 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Cabinet for Health & Family Servs. ex rel. A.W. v. Huddleston, NO. 2005-CA-000165-ME,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the Kentucky Legislature conferred sole and exclusive authority upon the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to determine the appropriate placement of a child committed to its care in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 610.010(11), pursuant to Ky. Const. §§ 27, 28, the trial court erred in restricting where the Cabinet could place two children.
|
|||||
| Cabinet for Health & Family Servs. v. Evans, NO. 2004-CA-001978-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A family court could order the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to pay for counseling for a parent from whom it removed a child because it was "reunification services" the Cabinet had to provide, under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 620.020(11), and a court could do all things reasonably necessary to the administration of justice in a case before it.
|
|||||
| Citizens Bank of N. Ky., Inc. v. PBNK, Inc., NO. 2004-CA-001351-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: First of two banks which mortgaged certain property lacked a valid legal or equitable mortgage thereon as the debtor was not the true owner of the property and thus, lacked the power to mortgage the same. Hence, it acquired no power to assert a lien on the property and could not claim that the second bank was depriving it of money or benefits.
|
|||||
| Gilliam v. Pikeville United Methodist Hosp. of Ky., Inc., NO. 2004-CA-001573-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Absent a showing of damages by an employee to support his defamation allegations, and because he could not rely his affidavit filed in response to a summary judgment motion, which contradicted his deposition testimony, to demonstrate damages for the purpose of defeating summary judgment, such was properly entered against him.
|
|||||
| Goodwill Coal Co. v. Bullock, NO. 2005-CA-001432-WC,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an ALJ's error in failing to address the findings of a university evaluator and to make required findings of fact constituted patent error or omission of fact appearing on face of order, worker's failure to bring this error to the attention of the ALJ by means of a petition for reconsideration precluded appellate review of the issue.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. Commonwealth, NO. 2005-CA-000330-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the evidence of defendant's flight was admissible pursuant to Ky. R. Evid. 404(b)(1) to show an expression of a sense of guilt, the trial court did not err in allowing its admission.
|
|||||
| Leon Mfg. Co. v. Wilson Kubota, LLC, NO. 2004-CA-002256-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Absent evidence that a franchise agreement existed between a buyer and seller, and notwithstanding the existence of an exclusive dealership agreement, the circuit court erred in requiring the seller to repurchase dozer blades from the buyer under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 365.805, as the establishment of a franchise fee and business plan were lacking.
|
|||||
| N.T.G. v. Commonwealth, NO. 2005-CA-000035-DG,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 635.060(4), (5), restricted the dispositional option to a child 14 or older. Thus by statute, any child under the age of 14 was not allowed to have been placed in detention. The fact that the detention was probated did not allow the detention.
|
|||||
| Sheckles v. Ky. Parole Bd., NO. 2004-CA-002210-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate was not entitled to mandamus requiring a parole board to grant him a new hearing when it did not consider his sentencing videotape, submitted with his request for reconsideration, because the videotape was not new evidence, under 501 Ky. Admin. Regs. 1:030, § 4(4), and he did not contest other grounds on which the parole denial was based.
|
|||||
| Tucker v. Commonwealth, NO. 2004-CA-002421-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, February 17, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a dispatcher did not relay an informant's identity to an officer, the tip was not anonymous, as to the officer, and, under the totality of circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant, under the Fourth Amendment, because it was reported defendant had a gun and he walked toward the officer with his hand in his pocket.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
