The Kentucky Court of Appeals announced 17 decisions on Sept. 19, 2014, with two opinions designated to be published – Barbara Cox vs. Jeffrey Owen from Jefferson County; and Dr. Jack Readnour vs. Jerry Gibson from Kenton County.
A View of “Constitution Square” in Danville, Virginia. Who are those guys in the center of the Governors’ Circle?
For more information on “Constitution Square”, click here. FYI: A bronze statue depicting two men shaking hands, a symbol taken from the state seal, stands in the middle of the Governor’s Circle.
The two Court of Appeals opinions to be published are:
827. Error for Trial Court to Direct Verdict Before Impaneling Jury
BARBARA COX VS. JEFFREY OWEN
OPINION AFFIRMING IN PART, REVERSING IN PART, AND REMANDING
CLAYTON (PRESIDING JUDGE); COMBS (CONCURS) AND NICKELL CONCURS
JEFFERSON
COA To Be Published; 9/19/2014
863. Road Rage Incident Prompted Injury Claims by Pro Se Plaintiff which failed to survive summary judgment
Affirming
Kenton County
COA Published 9/19/2014
COMBS, JUDGE: Jack Readnour, pro se, appeals from an order of the Kenton Circuit Court granting summary judgment and dismissing the claims he asserted against Jerry Gibson, III; Tammy Gibson, his wife; Jerry Gibson, Jr., his father; Thomas G. Abbott; and Dylan Mead. After our review, we affirm.
CAPERTON, JUDGE, CONCURRING: I concur with the result reached by the majority but write separately to express my opinion of those persons who believe they can privately enforce traffic laws. It is apparent from the facts that the Gibsons believed they had the right, as individuals, to enforce our traffic laws. Quite the contrary, they have shown no authority that allows them to enforce traffic laws and, as is apparent from the facts, the Gibsons violated our traffic laws by obstructing a lane of travel on multiple occasions. Their conduct may well be found to have been a factor in precipitating the events that followed.
The blocking of traffic lanes has become prolific on our roads; to this I lend a word of caution. While on many occasions the operator of the vehicle taking the initiative to avoid the traffic delay is without an excuse or emergency to justify his actions which are violative of traffic laws, there may be times that the violator has a medical emergency or other factual scenario that would justify his actions to use clear lanes or initiate emergency procedures. Those that seek to interfere without authority to do so may find themselves immersed in a legal battle wherein they must justify their actions or bear civil and/or criminal liability.
[KCR NOTE: As an aside, here is a news story several years back on a “Dr. Jack Readnour” – “Accused ‘fake doctor’ back in jail” Feb 17, 2009.]
“Continue reading” for the Tort Report and a complete copy of this week’s minutes of ALL decisions with links to their full text.
The Tort Report – Selected decisions this week on tort, insurance and civil law (continue reading).
In addition to the two published decisions above, the following nonpublished decisions are note in our “Tort Report”:
847. Consumer Practice Act
Halpern vs. Hardy
Fayette County
COA Not Published 9/19/2014; PJ Caperton
Affirming in part, dismissing in part, and remanding
CAPERTON, JUDGE: The Appellants and Cross-Appellees, Dermot and Hilary Halpin, appeal the June 14, 2011 order of the Fayette Circuit Court, dismissing their claims in this consumer protection action filed against Appellee and Cross- Appellant Bill Hardy, and Appellees Susan Hardy and Clay Avenue, LLC, and Appellee E. David Marshall, attorney for Appellees Bill and Susan Hardy. Bill Hardy, as Cross-Appellant, argues that the trial court erred in failing to require the Halpins to refund the amount paid to them by Bill Hardy on the first reversed judgment, with interest, and that the court’s final judgment erroneously permitted the amount of the second judgment to be paid through a set-off against the amount previously paid by Bill Hardy. Appellees E. David Marshall and Susan Hardy have also filed motions to dismiss the Halpins’ appeal as frivolous and for Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure (CR) 11 sanctions against the Halpins. Upon review of the record, the arguments of the parties and the applicable law, we grant the motions to dismiss filed by Susan Hardy, Clay Avenue, LLC, and E. David Marshall with respect to the fraudulent conveyances action and affirm the June 14, 2011 order of the Fayette Circuit Court dismissing the Halpins’ claims, and order sanctions as set forth herein. Concerning Hardy’s argument that the court erred in failing to require the Halpins to refund the amount paid to them by Bill Hardy on the first reversed judgment, we decline to alter this portion of the court’s order, and we affirm.
860. No negligence claim found re duty to use flags in funeral procession
Christian v. Steen Funeral Home
Lawrence County
COA Not Published 9/19/2014 Affirming Dismissal
CLAYTON, JUDGE: Mark Christian appeals the Lawrence Circuit Court’s July 15, 2013 order granting the motion of Carriage Funeral Services of Kentucky, Inc., d/b/a as Steen Funeral Home (hereinafter “Steen Funeral Home”) to dismiss his complaint against it. The trial court held that Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 189.378 did not impose a duty on the funeral home to place flags or other identifying objects on vehicles or to illuminate the headlights of vehicles traveling as part of a funeral procession. Further, the trial court determined that common law negligence was not implicated since KRS 189.378 was created by the legislature rather than the courts. Accordingly, the trial court dismissed Mark’s complaint against the funeral home. After careful consideration, we affirm.
[gview file=”https://kycourtreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/MNT091920141.pdf”]
