Court Filings

The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s divorce judgment. The court held the prenuptial agreement signed the wedding day was valid because Wife could have postponed the ceremony, had prior divorce experience, made edits to the agreement, and Husband’s testimony about timing and disclosure was credible. The court found most contested assets (proceeds from sale of Husband’s family businesses, silver bars, and funds in several UBS accounts) were Husband’s separate property based on the prenup and an unchallenged forensic accounting. The court awarded time-limited spousal support to Wife and taxed costs to the appellant.

The Georgia Court of Appeals considered an application for an interlocutory appeal filed in case A26I0187 (LC No. 25C11603), captioned Matthew Baratian v. Theresa Strickland. The court reviewed the application and denied it on May 6, 2026. No further explanation or reasoning is included in the order; it is a short ministerial entry certifying the denial and the clerk's certification of the minutes.

The Court of Appeals of Georgia affirmed a trial court judgment for the Vinings Estates Homeowners Association (HOA) against Earl and Deidre Cotton. The HOA sued over the Cottons’ unapproved construction of an outdoor kitchen and pool pavilion that violated the subdivision’s Declaration and board-adopted design guidelines. A jury awarded the HOA monetary relief for fines and attorney fees, and the trial court later granted a permanent injunction requiring removal of the detached structure. The court held the Declaration plainly allowed the HOA to adopt enforceable design guidelines, rejected the Cottons’ procedural and evidentiary challenges, and found no abuse of discretion in issuing the injunction.

The New Jersey Supreme Court held that evidence of a plaintiff’s future medical expenses is inadmissible in a personal-injury trial against a tortfeasor if those projected expenses fall within the plaintiff’s personal injury protection (PIP) coverage, even when the PIP benefits are provided through the Unsatisfied Claim and Judgment Fund (UCJF/NJPLIGA). The Court found that the No-Fault Act’s inadmissibility provision (N.J.S.A. 39:6A-12) applies to UCJF PIP benefits and bars evidence of benefits that are "collectible or paid." Because the plaintiff’s projected future medical costs did not exhaust her $250,000 PIP limit, they were "collectible" and therefore inadmissible; the Appellate Division’s modification of the judgment was affirmed.

The First District reversed a county court order that had dismissed a contractor’s suit to collect payment under an assignment of benefits (AOB) from an insurer for mold testing and remediation after Hurricane Sally. The court reviewed the AOB and a same-date invoice and concluded they satisfied Florida Statute § 627.7152’s written and itemized-per-unit estimate requirements. Because the documents, viewed together, described the services and costs sufficiently and there was no evidence of multiple dwelling units, the AOB was valid and the contractor may proceed with its claim on remand.

The First District Court of Appeal reviewed a final summary judgment of foreclosure that also reestablished a lost note, reformed a loan modification to add the wife’s signature, and awarded attorney’s fees. The court held that there was a genuine factual dispute over whether the wife intended to sign the modification, so reformation by summary judgment was improper. The court also found that attorney’s fees required an evidentiary hearing and reversed that award. All other challenges were either unpreserved or meritless, so the remainder of the trial court’s order was affirmed and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

The First District Court of Appeal reversed a workers’ compensation dismissal and set aside an amended final compensation order that had deemed Brian Leighton’s petition for benefits untimely under Florida law. The court held that, under its recent decision in Estes, the one-year tolling provision in section 440.19(2) suspends (stops) the two-year limitations clock that begins under section 440.19(1) until one year after the last furnished remedial care. Because Claimant’s last authorized medical visit was August 2, 2022, the limitations clock did not begin to run until August 2023, making the March 1, 2024 petition timely.

The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment in a civil appeal brought by Selamawit Tewolde and Tesgai Fissha against Professional Security Consultants, Brandon Shopping Center Partners, Ltd., and Westfield Property Management, LLC. The panel issued a brief per curiam decision on May 6, 2026, concluding the appellants’ challenge lacked merit and therefore the lower court's ruling stands. No extended opinion or new legal rule was announced; the court unanimously affirmed without published opinion and the decision may be revised before official publication.

The appellate court reviewed an appeal by Jason Friend from a Pasco County circuit court decision brought by Shawnee Friend individually and on behalf of C.F. The Second District issued a per curiam opinion affirming the lower court's judgment. The court provided no published reasoning in this short entry and the panel concurred, leaving the trial court's ruling in place without change.

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a probate court order revoking a 2010 will executed by Isabel Camacho. The probate court had concluded the will failed as a self-proving instrument because the notary affidavit did not comply with Florida notary statutes, so the will’s proponent (the decedent’s son Pedro Camacho) bore the burden to prove formal execution at trial. The proponent presented only the drafting attorney whose faded memory the trial court found unreliable. Because the proponent failed to meet his burden, the appellate court affirmed the revocation.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court order that vacated a default and dismissed Wells Fargo’s complaint against Rio Poco Homeowners’ Association. The trial court had relied on materials outside the complaint to find Wells Fargo failed to comply with Florida’s presuit mediation service requirements under section 720.311, but the appellate court held dismissal was improper because Wells Fargo pleaded that all conditions precedent had been performed or waived and the complaint’s allegations of waiver were not contradicted by the complaint’s four corners. The case is remanded for further proceedings.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing a homeowner plaintiffs’ suit challenging a neighbor’s parked RV. The appellants sued under Florida Statute section 720.305, but the court concluded their claimed injury was one to the homeowners association as a whole, not a personal injury. Because the claim was derivative in nature, the appellants were required to satisfy the pre-suit requirements of section 617.07401 for derivative actions and failed to do so. The appellate court therefore affirmed without addressing the merits of the RV dispute.

The appellate court reviewed portions of a circuit court order in a trust dispute between the parents (appellants) and the trustee (appellee) over expenditures for a disabled adult beneficiary. The court dismissed the appeal insofar as the parents sought review of compensation for their caregiving because the trial court’s order showed judicial labor on that issue had not concluded. For the remaining issues, the court affirmed the trial court’s rulings: sale of a residential condominium, reimbursement for a truck purchase, the parties’ agreement to use a “Dynamic Dividend Strategy” (but not a specific implementation option), and the sale of an office condominium did not violate due process.

The appellate court reviewed a dispute over whether a Letter of Intent and Shareholders’ Agreement created an enforceable commission agreement for plaintiff Henry McDowell after he transferred most of his company to Roger Moore and Jeff Garcia and Nautical Ventures South, Inc. The court held that paragraph 13 of the Letter of Intent, which left commission terms for future negotiation, was an unenforceable agreement to agree. It affirmed directed verdicts for Moore and Garcia on contract, fiduciary duty, and fraud claims, reversed the denial of a directed verdict for NVS, and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for NVS.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a non-jury foreclosure judgment entered for The Bank of New York Mellon against Carlos Pantoja. The homeowner appealed solely because the lender failed to file its trial exhibits with the clerk after a hybrid (Zoom/in-person) trial, although the judge admitted and reviewed the exhibits during trial and the homeowner never objected then. The court held that the mere failure to file admitted exhibits is a clerical defect, not an independent basis for reversal, and explained that post-trial motions or motions to correct the record are the correct remedies to preserve review.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a lower court order denying defendants' motion to dismiss a personal-injury complaint on sovereign-immunity grounds. Plaintiff was injured when a bus owned by New Jersey Transit Bus Operations, Inc. (NJTBO) struck her vehicle. Defendants argued NJTBO is an arm of New Jersey and therefore immune, but the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Galette (which affirmed the New York Court of Appeals in Colt) held that New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJT) is not an arm of the State. Because NJTBO's immunity claim depends on NJT's status, the court concluded immunity does not apply and affirmed the denial of dismissal.

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed part of Supreme Court Bronx County's order and granted summary judgment to defendant Total Concrete Flatwork, LLC (TCF), dismissing the complaint and cross-claims against it in a motor-vehicle accident case. The court held that TCF established it did not own, operate, control the vehicle at issue and had no employment relationship with the driver. Plaintiffs and codefendants failed to raise a triable issue because ownership and permissive use were admitted by codefendant Total Property Care, leaving TCF unconnected to the vehicle or driver.

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed a lower court order and granted defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiff Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp.'s amended complaint in its entirety. The plaintiff alleged fraud and breach of contract based on an Offering Memorandum's statements about how subordinated notes' proceeds and certain equity instruments (CPECs/PECs) would be used or secured. The court found the Offering Memorandum did not contain actionable misrepresentations and that no contractual provision prohibited redemption of the cited equity instruments, so fraud and breach claims failed as a matter of law.

The First Department modified a lower court order in a discrimination suit by actress Kathy Breiding against director/producer Dennis Piliere and his company. The appellate court granted defendants summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's hostile work environment and retaliation claims under the pre-amendment New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), finding Piliere's comments too sporadic to constitute a permeating hostile environment and that some complained conduct was not protected activity or did not cause an adverse NYSHRL employment action. The court otherwise affirmed denial of summary judgment, leaving plaintiff's gender discrimination claims and all claims under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) to proceed based on disputed facts about pretext and disadvantageous treatment.

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed Supreme Court and granted summary judgment to Chutes and Compactors, dismissing 267 Development LLC's second third-party complaint. The building owner (267 Development) sought contractual indemnification, common-law indemnity and contribution, and insurance-failure damages from Chutes after a porter was injured by glass near a compactor. The court held Chutes' contractual obligations had ended long before the accident, there was no evidence Chutes had been negligent in failing to warn about or create the missing safety cover, and the owner abandoned its insurance claim by not opposing that part of the motion.

The Appellate Division, First Department reversed Supreme Court's dismissal and reinstated plaintiff Forrester's discrimination claims against 640 Park Avenue Corporation and Brown Harris Stevens Residential Management, LLC. The court held that under notice pleading the complaint sufficiently alleges that the co-op owner and managing agent were involved in defendant Tichenor's decision not to sell his unit to plaintiff — a qualified Black woman and nurse practitioner — who was later bypassed in favor of a white male board member. The court found the pleadings, including allegations about the managing agent's communications and the board member's last-minute purchase, adequate to raise an inference of discrimination and warrant discovery.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Madalina Garrido's negligence action against Barawine LLC. Garrido claimed she tripped on a sidewalk crack and that Barawine's sidewalk café forced her into the defective middle slab. The court relied on Barawine's lease disclaiming sidewalk maintenance responsibility, an engineer's affidavit finding adequate clearance to avoid the defect, and testimony that tables would not have diverted the plaintiff's path. The court found plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact and properly rejected plaintiff's affidavit as inconsistent with her deposition.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed Supreme Court's order granting plaintiff M.P. summary judgment on liability for battery, assault, and false imprisonment and denied defendant A.'s cross-motion to dismiss claims based on wrongful transmission of a sexually transmitted disease (STD). The court found the plaintiff's sworn affidavit and exhibits (photographs, arrest report, police report) established a prima facie case and that the defendant submitted no evidence creating a triable issue. The court also allowed the complaint to be conformed to proof to include the STD transmission claim and ordered a trial solely on damages.

The Appellate Division modified a Bronx Supreme Court order to grant the New York City Housing Authority's motion to strike new claims in plaintiff Henriquez's supplemental bills of particulars and otherwise affirmed the lower court's denial of plaintiff's request to amend her notice of claim and complaint. Henriquez, injured by smoke from an alleged apartment fire, had timely filed a notice of claim alleging negligence for permitting an illegal generator. After the statute of limitations, she added distinct theories alleging violations of multiple fire, administrative, and penal code provisions. The court held those new theories were not fairly implied by the original notice and therefore were barred.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a Supreme Court (Bronx County) judgment directing a disciplinary hearing under Civil Service Law § 75(1)(c) for petitioner Joshua Clemente, who had been discharged by the Bronx County District Attorney. The court rejected Clemente’s claim for immediate full back pay, explaining that any entitlement to back pay (which may begin 30 days after suspension) and offsets (such as other earnings or unemployment benefits) must be determined at the § 75(3) hearing. The court rejected the remaining arguments and affirmed without costs.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court order vacating a prior summary-judgment ruling in favor of MIC General Insurance Corporation and, upon vacatur, denying the insurer summary judgment. The court held the trial judge correctly found a reasonable excuse for the default and that questions of fact exist about whether the insured property and relationships fit the policy terms “residence” and “household.” Because the policy terms are not defined and ambiguities are construed against the insurer, the court concluded summary judgment was improper and also affirmed denial of the insurer’s motion to renew.

The First Department affirmed the denial of ExxonMobil's motion to dismiss claims by former InterOil shareholders who allege ExxonMobil manipulated post-closing appraisals to reduce contingent payments. The court held plaintiffs now have standing because one plaintiff acquired enough Escrow Verification Receipts (EVRs) after the Contingent Resource Payment Agreement (CRPA) terminated to meet the contract's Required Holder threshold. The court found transfer restrictions in §§ 3.03 and 3.04 did not survive termination under § 8.11, so EVRs were freely transferable post-termination, and the complaint therefore survives dismissal on standing grounds.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a Bronx County Supreme Court order denying defendants' motion to disqualify the Grigoropoulos Law Group (GLG) from representing plaintiff in a personal-injury action arising from a 2019 vehicle collision. GLG initially represented both plaintiff and driver Santos, obtained a written conflict waiver, and later withdrew for Santos when Santos's position became adverse and proceeded to represent only the plaintiff. The court found defendants waived the disqualification claim by delaying about three years, the written waiver adequately warned of potential conflicts and withdrawal, and there was no evidence that confidential information obtained during GLG's brief representation of Santos was used to plaintiffs' advantage.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a Bronx Supreme Court order denying defendants' motion to disqualify plaintiff's counsel, the Grigoropoulos Law Group (GLG). The dispute arose from GLG's brief, joint-retainer representation of both plaintiff and defendant Santos after a 2019 motor vehicle accident; GLG later withdrew from representing Santos and continued for the plaintiff. The court found defendants had waived any conflict by delaying three years to move for disqualification, that the signed conflict waiver adequately informed both clients of potential adverse positions, and there was no evidence confidential information obtained from Santos was used to the defendants' prejudice.

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the trial court's order denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and granting defendants' motions to dismiss her complaint. Plaintiff, a shareholder in an HDFC co-op, claimed the co-op and its managers delayed providing board minutes and financials, causing her to lose a prospective buyer and giving rise to breach of contract, tortious interference, and conspiracy to commit fraud claims. The court held defendants provided records within a reasonable time, plaintiff produced no evidence the prospective buyer met statutory income qualifications for an HDFC unit, and she therefore failed to show damages or underlying fraud.