PUBLISHED DECISIONS.

512. MCCARTHY V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Criminal Law. Introduce evidence of his refusal to take a warrantless blood test and giving the jury an Allen charge

514. FRANKFORT MEDICAL INVESTORS dpa THE LANTERN V. THOMAS
Affirmed holding that The Lantern’s) arbitration agreement is invalid and denying their motion to dismiss or stay the Appellees’ (the Thomasfamily’s) claims.

516. AMERICAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF KY V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
American National University of Kentucky, Inc. (“National”) appeals the Fayette Circuit Court’s final judgment that it “willfully” violated the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act (“KCPA”) by publishing false, deceptive, and misleading statements on its website about its students’ post-graduate employment rates. National contends the trial court erred by finding that it was liable for the actions of the company that created its website. National also argues the trial courterroneously defined “willful” under the KCPA, employed the wrong standard ofproof, and abused its discretion by imposing a $20.00 civil penalty for every day the misleading employment figures remained on its website. For reasons stated below, we affirm most of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. However, we hold the trial court’s “per day” method of calculating KCPAviolations was an abuse of discretion. Hence, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a new penalty consistent with this opinion.

519. KYLE V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Criminal Law. Persistent felony sentence enhancement. Affirmed added 13 years.


SELECTED NON-PUBLISHED DECISIONS.

509. DICK V. ANTON
Authenticating signatures on beneficiary designation.

510. CLARK V. LOUISVILLE-JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOV’T
Immunity and dismissal affirmed on claim city was liable for negligent maintenance of spill way and water damage.

MINUTES WITH LINKS TO FULL TEXT TO ALL DECISIONS.

513. BELL HELICOPTER V. DOBBS ESTATE
Reversed and remanded jury award of damages arising from mid-air helicopter crash re admissibility and exclusion of certain evidence.

“Considering that the primary and ultimate factual issue at trial was whether a manufacturing void caused the Air Evac helicopter crash, it was unfair and prejudicial to only admit selective parts of Rodriguez’s examination by appellees and to completely exclude Bell Helicopter’s direct examination of Rodriguez. See CR 32.01(d); see also Armstrong v. McGuire, 283 S.W.2d 366 (Ky. 1955). By so doing, the jury was only presented with part of Rodriguez’svideo-taped deposition testimony, and there exists a reasonable probability that the jury was swayed to believe appellees’ repetitive assertion throughout the trial thatBell Helicopter possessed “actual knowledge” and admitted that a void caused the Air Evac helicopter crash. As hereinbefore stated, this issue went to the heart of the case – whether a manufacturing defect (void) caused the Air Evac helicopter crash. The error in not admitting Bell Helicopter’s examination of Rodriguez wasnot harmless. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the exclusion of Rodriguez’svideo-taped deposition testimony elicited by Bell Helicopter as set forth above was unfairly prejudicial and constitutes reversible error. KRE 103; CR 61.01; Tetrick v. Frashure, 119 S.W.3d 89 (Ky. App. 2003). We, thus, reverse upon this issue.”

MINUTES WITH LINKS TO FULL TEXT OF ALL DECISIONS.