The court also found the FOIL claims moot because DMNA had responded to the requests and Ocasio failed to exhaust administrative appeals regarding any alleged inadequacy. The court denied sanctions against the respondent for lack of support in the record.
OtherAffirmedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New YorkCV-24-0690