Here are the decisions announced and posted by the Court of Appeals in their weekly minutes. Please note that you will have to check Case Information for each decision for finality, amendments, rehearing, or other matters including motions for discretionary review (MDR) filed with the Supreme Court of Kentucky.
Published Court of Appeals Decisions
Here are the links to the full text of each published case for this week with a short synopsis.
533. Unemployment Benefits. Substantial compliance with filing action for benefits.
Wilson v. Kentucky Unemployment Insurance Commission
Court of Appeals Published Opinion REVERSING and REMANDING Jefferson Cir Ct’s denial of unemployment compensation benefits because the complaint was not properly verified. COA concluded applicant had substantially complied with the statute and reversed and remanded.
542 Res judicata and federal claim
Hashemian v. Louisville Regional Airport Authority
Court of Appeals Published Opinion AFFIRMING Jefferson Cir Ct summary judgment in favor or airport authority. Appellant argues that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply in this case because the claims raised in the state action were not raised in the federal action and that the federal action was not complete. We disagree and believe the trial court properly granted summary judgment.
550. Workers Compensation.
LKLP CAC Inc. v. Fleming
Court of Appeals Published Opinion AFFIRMING Workers Comp Board AFFIRMING ALJ’s reopening claim and finding worsening condition
Selected Non-Published Decisions Dealing with tort, insurance and civil procedure:
532. Underinsured motorist benefits. Coverage. Who is an occupant?
Jackson v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.
COA Not to Be Published Opinion REVERSING & REMANDING Graves Cir Ct summary judgment in favor of State Farm dismissing his complaint on basis he did not qualify for underinsured motorist benefits because he was not an “occupant” of a vehicle.
Immediately before the accident, Jackson was leaning his head into the passenger window of Doyle’s vehicle with his arms on the door. At the time of the accident, Jackson raised his head out of the window and had his hands on the passenger door when he was struck by Jones’s vehicle, which pushed him against Doyle’s vehicle. Jackson applied for basic reparation benefits (BRB) from GEICO as a pedestrian and received those benefits. He also applied for and received liability benefits from GEICO in the amount of $25,000 which was the maximum available under its liability policy on the Doyle vehicle that hit Jackson. Jackson then filed suit against State Farm for UIM coverage claiming he was an “occupant” of Doyle’s vehicle under its policy. The State Farm policy defines “insured” as including “any other person while occupying a car that: (a) is owned by you [Doyle].” The policy states: “Occupying means in, on, entering, or exiting.”
Considering the facts most favorably to Jackson under an expansive interpretation of the State Farm policy, we conclude the trial court erred by determining as a matter of law that Jackson was not “occupying” Doyle’s vehicle: (1) there was a causal relationship or connection between where Jackson was located when he received his injury and the use of the insured vehicle; Hayes’s action of calling to Jackson, Doyle’s action of stopping his vehicle behind Jones’s vehicle, and Jackson conversing with Hayes through the open passenger window with his back to Jones’s vehicle put him in a vulnerable position behind her vehicle and the impact of the two vehicles resulted in his injuries from being pinned between them and hitting his head on Doyle’s vehicle; (2) Jackson was in reasonably close geographic proximity to Doyle’s vehicle because he was in actual physical contact with it when he was hit by Jones’s vehicle; (3) Jackson was vehicle oriented because he had his hands on the vehicle and was talking to Hayes through the window; and (4) Jackson was arranging a ride which was an essential transaction to enable him to use the vehicle as a passenger and, although paused, the vehicle was still being driven which is also an essential use of the vehicle.1 Therefore, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to State Farm.
536. Premises Liability. Shelton v. Kentucky Easter Seals Not Applicable.
Phillips v. Touchstone Properties LLC
COA Not to Be Published Opinion AFFIRMING Fayette Cir Ct summary judgment dismissing premises liability claim
537. Premises Liability. Carter v. Bullitt Host applied in snow and ice accumulation.
Reed v. Weber
COA Not to Be Published Opinion REVERSING & REMANDING Kenton Cir Ct summary judgment dismissing tort claim against building owner
[gview file=”https://kycourtreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/MNT07012016.pdf”]
