 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Commonwealth ex rel. Stumbo v. Philip Morris, USA, NO. 2006-CA-001425-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal from an order compelling arbitration and staying a motion for declaratory judgment was dismissed because the order was not a final and appealable order as it specifically stayed rather than dismissed the litigation pending completion of the arbitration proceeding.
|
|||||
| Croft v. Croft, NO. 2006-CA-001403-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an ex-husband did not establish that the increase in value of the marital residence was due to general economic circumstances or his sole efforts, where improvements had been made while the parties were married, the appreciation in value of the residence had to be deemed to be marital property under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 403.190.
|
|||||
| Davis v. 3 Bar F Rodeo, NO. 2006-CA-002212-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While a deceased husband signed a release before entering a bull ring, as there was no language that released the county fair as to gross negligence under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 247.4027, as alleged by the administratrix, and the intentional provocation of the bull was clearly not contemplated by the release, summary judgment was improper.
|
|||||
| Goods v. Commonwealth, NO. 2006-CA-001187-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not clearly err in finding that defendant had made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel, as the proceedings before the trial court met all the requirements of the Sixth Amendment and Ky. Const. § 1. Defendant made an unequivocal request to dismiss his trial counsel and proceed pro se.
|
|||||
| Hall v. Coyle, NO. 2007-CA-001441-DR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Son's motion for discretionary review of a judgment affirming a district court order removing him as co-guardian for his mother was denied because the matter did not involve probate and the district court's jurisdiction was provided by Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 387.520(1). Removal of a guardian was nonadversarial.
|
|||||
| Jones v. Commonwealth, NO. 2006-CA-000960-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claim that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated by police action was not preserved under Ky. R. Crim. P. 8.09 as defendant responded affirmatively when trial court, during conditional plea hearing, asked whether he understood that right to appeal was reserved to single issue, which was not the issue raised on appeal.
|
|||||
| Prather v. Commonwealth, NO. 2006-CA-001267-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's motion for additional jail time credit, pursuant to Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 532.110(1)(a), for the six months he served for his misdemeanor convictions while his felony charge was diverted was properly denied because the inmate was not actually incarcerated for the felony conviction until after he had served out the misdemeanor sentence.
|
|||||
| Russell v. Commonwealth, NO. 2006-CA-000747-MR,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KENTUCKY, November 2, 2007, Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an action concerning theft of identity, trial court did not err by concluding that auto sales company was an entity entitled to restitution under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 532.034 as company was required to satisfy defendant's unpaid loan obligation on the truck he used his father's identity to purchase, and the truck was damaged when repossessed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
