March Decisions of Ky Supreme Court by LawReader

 Go to Lawreaders Monthly Decisions of Ky Supreme Court to read synopsis and full text of  all decisions issued by Supreme Court.   LawReader posts these decisions each month to keep you current on the status of the law.

KY. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS FOR MARCH, 2006

 Case No.

1CRIME LAB EXPERT GAVE FALSE TESTIMONY- RAGLAND GRANTED NEW TRIAL
2KOTILA REVERSED
3 4 continuing treatment Appellant received from Appellee tolled the applicable statute of limitations
5 the trial court abused its discretion in limiting the cross-examination
6 Crawford v. Washington re: testimonial hearsay cited: its ruling applies to pending cases on appeal
7 DOCTOR WHO REFUSED TO SETTLE MUST PAY EXCESS VERDICT OF $200,000 – There was ample evidence to support the jury’s finding that, Dr. Tabler did not consent to a compromise settlement prior to the return of the excess liability verdict. The Court of Appeals erred in usurping the fact-finding authority of the jury on this issue . Editor’s note: Pride cometh before the fall.
8 trial courts have broad discretion over change of venue questions and their decision will be overturned only on a showing of an abuse of discretion
9 10 11 A licensed motor vehicle dealer is not the owner of a vehicle when he “transfers physical possession of a motor vehicle to a purchaser pursuant to a bona
fide sale, and complies with the requirements of KRS 186A.220 .”
12 13 the trial court failed to make the factual findings required by KRS 403 .250 to allow a deviation from the standard practice of a face-to-face confrontation
14 There are methods other than a formal written waiver that confirm a defendant has knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived a jury trial
15“In defining reasonable limitations on cross-examination, this Court has cautioned : ‘a connection must be established between the cross-examination proposed
to be undertaken and the facts in evidence .”
16“[s]o long as a reasonably complete picture of the witness’ veracity, bias, and motivation is developed, the judge enjoys power and discretion to set appropriate
boundaries.”
17 KRS 342 .125(3) permits (reopening of award) to be sought during the period of an award
18 the incident did not appear to be “anything more than a temporary exacerbation of the plaintiffs preexisting non work-related condition
19 20 A worker seeking to resist rehabilitation has the burden to show that the evaluator’s recommendations or the available options are impractical or inappropriate .
21 Caroline Griffith is suspended from the practice of law in Kentucky for a period of one year pursuant to SCR 3 .380 . This suspension is to be served consecutive to Respondent’s current five-year suspension and shall commence on the expiration of that period .
22 we adopt the finding by the KBA regarding the appropriate discipline in this matter and order Mr. Robert W. Stevens be publicly reprimanded for his violation of SCR 3 .130-1 .7(b) .
23 An Unnamed Attorney, is hereby privately reprimanded for violations of SCR 3.130-1 .4(b) and SCR 3.130-1 .7(2)(b) .

Comments are closed.