The case involved a wrongful death claim by the estate of a public housing resident shot and killed by a third party, alleging negligence by the Housing Authority of Paducah and the City of Paducah in failing to provide adequate security. The trial court dismissed the claims based on KRS 411.155, which bars liability for injuries from criminal firearm use absent conspiracy or aiding by the defendant, and on sovereign immunity grounds for the city. The appellate court ruled that KRS 411.155 violates §§ 14 and 54 of the Kentucky Constitution by abolishing remedies for personal injuries, and that common law permits landlord liability for foreseeable criminal acts if reasonable steps were not taken to prevent them. The court remanded the claim against the housing authority for further proceedings but affirmed dismissal of the city, finding no special duty owed and that the housing authority was a separate entity.
This case involved a personal injury claim by Halderman against Sanderson Forklifts, an English company, after he was injured by a defective Winget dumper in Kentucky; the dumper had been sold through an Ohio distributor. The trial court dismissed the complaint on grounds that the one-year statute of limitations had run, the court lacked personal jurisdiction over the foreign defendant, and the breach-of-warranty claim failed for lack of privity. The appellate court held that the action was timely commenced under Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure when the complaint was filed and summons issued in good faith, but affirmed dismissal because Sanderson Forklifts lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Kentucky to support personal jurisdiction and because KRS 355.2-318 warranty claims require privity limited to purchasers or household members. The court reasoned that the defendant's sale of three units to an Ohio distributor, with one ending up in Kentucky by chance, did not constitute purposeful availment of the forum state.
The case involved TARC, a self-insured employer, suing the tort-feasors in a 1986 motor vehicle accident to recover workers' compensation benefits it had paid to its injured bus driver employee; the suit was filed in November 1988. The Jefferson Circuit Court granted summary judgment for TARC, but the Court of Appeals reversed, holding the action time-barred. The court reasoned that TARC's subrogation claim under KRS 342.700(1) was derivative of the employee's tort claim rather than an independent statutory action, so it was subject to the two-year limitations period in KRS 304.39-230(6) of the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act instead of the five-year period in KRS 413.120(2).
This case involved an appeal by Paul and Roxanne Elwell from a jury verdict finding them jointly and severally liable for converting the assets of Mary McKenney, a 90-year-old woman determined to lack mental capacity, through fraud and undue influence after she moved into their home; the verdict awarded compensatory damages for lost real estate value, cash, interest, and medical payments plus $10,000 in punitive damages. The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment in favor of McKenney's guardian, Sharon Stone. The court reasoned that the Elwells failed to comply with appellate briefing rules requiring identification of preserved errors and that the record contained ample evidence of exploitation beyond a scintilla, with no manifest injustice from declining to review unpreserved issues.
In Spears v. Spears, the husband appealed the denial of his CR 60.02 motion to reopen a 1985 divorce judgment that had presumed his paternity of a child born during the marriage and ordered him to pay child support. The wife had asserted the child's paternity after the husband petitioned for dissolution, leading the trial court to apply the presumption of legitimacy without further contest at the time. Years later, blood testing confirmed the husband was not the biological father, prompting his motion to set aside the paternity finding. The court held that res judicata would normally bar relitigation of the issue but that the doctrine must yield to fairness and justice when overwhelming evidence shows the man is not the father and no prior support demands had been made. It reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the motion.
The case involved Carol Floyd suing Humana hospitals, University of Louisville entities, and Dr. Lucas for permanent injuries allegedly caused by anesthesia during her Caesarean section delivery. The trial court granted summary judgments to the defendants, finding no negligence by Dr. Lucas, no actual or apparent agency relationships with the hospitals for the doctors involved, and no independent negligence claims. It also denied Floyd's motion to amend her complaint to add new allegations due to undue delay after she learned of other potential doctors involved. The Court of Appeals affirmed these rulings, emphasizing that vicarious liability claims fail without underlying negligence and that the admission forms disclosed independent contractor status of physicians.