The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a permanency planning order expressly ordering that legal custody of the children “shall remain with” DSS constitutes a “custody order” under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1104(5), giving DSS standing to file termination-of-parental-rights petitions and conferring subject-matter jurisdiction on the district court.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court vacated four years of guardianship proceedings and remanded for dismissal, holding that the Probate and Family Court never had subject matter jurisdiction over a newborn’s custody under the Massachusetts Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (MCCJA) because New Hampshire—not Massachusetts—was the child’s home state, and the concurrent New Hampshire proceeding independently barred the Massachusetts action under G. L. c. 209B, § 2(d).
The Massachusetts Appeals Court held that the Juvenile Court has jurisdiction under G.L. c. 210, § 1, to hear a birth mother’s motion to revoke her adoption consent and to approve an open adoption agreement, even though the consent was executed before the subject child was added to a pending care and protection petition, because the 1993 statutory amendments require only that a care and protection proceeding be pending when the motion is filed—not that it was pending when the consent was executed.
First Department reverses dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding that a foreign shipping company’s use of New York paying agents, depositories, and underwriters for preferred-stock dividends constitutes transacting business in New York under CPLR 302(a)(1).
The Appellate Division, Second Department holds that a former seminarian’s race, sexual orientation, and disability discrimination claims against the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York and Cardinal Dolan are non-justiciable under the First Amendment’s ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, because adjudicating them would require the court to evaluate his progress in Catholic priestly “human formation” — an inquiry into religious doctrine the courts may not conduct.
The Eighth Court of Appeals held that Texas residents cannot file a special appearance under Rule 120a to contest defective service of process, because Texas courts have presumptive personal jurisdiction over all Texas residents. A misspelled name in a citation is a curable service defect, not a jurisdictional flaw, properly raised by a motion to quash — not a special appearance that risks constituting a general appearance.
The Sixth District confirmed that post-resignation union dues disputes fall within SERB’s exclusive jurisdiction, affirming dismissal of state-court claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The Sixth District dismissed an appeal after finding the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on summary judgment motions while a prior appeal involving related parties was pending.
The Texas Supreme Court dismissed a parental-termination case for lack of jurisdiction after the trial court failed to enter a written extension order before the Family Code’s automatic-dismissal deadline.
The Eighth District affirmed dismissal of an unemployment compensation appeal filed 34 days after the Review Commission’s decision was mailed, holding the 30-day statutory deadline under R.C. 4141.282 is jurisdictional and cannot be overcome by creative pleading.
The Tenth District affirmed the dismissal of a challenge to Ohio Department of Medicaid subrogation rights, holding that R.C. 5160.37 provides the exclusive administrative remedy and the common pleas court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
The First Court of Appeals reversed the denial of a special appearance, holding that forum-selection clauses in LLC agreements could not bind a non-signatory entity through direct-benefits estoppel in a multi-layered ownership structure.
The Seventh District affirmed a transfer of custody jurisdiction from Ohio to Virginia under the UCCJEA, holding that contractual jurisdiction-retention clauses carry little weight when neither party nor the children reside in the forum county.
Delaware Superior Court holds that a pro se third-party defendant waived his personal jurisdiction defense by filing multiple motions without raising it, and finds a permissive forum selection clause does not mandate New York as the exclusive venue.
Delaware Superior Court dismisses with prejudice a grandmother’s school choice complaint against the Caesar Rodney School District, finding no cognizable relief available and no exhaustion of required administrative remedies.
The Sixth District affirmed the vacatur of a Tennessee default judgment enforced in Ohio, finding the Tennessee court lacked personal jurisdiction over the Ohio car dealer, and upheld sanctions against the pro se plaintiff for submitting AI-generated hallucinated case citations to the court.
The Eleventh District sua sponte dismissed an appeal from a probate court’s partial summary judgment on heirship, holding that the order was not a final appealable order under R.C. 2505.02 because it resolved only one party’s rights while leaving other parties’ heirship determinations for further proceedings.
Delaware CCLD grants insurer’s summary judgment motion, holding that USVI law applies and bars policyholders from recovering millions in defense costs incurred before they formally requested coverage under a pollution liability policy.
Delaware Superior Court dismisses all seven claims brought by a pro se homeowner against Dover police, the city, and ADT Security after a warrantless home entry triggered by a residential alarm, finding exigent circumstances and municipal immunity.
Delaware Superior Court denies Fox News’s motion to dismiss Governor Newsom’s defamation suit, finding it reasonably conceivable that the network acted with actual malice by selectively editing video to accuse Newsom of lying about a phone call with President Trump.