 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allen v. Devine, NO. 2006-CA-000841-ME,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, May 25, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence to support trial court's finding that de facto custodians waived their superior right to custody under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 403.270 because testimony showed that de facto custodians never evinced desire for permanent custody of the children but maintained that they wanted at most temporary custody of the children.
|
|||||
| Bugg v. Am. Legion, NO. 2006-CA-000429-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, May 25, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Directed verdict under Ky. R. Civ. P. 50.01 for owner in premises liability claim brought by invitee who was struck by bullet accidentally fired from arrestee's gun during arrest was proper because, inter alia, there was no evidence that owner knew or reasonably should have known that anyone was in imminent danger of being injured by arrestee.
|
|||||
| Cmty. Servs. Project, Inc. v. BAWAC Cleaning Servs., NO. 2005-CA-002320-MR AND: NO. 2005-CA-002545-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, May 25, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 45A.470(5) negotiation requirement were applicable, cabinet correctly concluded that negotiations were not required because corporation failed to offer service at price comparable to that offered by winning bidder, and summary judgment for cabinet and winning bidder in case challenging contract award was correct.
|
|||||
| Commonwealth v. Holloway, NO. 2005-CA-000829-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, May 25, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order granting expungement of records under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 431.076 was reversed; appellee sought expungement of records in 1996 case in which charges were dismissed without prejudice after grand jury failed to return a true bill, and the language of § 431.076 did not provide for expungement under those facts.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Commonwealth, NO. 2005-CA-002173-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, May 25, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress in a trial for trafficking in a controlled substance, because officers who filed the complaint and served a warrant were employed by a police department in the county, and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 95.019(1) empowered the city police department to make arrests within the county.
|
|||||
| Ashland Hosp. Corp. v. Calor, NO. 2006-CA-000395-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, June 1, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no dispute as to the nature of the statements by a medical center and its CFO's statements or the context in which they were communicated to a staffing agency which provided a doctor to the medical center, qualified privilege applied as to the defamation and tortious interference claims.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. Tullar, NO. 2005-CA-001006-MR AND NO. 2005-CA-001140-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, June 1, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Matter was remanded for new trial as apportionment instruction violated Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.241. Whether bars were secondarily liable should have been considered only after driver was found to have some fault, after which jury was to determine what degree sale of alcohol by each bar was substantial factor in causing driver's intoxication.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
