PUBLISHED DECISIONS.

594. QAISI (SHAHRAZAD D.)  VS.  ALAEDDIN (ANIS YOUSEF)
Family Law. Affirmed Family Court decision declining to register documents from courts in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.).

597. GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL SENIOR CARE, LLC D/B/A GOLDEN LIVING, ET AL. VS. DOLAN (DAVID)
Arbitration. Affirmed circuit court order5 denying its motion to compel arbitration and dismiss or stay the pending litigation. 

606. FRENCH (JON-MARK) VS. FRENCH (REBECCA)
Family Law. Finding no manifest injustice, affirmed order of the Laurel Family Court modifying timesharing.

620. RECBAR, LLC VS. DRAKE (JONATHAN)
Appeal is dismissed for failure to appealfrom a final and appealable order. Ordinarily orders denying summary judgment are interlocutory.

Appeals. Interlocutory Orders. Appellee Jonathan Drake was injured in a single-person motor vehicle accident. Appellee contends Appellant Recbar, LLC negligently served him alcoholic beverages when it knew or should have known he was intoxicated, resulting in his injuries. Appellant moved for summary judgment under KRS1413.241, Kentucky’s Dram Shop Act, on the basis that the statute does not permit“first-party” claims against dram shops.

On March 1, 2019, the trial court entered an order denying Appellant’s motion for summary judgment. The order provides: “[t]he Court finds there are genuine issues of material fact and that summary judgment is notappropriate.” The order does not contain finality language under CR2 54.02.Appellant filed a “Notice of Interlocutory Appeal” on March 29, 2019. Appellee moved to dismiss the appeal. “A final or appealable judgment is a final order adjudicating all the rights of all the parties in an action or proceeding, or a judgment made final under Rule 54.02.” CR 54.01. Ordinarily, the denial of a motion for summary judgment is considered interlocutory and not appealable. Bell v. Harmon, 284 S.W.2d 812, 814 (Ky. 1955). In the absence of an exception to the general rule, this Court lacks jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal. Wilson v. Russell, 162 S.W.3d 911, 913- 14 (Ky. 2005).

SELECTED NON-PUBLISHED DECISIONS.

592. ROBINSON V. MONROE GUARANTEE INS. CO.
Insurance Coverage. Exclusions – occurrence.
Affirmed. The circuit court found the “violation of any statute” exclusion precluded coverage for Brianna’s injuries caused by sexual molestation. It reasoned that Brianna’s injuries arose from violations for multiple sections of KRSChapter 510.

596. HOLT VS. THOMPSON HINE LLP
Affirmed circuit court order dismissing aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty claims against the law firm of Thompson Hine, LLP. The complaint alleges that for several decades, attorneys at Thompson Hine helped appellants’ brothers to secretlydeprive appellants of their rightful share of their parents’ large estates. 

598. ESTATE OF JOSEPH DILL VS. FLOWERS MD
Affirmed denial of their Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure (CR) 60.02 motion, which sought to set aside a summary judgment granted in a medical malpractice suit. Because the Dills failed to show they are entitled to the extraordinary relief afforded by CR 60.02(e), we affirm.

MINUTES WITH LINKS TO FULL TEXT OF ALL DECISIONS.