 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| AIK Selective Self-Insurance Fund v. Minton, 2004-SC-0326-DG,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denying a workers' compensation carrier subrogation under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 342.700(1) because the claimant's legal fees exceeded the benefits the carrier paid did not violate due process or Ky. Const. § 2. The statute's plain language required such a result, which was not unreasonable, and the carrier was not deprived of a property interest.
|
|||||
| Arnold v. Commonwealth, 2005-SC-0147-MR,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commonwealth properly provided expert's testimony that disputed voluntary intoxication defense to assault; intoxication defense related to defendant's mental condition, and Ky. R. Crim. P. 7.24(3)(B)(ii) allowed rebuttal of evidence that could reduce criminal culpability. Kidnapping exemption statute, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 509.050, did not apply.
|
|||||
| CSX Transp., Inc. v. Ryan, 2005-SC-0275-MR,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a FELA suit, when Ky. R. Civ. P. 35.02(1) was triggered by employee's request for production of independent medical examiner's report, he had reciprocal obligation to produce "like reports" of all similar examinations. With or without a written report, the employer was still entitled to test results and raw data obtained by employee's expert.
|
|||||
| Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Samples, 2004-SC-0005-DG AND 2004-SC-0680-DG,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 342.700(1) limited the rights of a worker attendant to his right to collect workers' compensation benefits. Driver injured in traffic accident could not have recovered damages duplicating workers' compensation benefits against tortfeasor, and so, he was not entitled to recover those same damages against UM/UIM insurer.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Hatcher, 2004-SC-0242-DG,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Seizure of a pipe from a house did not fall within the plain view doctrine. An officer who came to investigate a report of an abandoned minor had no right to enter the house, as he had requested entry only after seeing the pipe, and he had no probable cause to believe the pipe was drug paraphernalia until he picked it up and smelled marijuana.
|
|||||
| Fletcher v. Graham, 2005-SC-1009-MR,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Governor of Kentucky had authority under Ky. Const. § 77 to issue blanket pardons of indicted and unindicted persons in a grand jury investigation of alleged criminal violations of a state hiring scheme, and a circuit court abused its discretion in refusing to instruct the grand jury that it had no prerogative to indict pardoned individuals.
|
|||||
| Greene v. Commonwealth, 2004-SC-000046-MR,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted of murder. The evidence was sufficient for the jury to make a factual determination that defendant did not act under an extreme emotional disturbance, and any error in allowing a minor child to testify by TV was harmless because the testimony was basically redundant.
|
|||||
| Harris v. Jackson, 2004-SC-000121-DG,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An attorney's failure to disclose to opposing counsel the death of his client during litigation of a personal injury action against the client until after the limitations period for revivor under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 395.278 had expired was misleading and created an estoppel against asserting the limitations defense that bound the client's estate.
|
|||||
| Hilsmeier v. Chapman, 2003-SC-0281-DG, 2003-SC-0303-DG,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jury award to an estate administrator was reversed and remanded for a retrial as the jury was improperly instructed. The trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury to specify as to which claim it found an advisor and her mother were guilty and to apportion liability between the advisor and her mother under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.182.
|
|||||
| Hudson v. Commonwealth, 2005-SC-0120-MR,
SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, May 18, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant, who was convicted of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (DUI) under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 189A.010(1), was not prejudiced by trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on alcohol intoxication as a defense because public intoxication under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 222.202 was not a lesser included offense of DUI.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
