Issues of interest to Kentucky to personal injury and insurance attorneys include: Rule 11 sanctions; personal injury to school visitor and application of immunity; enforcability of arbitration agreement; insurance company’s duty to defend under liability policy;
Click here for entire calendar for this month at AOC.
Click here for entire INDEX to COA calendars organized by month and year.
LOCATION: CAMPBELL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, 330 YORK STREET, THIRD FLOOR, COURTROOM 3B, NEWPORT, KENTUCKY
DATE: Wednesday, December 5, 2012
DEANS & HOMER, INC. v COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, PUBLIC PROTECTION CABINET
Civil; Administrative Law: Whether the appellee’s finding that appellant performed an unauthorized transaction of insurance business was arbitrary or clearly erroneous.
LEXINGTON INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. v RANDY WILLEROY
Appeal from denial of CR 11 sanctions. Willeroy asserted claims for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty claims against attorn ey and brokerage company for his mother’s estate. Claims against
brokers were dismissed for failure to state a claim; claims against attorney went to trial and were partially successful. Brokers argues that CR 11 sanctions were appropriate because Willeroy & his counsel
admitted they had no factual basis for claims against them. Willeroy filed a cross-appeal from s.j. dismissing brokers. Motion to dismiss cross-appeal for failure to name necessary party passed to merits
LOCATION: JEFFERSON COUNTY JUDICIAL CENTER, 10TH FLOOR APPELLATE COURTROOM, 700 WEST JEFFERSON STREET, LOUISVILLE,
DATE: Thursday, December 6, 2012
WOODLAWN SPRINGS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v YOUR COMMUNITY BANK, INC.
At issue are restrictive covenants in subdivision restrictions and the proper definition of what constitutes “Developer” under Kentucky law, purportedly an issue of first impression.
GARY HURT, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AS EMPLOYEE v BARBARA PARKER
Personal injury case involving a visitor to school premises. Summary judgment was entered allowing case to proceed by finding that high school principal was not shielded by qualified immunity. Principal,
the appellant before us, challenges finding that his duties were ministerial rather than discretionary and seeks protection of immunity.
LOCATION: HARDIN COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER, 120 EAST DIXIE AVENUE, 2ND FLOOR, COURTROOM 1, ELIZABETHTOWN, KENTUCKY
DATE: Thursday, December 13, 2012
HQM OF PIKEVILLE, LLC v SHERRY COLLINS, ON BEHALF OF
Whether an arbitration agreement was enforceable.
HARLAN COUNTY v JAYNE BROWNING
Whether circuit court properly determined that appellees’ claims were not barred by sovereign or governmental immunity.
NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY v GRAYCO RENTALS, INC.
Whether circuit court erred by determining that appellant had a duty to defend appellee under a general liability insurance policy.
LOCATION: COURT OF APPEALS COURTROOM, 360 DEMOCRAT DRIVE, FRANKFORT, KENTUCKY
DATE: Friday, December 14, 2012
STEPHANIE FOSTER v JENNIE STUART MEDICAL CENTER, INC.
Appeal from summary judgment holding that appellants was not wrongfully discharged, not entitled to the protection of the anti-retaliatory section of KRS 216B.165, that they were not defamed, had no appeal rights and that individual appellees were not liable. Appellants were suspected of being whistleblowers, though they allege they were not and thus held not entitled to the protections of KRS 2.165.
JESSAMINE COUNTY v READY MIX CONCRETE OF SOMERSET, INC.
The Jessamine County Board of Adjustment appeals from the circuit court’s order reversing the Board’s denial of a conditional use permit. On appeal, the Board argues that its previous denial of a conditional
use permit foreclosed a second similar application. The Board also argues that the zoning regulations did not permit the conditional use required.