Carter v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004-10-08 · cited 15×
The case concerned Arnold W. Carter's appeal from the Bourbon Circuit Court's denial of his motion to intervene as a matter of right under CR 24.01 in a lawsuit filed by Jamie D. Smith against the Bourbon County Board of Education alleging multiple violations of the Open Meetings Act. The underlying suit challenged actions at a December 19, 2002, meeting where the Board accepted Carter's resignation as superintendent and entered a consulting contract with him, and the circuit court had issued a temporary injunction blocking further payments under that contract. The Court of Appeals reversed the denial, ruling that the motion was timely filed, that the action could practically impair Carter's ability to protect his contractual interests, and that neither Smith nor the Board adequately represented those interests.
procedure
Hallahan v. the Courier Journal
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004-06-25 · cited 127×
Dan Hallahan sued The Courier-Journal under Kentucky Revised Statutes Chapter 344 for disability discrimination after he developed a back injury from new physical duties involving lifting newspaper bundles following a 1998 restructuring of delivery operations. Hallahan claimed the employer failed to accommodate his restrictions, denied him promotions, issued reprimands, and ultimately took adverse actions against him due to his condition. The Jefferson Circuit Court granted summary judgment to the employer and dismissed the complaint, which the Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that Hallahan failed to establish a prima facie case because he did not prove he was disabled under the statute, as his impairment did not substantially limit a major life activity such as working, even under either the direct-evidence or McDonnell Douglas circumstantial-evidence frameworks.
labor & employmentcivil rights
Kingrey v. Whitlow
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004-02-20 · cited 17×
The case concerned whether a domestic violence order (DVO) under Kentucky law could be reissued after expiration without evidence that new acts of domestic violence or abuse had occurred during the prior period. The Court of Appeals of Kentucky reversed the circuit court's decision and held that a DVO may be reissued under KRS 403.750(2), which permits renewal for additional periods up to three years with no limit on the number of reissuances. The court reasoned that the statute does not require proof of subsequent acts of abuse and instead allows parties to present testimony regarding the significance of any lack of incidents during the order's effectiveness, while the original finding that abuse may recur can support renewal. The district court had reissued the DVO based on the petitioner's ongoing fear and the history of severe prior abuse and violations, which the appeals court found sufficient.
family law
Marksberry v. Chandler
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004-01-30 · cited 21×
In Marksberry v. Chandler, an inmate at Luther Luckett Correctional Complex challenged a prison disciplinary finding that he committed physical action against another inmate, resulting in 15 days of disciplinary segregation, by filing a petition for declaration of rights alleging due process violations under the U.S. and Kentucky Constitutions, including insufficient evidence from confidential sources and denial of a witness. The Oldham Circuit Court dismissed the petition, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that Marksberry lacked a protected liberty interest because, under Sandin v. Conner, short-term disciplinary segregation does not constitute an atypical and significant hardship in relation to ordinary prison life, and prison regulations did not create a liberty interest in this context. The decision relied on precedents establishing that such penalties and related procedural claims do not trigger due process protections absent a qualifying liberty interest.
criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure
PNC Bank, N.A. v. Citizens Bank of Northern Kentucky, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2003-12-19 · cited 16×
This case involved a foreclosure action filed by Citizens Bank of Northern Kentucky against the Bennetts and their property after they defaulted on a loan; Citizens Bank named PNC Bank as a defendant because PNC held a prior recorded mortgage on the same property. After serving the complaint on a branch manager at PNC's Northern Kentucky location, PNC failed to respond, leading the trial court to enter a default judgment that declared PNC's lien null and void and ordered the property sold. PNC later moved to vacate the default judgment, arguing improper service, but the trial court denied the motion. The appellate court affirmed, holding that service on the branch manager qualified as proper service on a managing agent under Kentucky civil rules because it was reasonable to expect the manager to handle the legal papers. The court also found PNC was the correct successor entity and had received adequate notice.
propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory
Patterson v. Estate of Boone
Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2003-12-05 · cited 3×
The case Patterson v. Estate of Boone involved the interpretation of KRS 396.055 on the allowance and disallowance of claims by personal representatives of an estate. Claimants filed a timely statement of claim for contingent liabilities arising from a guaranty agreement, but the estate took no action within sixty days, resulting in an automatic allowance under the statute; after investigation, the estate later petitioned to disallow the claim. The district court denied the petition, but the circuit court reversed and the Court of Appeals affirmed in part, ruling that the statute permits disallowance before payment upon a showing of cause and that the estate had demonstrated sufficient cause due to the claim's complexity and the need for document review. The court held the claim disallowed without requiring a remand for further findings on the merits.
procedureproperty