SCOKY Minutes for January 20, 2011 posted [link corrected 1.29.2011]

SCOKY Minutes for January 20, 2011 posted.

Decisions:  18 with 9 published.
3 disciplinary actions.
Some of the published civil decisions of interest:

5.    MATTHEW HUDSON V. CAVE HILL CEMETERY, ET AL.
2010-SC-000223-WC FROM COURT OF APPEALS
OPINION OF THE COURT – AFFIRMING   TO BE PUBLISHED
Questions Presented:
Workers' Compensation. Whether parties’ correspondence constituted an adequate memorandum of agreement under KRS 342.265(1); more specifically, whether the amount of lump sum proceeds to be allocated to a Medicare Set-Aside Account is an essential element of a settlement that includes such an account.

6. MARY JANE CALHOUN, ET AL. V. CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., ET AL.
TO BE PUBLISHED 2009-SC-000100-DG BULLITT
OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUSTICE SCOTT –
AFFIRMING IN PART AND
REVERSING IN PART
VENTERS, J., DISSENTS BY
SEPARATE OPINION, IN WHICH
CUNNINGHAM, J., JOINS.
Questions Presented:
Personal Injury. Negligence. Railroad Duty of Care. Extra Hazardous Private Crossing. Issues include the proper standard for evaluating whether a crossing is extra hazardous and the general duties owed by railroads at private crossings.

7. GLEN AVERY BRYANT V. PULASKI COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; AND BRIAN BISHOP
2009-SC-000036-DG PULASKI TO BE PUBLISHED
OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUSTICE NOBLE – AFFRIMING IN PART, REVERSING IN PART,
VACATING IN PART AND REMANDING

Questions Presented:
Qualified Official Immunity. Issues include whether a governmental employee may assert qualified immunity in a lawsuit brought by a prisoner, where the prisoner was physically injured by the governmental employee's acts of "horseplay" or teasing of the prisoner while supervising him on work release detail.

8. PROGRESSIVE MAX INSURANCE COMPANY V. NATIONAL CAR RENTAL SYSTEMS, INC.
2009-SC-000577-DG JEFFERSONTO BE PUBLISHED
OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUSTICE SCOTT – REVERSING
Questions Presented:
Insurance. Basic Reparations Obligors. Subrogation. The issue is whether a rental car insurer that pays basic reparations benefits to the injured is entitled to subrogation from the driver's liability insurer. If so, which insurer has priority.

This appeal arises from a subrogation dispute regarding basic reparations benefits (BRB) paid by Appellee, National Car Rental Systems, Inc. (National) to a passenger of one of its rental vehicles. After payment, National sought full reimbursement against Appellant, Progressive Max (Progressive), the insurer of the driver of National's vehicle.
After the Jefferson Circuit Court granted summary judgment in National's favor, the Kentucky Court ofAppeals affirmed, holding that (1) Progressive was primarily liablefor BRB; and (2)Nationalmay pursue its claim via KRS 304.39-050. We granted discretionary review to determine the correctness of that opinion and now reverse.

Here, once again,we are asked to determine an issue of priority,but, under different circumstances. Rather than addressing two excess clauses as we did in Shelter, this Court now faces the question ofwhether the vehicle  owner's insurance should take priority over the driver's insurance when BRB are owed to an injured third party. We again hold that, per the policies established in the MVRA, priority lies with the vehicle owner.

————————————————————–

By the way.  I will now just be linking to the Supreme Court's minutes as posted.  The reason is that the minutes already contain a detailed listing of all decisions with name, author, action (affirming etc), cse number, and lower court.  IF PUBLISHED, then the "Questions Presented" is in a box.  Then with the hot link for each decision, then you can instantly click through to the full text of the decision.

More details will follow.

For  you iPad readers.  Download GoodReader, and when you have the minutes in PDF in your iPad, then right click on top right hand corner and you will be then given option of opening document in Goodreader AND the HOT LINKS TO THE DECISIONS WORK!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.