Here are a few cases I did not have time to write up but seemed either important or irritating enough to mention:
Supreme Court “rescue mission”? The high court is not a “court of error,” meaning the lower courts can really screw the pooch and yet review still will be denied unless the Court sees a way to mold and shape policy. But this case presented no policy, just error, so the grant of review was probably just a rare “rescue mission.” Long v. City of Exeter (Dec. 18, 2024, No. S286705)
The Streisand Effect is an attempt to minimize publicizing an embarrassing fact that winds up publicizing it even more. That's what happened to this litigant who got a restraining order vacated but whose attempt to expunge the records resulted in defeat in a published appellate opinion. Oops. United States v. Lawrence (D.Ariz. Feb. 18, 2025, No. CV-23-01091-PHX-JAT)
You can't agree to limit damages you cause on purpose. Add that to the short list of unenforceable contract provisions. One company intentionally undercut the other's business. You can't agree to waive intentional damages, so you can't cap them, either. New England Country Foods, LLC v. VanLaw Food Products, Inc. (Cal., Apr. 24, 2025, No. S282968)
Review denied in People v. Richardson, a published opinion holding “convictions for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition are constitutional because only law-abiding citizens are among the class of people covered by the text of the Second Amendment. People v. Richardson (Apr. 30, 2025, No. S289562).
(Artwork by Randall Holbrook, RNDL.DESIGN.)