In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.
Headline: Partner's Estate Excluded From Business, Court Rules Against Surviving Partner
Citation: 568 P.3d 413,2025 CO 23
Brief at a Glance
Surviving business partners must account to a deceased partner's estate for business profits and assets, or face liability for breach of fiduciary duty.
- Document all business communications and financial transactions meticulously.
- Seek legal counsel immediately if a business partner dies and the surviving partner is not transparent.
- Understand your partnership agreement's clauses regarding death and dissolution.
Case Summary
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc., decided by Colorado Supreme Court on May 12, 2025, resulted in a plaintiff win outcome. This case concerns a dispute over the ownership and control of a business, All State Enterprise, Inc., following the death of Timothy Trenshaw. The core dispute involved whether the surviving business partner, Eugene Jennings, wrongfully excluded the estate of Timothy Trenshaw from business operations and assets. The court analyzed partnership agreements and estate law to determine the rights of the estate and the actions of the surviving partner, ultimately finding that Jennings had indeed breached his fiduciary duties and improperly excluded the estate. The court held: The court held that the surviving partner, Eugene Jennings, breached his fiduciary duty to the estate of Timothy Trenshaw by failing to provide an accounting and by excluding the estate from business operations and assets.. The court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the estate's claims, finding that the estate had presented sufficient evidence to support its allegations of wrongful exclusion and breach of fiduciary duty.. The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the extent of the estate's interest in the business and to fashion an appropriate remedy, including potential dissolution or buy-out.. The court clarified that the partnership agreement did not grant Jennings unilateral authority to exclude the estate of a deceased partner without proper accounting or compensation.. The court found that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the partnership agreement and the applicable estate law, leading to an incorrect initial judgment.. This decision reinforces the fiduciary obligations surviving partners owe to the estates of deceased partners, emphasizing the need for transparency and proper accounting. It serves as a reminder to business partners to clearly define succession and estate rights in their partnership agreements to avoid future disputes.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Case Analysis — Multiple Perspectives
Plain English (For Everyone)
If you were a business partner and your partner died, their estate has rights. The surviving partner can't just take over and cut the estate out. The court said Eugene Jennings wrongly excluded Timothy Trenshaw's estate from their business, All State Enterprise, Inc., and must pay the estate what it's owed.
For Legal Practitioners
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed that a surviving partner owes significant fiduciary duties to the estate of a deceased partner, including the duty to account for profits and partnership assets post-death. Jennings' exclusion of the Trenshaw Estate from All State Enterprise, Inc. constituted a breach, entitling the estate to its share of value and profits.
For Law Students
This case illustrates the fiduciary duties partners owe each other, which extend to the deceased partner's estate. The court applied partnership statutes (C.R.S. § 7-60-115) and estate law (C.R.S. § 15-12-701) to hold Jennings liable for excluding the Trenshaw Estate from All State Enterprise, Inc., emphasizing the estate's right to post-death profits.
Newsroom Summary
A Colorado appeals court ruled that a surviving business partner, Eugene Jennings, improperly excluded the estate of his deceased partner, Timothy Trenshaw, from their company, All State Enterprise, Inc. Jennings was ordered to compensate the estate for its share of the business and subsequent profits.
Key Holdings
The court established the following key holdings in this case:
- The court held that the surviving partner, Eugene Jennings, breached his fiduciary duty to the estate of Timothy Trenshaw by failing to provide an accounting and by excluding the estate from business operations and assets.
- The court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the estate's claims, finding that the estate had presented sufficient evidence to support its allegations of wrongful exclusion and breach of fiduciary duty.
- The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the extent of the estate's interest in the business and to fashion an appropriate remedy, including potential dissolution or buy-out.
- The court clarified that the partnership agreement did not grant Jennings unilateral authority to exclude the estate of a deceased partner without proper accounting or compensation.
- The court found that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the partnership agreement and the applicable estate law, leading to an incorrect initial judgment.
Key Takeaways
- Document all business communications and financial transactions meticulously.
- Seek legal counsel immediately if a business partner dies and the surviving partner is not transparent.
- Understand your partnership agreement's clauses regarding death and dissolution.
- Be prepared to pursue legal action to enforce your rights or the estate's rights.
- Ensure proper accounting of all business assets and profits, especially after a partner's death.
Deep Legal Analysis
Standard of Review
De novo review for questions of law, including contract interpretation and statutory application. The court reviews the trial court's findings of fact for clear error.
Procedural Posture
This case reached the Colorado Court of Appeals after the trial court ruled in favor of the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw, finding that Eugene Jennings breached his fiduciary duties and improperly excluded the estate from business operations and assets of All State Enterprise, Inc.
Burden of Proof
The burden of proof was on the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw to demonstrate that Eugene Jennings breached his fiduciary duties and improperly excluded the estate. The standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence.
Legal Tests Applied
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Elements: Existence of a fiduciary relationship · Breach of that duty · Damages resulting from the breach
The court found that a fiduciary relationship existed between Jennings and Trenshaw as business partners. Jennings breached this duty by excluding the estate from management and financial information and by failing to account for business assets after Trenshaw's death. The court determined damages based on the estate's share of the business's value and profits.
Partnership Agreement Interpretation
Elements: The language of the agreement · The intent of the parties · Relevant statutes governing partnerships
The court interpreted the partnership agreement between Jennings and Trenshaw, considering the plain language and the parties' intent. The agreement did not explicitly detail the process for dissolution or the rights of a deceased partner's estate, leading the court to rely on Colorado partnership law and the implied fiduciary duties.
Statutory References
| C.R.S. § 7-60-115 | Partner's Duty — This statute outlines the fiduciary duties partners owe to each other and to the partnership, including the duty of loyalty and the duty of care. The court applied this to find Jennings breached his duties. |
| C.R.S. § 15-12-701 | Powers and Duties of Personal Representative — This statute grants the personal representative of an estate the authority to manage estate assets and pursue claims. The court recognized the Estate's right to act on behalf of Timothy Trenshaw's interests in the partnership. |
Key Legal Definitions
Rule Statements
A partner owes to the partnership and to each of the other partners the duty of loyalty and the duty of care.
The estate of a deceased partner is entitled to the value of the deceased partner's partnership interest, including profits earned after the partner's death.
A surviving partner has a duty to account to the estate of the deceased partner for any partnership property or profits received after the partner's death.
Remedies
The court ordered Jennings to pay the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw the value of his partnership interest, including profits earned after Trenshaw's death.An accounting of the business's financial records was ordered.
Entities and Participants
Key Takeaways
- Document all business communications and financial transactions meticulously.
- Seek legal counsel immediately if a business partner dies and the surviving partner is not transparent.
- Understand your partnership agreement's clauses regarding death and dissolution.
- Be prepared to pursue legal action to enforce your rights or the estate's rights.
- Ensure proper accounting of all business assets and profits, especially after a partner's death.
Know Your Rights
Real-world scenarios derived from this court's ruling:
Scenario: My business partner died, and the surviving partner is refusing to give me any information about the business or my deceased partner's share.
Your Rights: You have the right to access business records and receive an accounting of profits and assets. The estate of your deceased partner has a right to their share of the business's value and any profits earned after their death.
What To Do: Consult with an attorney immediately. Gather any partnership agreements and financial records. File a lawsuit to compel an accounting and recover the estate's rightful share.
Scenario: I inherited a share of a business from a relative, but the other partners are not letting me participate or are hiding financial information.
Your Rights: As an heir or beneficiary of a deceased partner's estate, you have rights to the business's financial information and a share of its value and profits. The surviving partners have fiduciary duties to you.
What To Do: Seek legal counsel specializing in business and estate law. Send a formal demand for an accounting and information. If necessary, initiate legal proceedings to protect your inheritance.
Is It Legal?
Common legal questions answered by this ruling:
Is it legal for a surviving business partner to exclude the deceased partner's estate from business operations and profits?
No, it is generally not legal. Surviving partners have fiduciary duties to the estate of a deceased partner, requiring them to provide an accounting and ensure the estate receives its rightful share of the business's value and profits earned after the partner's death.
This applies in Colorado, based on C.R.S. § 7-60-115 and common law principles of fiduciary duty.
Practical Implications
For Heirs and beneficiaries of deceased business owners
The ruling clarifies that estates have a strong legal standing to demand financial transparency and their rightful share of business assets and profits from surviving partners, preventing wrongful exclusion.
For Surviving business partners
This decision reinforces the strict fiduciary duties owed to the estates of deceased partners. Surviving partners must act diligently and transparently to avoid liability for breach of duty.
For Personal representatives of estates
Personal representatives have clear legal grounds and precedent to pursue claims against surviving business partners who fail to account for or improperly withhold estate assets related to business interests.
Related Legal Concepts
Governs the formation, operation, and dissolution of partnerships, including the... Fiduciary Duties
Legal obligations requiring one party to act in the best interest of another, of... Estate Law
Deals with the administration of a deceased person's assets and liabilities, inc... Breach of Contract
Failure to fulfill the terms of a legally binding agreement, which can lead to l...
Frequently Asked Questions (33)
Comprehensive Q&A covering every aspect of this court opinion.
Basic Questions (7)
Q: What is In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. about?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. is a case decided by Colorado Supreme Court on May 12, 2025.
Q: What court decided In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. was decided by the Colorado Supreme Court, which is part of the CO state court system. This is a state supreme court.
Q: When was In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. decided?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. was decided on May 12, 2025.
Q: What is the citation for In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
The citation for In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. is 568 P.3d 413,2025 CO 23. Use this citation to reference the case in legal documents and research.
Q: What is the main issue in the Trenshaw v. Jennings case?
The case centered on whether Eugene Jennings, the surviving partner of All State Enterprise, Inc., wrongfully excluded the estate of his deceased partner, Timothy Trenshaw, from business operations and assets.
Q: Who won the case at the appeals court level?
The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw, affirming that Eugene Jennings breached his fiduciary duties.
Q: What business was involved in this dispute?
The business involved was All State Enterprise, Inc., a partnership between Eugene Jennings and the late Timothy Trenshaw.
Legal Analysis (12)
Q: Is In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. published?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. is a published, precedential opinion. Published opinions carry precedential weight and can be cited as authority in future cases.
Q: What was the ruling in In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.. Key holdings: The court held that the surviving partner, Eugene Jennings, breached his fiduciary duty to the estate of Timothy Trenshaw by failing to provide an accounting and by excluding the estate from business operations and assets.; The court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the estate's claims, finding that the estate had presented sufficient evidence to support its allegations of wrongful exclusion and breach of fiduciary duty.; The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the extent of the estate's interest in the business and to fashion an appropriate remedy, including potential dissolution or buy-out.; The court clarified that the partnership agreement did not grant Jennings unilateral authority to exclude the estate of a deceased partner without proper accounting or compensation.; The court found that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the partnership agreement and the applicable estate law, leading to an incorrect initial judgment..
Q: Why is In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. important?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. has an impact score of 65/100, indicating significant legal impact. This decision reinforces the fiduciary obligations surviving partners owe to the estates of deceased partners, emphasizing the need for transparency and proper accounting. It serves as a reminder to business partners to clearly define succession and estate rights in their partnership agreements to avoid future disputes.
Q: What precedent does In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. set?
In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. established the following key holdings: (1) The court held that the surviving partner, Eugene Jennings, breached his fiduciary duty to the estate of Timothy Trenshaw by failing to provide an accounting and by excluding the estate from business operations and assets. (2) The court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the estate's claims, finding that the estate had presented sufficient evidence to support its allegations of wrongful exclusion and breach of fiduciary duty. (3) The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the extent of the estate's interest in the business and to fashion an appropriate remedy, including potential dissolution or buy-out. (4) The court clarified that the partnership agreement did not grant Jennings unilateral authority to exclude the estate of a deceased partner without proper accounting or compensation. (5) The court found that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the partnership agreement and the applicable estate law, leading to an incorrect initial judgment.
Q: What are the key holdings in In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
1. The court held that the surviving partner, Eugene Jennings, breached his fiduciary duty to the estate of Timothy Trenshaw by failing to provide an accounting and by excluding the estate from business operations and assets. 2. The court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the estate's claims, finding that the estate had presented sufficient evidence to support its allegations of wrongful exclusion and breach of fiduciary duty. 3. The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the extent of the estate's interest in the business and to fashion an appropriate remedy, including potential dissolution or buy-out. 4. The court clarified that the partnership agreement did not grant Jennings unilateral authority to exclude the estate of a deceased partner without proper accounting or compensation. 5. The court found that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the partnership agreement and the applicable estate law, leading to an incorrect initial judgment.
Q: What cases are related to In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
Precedent cases cited or related to In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.: In re Marriage of Dale, 87 P.3d 102 (Colo. App. 2003); People v. Smith, 112 P.3d 701 (Colo. 2005).
Q: What are fiduciary duties in a partnership?
Fiduciary duties require partners to act with loyalty and care towards each other and the partnership. This includes providing full financial disclosure and acting in the best interest of the partnership and fellow partners.
Q: Did Jennings have a fiduciary duty to Trenshaw's estate?
Yes, the court found that Jennings, as the surviving partner, owed fiduciary duties to the estate of his deceased partner, Timothy Trenshaw, under Colorado law.
Q: What specific actions by Jennings were considered a breach of duty?
Jennings' breach included excluding the estate from business management, failing to provide financial information, and not properly accounting for business assets and profits after Trenshaw's death.
Q: What statutes were relevant to this case?
Key statutes included C.R.S. § 7-60-115 regarding a partner's duty of loyalty and care, and C.R.S. § 15-12-701 concerning the powers of a personal representative of an estate.
Q: What does 'de novo review' mean in this context?
De novo review means the appellate court looks at the legal issues, like contract interpretation and statutory application, from the beginning, without giving deference to the trial court's legal conclusions.
Q: What remedies did the court order?
The court ordered Jennings to pay the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw the value of his partnership interest and any profits earned after Trenshaw's death. An accounting of business finances was also mandated.
Practical Implications (5)
Q: How does In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. affect me?
This decision reinforces the fiduciary obligations surviving partners owe to the estates of deceased partners, emphasizing the need for transparency and proper accounting. It serves as a reminder to business partners to clearly define succession and estate rights in their partnership agreements to avoid future disputes. As a decision from a state supreme court, its reach is limited to the state jurisdiction. This case is moderate in legal complexity to understand.
Q: What happens if a surviving business partner doesn't comply with their duties?
If a surviving partner breaches their fiduciary duties, they can be held liable for damages, which may include the value of the deceased partner's share and subsequent profits, as seen in this case.
Q: How can I protect my inheritance if it involves a business interest?
Ensure you have a clear understanding of the business structure and any partnership agreements. If issues arise, consult an attorney specializing in business and estate law promptly.
Q: What should I do if I suspect a surviving partner is mismanaging or hiding assets?
Gather all available documentation, consult with an attorney, and consider filing a lawsuit to compel an accounting and protect the estate's interests.
Q: Does this ruling apply to all business partnerships in Colorado?
The principles of fiduciary duty and the rights of estates generally apply to partnerships in Colorado, but specific outcomes can depend on the exact terms of partnership agreements and the facts of each case.
Historical Context (2)
Q: What is the historical basis for partner fiduciary duties?
The concept of fiduciary duties in partnerships has deep roots in common law, evolving over centuries to ensure fairness and trust among business associates.
Q: How did partnership law evolve to address deceased partners' estates?
Partnership statutes, like those in Colorado, have codified and clarified the rights of deceased partners' estates, building upon common law principles to provide clearer legal recourse.
Procedural Questions (4)
Q: What was the docket number in In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc.?
The docket number for In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. is 24SA262. This identifier is used to track the case through the court system.
Q: Can In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. be appealed?
Generally no within the state system — a state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law issues. However, if a federal constitutional question is involved, a party may petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review.
Q: What is the procedural posture of this case?
The case came to the Colorado Court of Appeals after a trial court ruled in favor of the estate, and the surviving partner appealed the decision.
Q: What is the standard of review for findings of fact?
The appellate court reviews a trial court's findings of fact for clear error, meaning they will only overturn them if there is a definite mistake or omission.
Cited Precedents
This opinion references the following precedent cases:
- In re Marriage of Dale, 87 P.3d 102 (Colo. App. 2003)
- People v. Smith, 112 P.3d 701 (Colo. 2005)
Case Details
| Case Name | In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. |
| Citation | 568 P.3d 413,2025 CO 23 |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
| Date Filed | 2025-05-12 |
| Docket Number | 24SA262 |
| Precedential Status | Published |
| Outcome | Plaintiff Win |
| Disposition | reversed and remanded |
| Impact Score | 65 / 100 |
| Significance | This decision reinforces the fiduciary obligations surviving partners owe to the estates of deceased partners, emphasizing the need for transparency and proper accounting. It serves as a reminder to business partners to clearly define succession and estate rights in their partnership agreements to avoid future disputes. |
| Complexity | moderate |
| Legal Topics | Partnership law, Fiduciary duties of partners, Estate law, Business dissolution, Breach of contract, Wrongful exclusion from business |
| Jurisdiction | co |
Related Legal Resources
About This Analysis
This comprehensive multi-pass AI-generated analysis of In Re Lucas Trenshaw and Theresa Gardner, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Timothy Trenshaw v. Eugene Jennings and All State Enterprise, Inc. was produced by CaseLawBrief to help legal professionals, researchers, students, and the general public understand this court opinion in plain English. This case received our HEAVY-tier enrichment with 5 AI analysis passes covering core analysis, deep legal structure, comprehensive FAQ, multi-audience summaries, and cross-case practical intelligence.
CaseLawBrief aggregates court opinions from CourtListener, a project of the Free Law Project, and enriches them with AI-powered analysis. Our goal is to make the law more accessible and understandable to everyone, regardless of their legal background.
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. May contain errors. Consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.
Related Cases
Other opinions on Partnership law or from the Colorado Supreme Court:
-
Gustavo Lopez v. The People of the State of Colorado.
Colorado Supreme Court: Miranda statements voluntary under totality of circumstancesColorado Supreme Court · 2026-04-13
-
Jaimi J. Mostellar v. City of Colorado Springs, a Colorado municipality.
Unlawful Traffic Stop Extension Leads to Unconstitutional Vehicle SearchColorado Supreme Court · 2026-04-13
-
Ralph L. Wadsworth Construction Company, LLC v. Regional Rail Partners; Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc.; Graham Contracting Ltd.; Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America; Balfour Beatty, LLC; and Graham Business Trust.
Colorado Supreme Court · 2026-04-06
-
CenturyLink, Inc.; Glen F. Post, III; R. Stewart Ewing, Jr.; David D. Cole; William A. Owens; Martha H. Bejar; Virginia Boulet; Peter C. Brown; W. Bruce Hanks; Jeffrey K. Storey; Steven T. Clontz; Mary L. Landrieu; Gregory J. McCray; Harvey P. Perry; Michael J. Roberts; Laurie A. Siegel; and Sunit S. Patel v. Dean Houser
Colorado Supreme Court · 2026-04-06
-
Khristina Phillips v. The People of the State of Colorado.
Colorado Supreme Court · 2026-04-06
-
People v. Shockey
Exigent Circumstances Justify "Plain View" Contraband DiscoveryColorado Supreme Court · 2026-03-30
-
Townsell v. People
Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Warrantless Vehicle Search Under Automobile ExceptionColorado Supreme Court · 2026-03-30
-
The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant: v. Dakotah J. Lulei. Defendant-Appellee:
Court Upholds Dismissal of DUI Vehicular Homicide Charge Due to Insufficient Evidence of Impairment at Time of AccidentColorado Supreme Court · 2026-03-30