Third Ballard County Courthouse. Located in Wickliffe, Kentucky. Construction started in 1900, completed in 1905 at a cost of $25,000. Design was similar to several courthouses built in Missouri by St. Louis architect Jerome Bibb Legg. Two story brick, Breaux-Arts styles of the period. Listed in National Register of Historic Places in 1980.
Beaux-Arts architecture depended on sculptural decoration along conservative modern lines, employing French and Italian Baroque and Rococo formulas combined with an impressionistic finish and realism. Characteristics of this style included flat roof, risticated and raised first story, heirarch of raised spaces, arched windows, arched doors, symetry, staturary, to name a few. For more info on this style, then see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaux-Arts_architecture.
Click here for links to all the archived AOC Court of Appeals minutes at the web site for the Administrative Office of the Courts.
Click here for a listing of the Kentucky Court Report’s posts of the weekly COA minutes (or you can always access these within the KCR web site at the uppermost dropdown menu option for the Court of Appeals).
AOC version of this week’s decisions can be accessed by clicking here.
Published Court of Appeals Decisions
Links are to full text of PDF published cases for this week.
418. Premises Liability. School parking lot. Snow. Defense of Qualified Official Immunity Applied regarding clearing accumlated snow.
Kim Rasche v. Dr. Sheldon H. Berman
Court of Appeals Published Opinion AFFIRMING. Jefferson.
J. LAMBERT, JUDGE: Kimberly Rasche appeals from the Jefferson Circuit Court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the Appellees. The Appellees are various employees of the Jefferson County Board of Education and district employees who were sued in their individual capacities. The trial court held that the Appellees were entitled to qualified immunity and entered summary judgment in their favor. Upon initial review, this Court affirmed the summary judgment entered by the trial court. Rasche sought discretionary review from the Supreme Court of Kentucky, which granted discretionary review, vacated this Court’s decision, and remanded for further consideration in light of Marson v. Thomason, 438 S.W.3d 292 (Ky. 2014). Upon consideration of Marson and supplemental briefing by the parties, we again affirm the summary judgment entered in favor of the various school employee defendants below.
423. Workers Compensation.
Austin Powder Co. v. Billy Stacy
Court of Appeals Published Opinion AFFIRMING IN PART, REVERSING IN PART, AND REMANDING. Workers Comp.J. LAMBERT, JUDGE: Billy Stacy and Austin Powder Company have both petitioned this Court for review of the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board (the Board). The Board affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (the ALJ) awarding Stacy permanent total disability benefits and medical benefits for cumulative trauma injuries to his wrists and lumbar spine as well as medical benefits for his work-related hearing loss. In his petition, Stacy contends that the Board erred in sua sponte reversing the ALJ’s decision for findings related to the date of manifestation of his cumulative trauma claims and for a determination of the percentage of his cumulative trauma that is related to his work for Austin Powder. In its petition, Austin Powder disputes the Board’s determinations that Dr. Hughes’s testimony was based upon substantial evidence of record; that the impairment rating assigned by Dr. Hughes was within the parameters of the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition; and that Stacy’s hearing loss claim entitled him to medical benefits. Having carefully reviewed the record, the parties’ respective arguments, and the applicable law, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Selected Non-Published Decisions Dealing with tort, insurance and civil procedure:
409. Dismissal for lack of prosecution affirmed.
Estate of Elizabeth Cooper v. Daniel Towner
COA Not to Be Published Opinion AFFIRMING. Bullitt.
An agreed order to dismiss a party does not constitute pretrial activity or step such as discovery to avoid dismissal for lack of prosecution. Potential barring of action following dismissal without prejudice has no bearing.