 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. Commonwealth, NO. 2006-CA-000545-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly considered the cost of labor in replacing a convertible top defendant damaged for purposes of establishing the amount of pecuniary loss necessary to convict defendant of criminal mischief under Ky. Rev. Stat. § 512.020; thus, denial of motion for directed verdict of acquittal did not violate defendant's due process rights.
|
|||||
| Carmical v. Bullock, NO. 2006-CA-001595-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 258.275(1) did not impose strict liability upon the owner or keeper of a dog, and the trial court instructed the jury consistent with the holdings of other cases, there was no error in the trial court's instructions as to the dog owner's owed duties.
|
|||||
| Codispoti v. First Fin. Ins. Co., NO. 2006-CA-001552-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to independent contractor and insurer on the corporation and owner's action regarding coverage under an insurance policy; employee exclusion in the insurance policy unambiguously excluded coverage to owner and validly did so to persuade corporation to cover him through workers' compensation insurance.
|
|||||
| Coleman v. Bee Line Courier Serv., NO. 2006-CA-000994-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A release following a settlement between a driver and a corporation was clear and unambiguous, and clearly provided that the driver was to indemnify those released against any third party, including the driver's insurer. Summary judgment in favor of the corporation should have been granted.
|
|||||
| Davis v. Fischer Single Family Homes, Ltd., NO. 2006-CA-000005-MR AND: NO. 2006-CA-000038-MR AND: NO. 2006-CA-000074-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order granting a builder and a subcontractor separate sets of peremptory challenges under Ky. R. Civ. P. 47.03(1) was proper in case alleging construction defects in home because those parties were antagonistic. Complaint charged them with separate acts of negligence occurring at differing times and they were represented by separate counsel.
|
|||||
| Estate of DeMoisey v. River Downs Inv. Co., NO. 2006-CA-001494-DG,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in affirming lower court's judgment, in which lower court concluded that the estate failed to show a good reason for prosecuting an appeal and that executor was thus not entitled to recoup costs and attorney fees; appeal at issue was taken for good cause since novel question of law involved was "some good reason" for appealing.
|
|||||
| Ford Motor Co. v. Pendygraft, NO. 2007-CA-000613-WC,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation ALJ erred in including an employee's profit sharing disbursements in a calculation of her pre-injury average weekly wage because wages, as defined in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 342.140(6), did not include profit sharing within the "similar advantage" language of the statute.
|
|||||
| Green v. Owensboro Med. Health Sys., NO. 2005-CA-001422-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a medical malpractice case in which a patient discovered after surgery that four of her teeth had been injured, the patient offered no expert medical testimony from which a trier of fact could conclude appellees breached the applicable standard of care, and summary judgment was properly granted to appellees.
|
|||||
| Masterson v. George, NO. 2006-CA-001265-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute over the lessee's option to purchase the lessor's property, an order granting the lessor a directed verdict was vacated; whether the lessee gave notice of closing the purchase to the lessor's son was a question of fact for resolution by the jury. A directed verdict therefore was not justified as to this issue, Ky. R. Civ. P. 50.01.
|
|||||
| Morris v. Carter, NO. 2006-CA-000733-MR AND: NO. 2006-CA-000790-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, August 10, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in concluding that no substantial evidence existed to support granting map amendment for the property owners' property that was contained in the zoning ordinance subsequently enacted by the Fiscal Court; indeed, Fiscal Court relied on substantial evidence to find that the area had experienced changes that justified map amendment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
