The Kentucky Court of Appeals considered an interesting issue of insurance law in a reported decision earlier this year. In Stamper v. Hyden, 334 S.W.3d 120 (Ky. App. 2011), a case arising in Kenton County, the Court held that an insured driver was entitled to make a claim for uninsured motorist (“UM”) benefits for injuries suffered when the driver’s ex-boyfriend intentionally rammed his car into hers.
Read More...
The Kentucky Supreme Court held earlier this year that a writ of prohibition was not an appropriate remedy to challenge a County Attorney’s use of documents incorrectly purporting to originate from a court to require persons named in a criminal complaint but not yet charged to attend a mediation prior to issuance of a warrant or summons.
Read More...
Litigants in Kentucky state courts now have new guidance on dealing with spoliation of evidence. Kentucky appellate courts have produced few decisions on the issue of spoliation or destruction of evidence with almost none in the civil context (most involve prosecutorial destruction of evidence). However, with the exponentially increasing digitalization of document storage, the proliferation of emails, and the age of electronic discovery, spoliation of evidence is become a more common issue in civil litigation.
Read More...
A recent decision by the Kentucky Court of Appeals (won by my DBL colleagues Emily Hanna and Betsy Weber) highlights an important consideration for any Kentucky attorney contemplating the appeal of a trial court’s civil judgment. The case, Morgan v. Appalachian Regional Healthcare, Inc. (2010-CA-197) (10/14/11), involved a civil action by a rural hospital to enforce
...
Read More...
At present, there is only one Kentucky case that mentions Bell Atl. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007), and there are no cases that mention Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ––– U.S. ––––, ––––, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). The one case that mentions Twombly is designated “Not To Be Published.” That case, Espinosa v. Jefferson/Louisville Metro. Gov’t, 2009 WL 277488 (Ky. App. 2009), citing Twombly states, “Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” It does not discuss the broader plausibility standard adopted by the federal cases.
Read More...
Two recent Kentucky appellate decisions, one by the Kentucky Supreme Court, the other by the Court of Appeals, address important issues of appellate procedure: supersedeas bond and interlocutory appeal.
Read More...
In New Albany Tractor v. Louisville Tractor, et al., ––– F.3d ––––, 2011 WL 2448909 (6th Cir. 2011), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals citing to Bell Atl. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ––– U.S. ––––, ––––, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009), discussed whether a dismissal with prejudice is appropriate when a plaintiff fails to meet the plausibility standard established by these cases.
Read More...
In an opinion issued on September 2, 2011, that was designated for publication but is not yet final, the Kentucky Court of Appeals discussed at length the proper procedure to follow when a circuit court orders a file in a civil action to be kept under seal in the clerk’s office. The opinion, in Kincaid
...
Read More...
With its recent decision in Green v. Blitz U.S.A., Case No: 2:07-CV-372 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 1, 2011), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a wake-up call for litigators. U.S. District Judge T. John Ward laid down the law for a defendant that appeared oblivious to basic ESI discovery obligations. In this case, over two years after the defendant’s favorable jury verdict, the court imposed sanctions upon the defendant for discovery abuse.
Read More...
In a recent decision that was designated for publication, the Kentucky Court of Appeals held that, while a plaintiff is permitted to introduce into evidence the full amount of medical bills incurred for treatment of injuries or conditions for which damages are claimed, the trial court should reduce the amount awarded for medical expenses where the expenses were written off by medical providers.
Read More...
