James E. Keller

The case arose from a coal-mining contract dispute in which Cheyenne Resources obtained a $9.5 million judgment against Elk Horn Coal; Elk Horn stayed enforcement with a supersedeas bond while pursuing appeals, including a denied motion for discretionary review. The trial court then assessed a 10% penalty under KRS 26A.300 against Elk Horn for the delay caused by the second-level appeal. The Kentucky Supreme Court held that KRS 26A.300 violates equal protection under the Kentucky and U.S. Constitutions because it arbitrarily imposes the penalty only on unsuccessful appellants in non-first appeals, and also violates separation of powers under the Kentucky Constitution by legislating appellate procedure. The court therefore vacated the portion of the judgment imposing the penalty.

procedurecivil rights

This case involved the Fayette County Board of Education's attempt to terminate school principal Melinda Cobb after allegations of insubordination, conduct unbecoming a teacher, inefficiency, and incompetency, including issues with staff conflicts, inaccurate student counts, and bringing a gun onto school property. An administrative tribunal found Cobb guilty of only two charges and imposed a reprimand and unpaid suspension rather than termination. The Board appealed, arguing the tribunal lacked authority to impose lesser sanctions and that procedural errors occurred during the hearing, while Cobb cross-appealed on other grounds. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' rulings upholding the tribunal, holding that the tribunal had discretion under KRS 161.790 to select sanctions within the allowed range, that the hearing officer's instructions and presence during deliberations were not improper, and that substantial evidence supported the findings with no denial of a fair hearing.

labor & employmentprocedure

William Vernon Matthews was convicted of first-degree rape and being a second-degree persistent felony offender, resulting in a life sentence. He appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing a mistrial after a witness mentioned his prior incarceration, admitting evidence of a prior misdemeanor charge, and allowing the victim's hospital records into evidence. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that none of the challenged rulings constituted reversible error under the applicable evidentiary and procedural standards.

criminal lawprocedure

In Hale v. Commonwealth, the appellant pled guilty to first-degree robbery, second-degree assault, kidnapping, criminal attempt to commit murder, and being a first-degree persistent felony offender, and received a thirty-year sentence. He appealed on grounds that the trial court should not have accepted the pleas before completing a post-plea psychological evaluation or holding a competency hearing, arguing the evaluation order itself raised competency doubts under KRS 504.100. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, ruling that the evaluation was properly ordered for sentencing purposes under KRS 532.050(3) without any reasonable grounds to question competency, as shown by the coherent Boykin colloquy and absence of any party raising the issue. Because the evaluation confirmed competency and no reasonable grounds for doubt existed before or after, no hearing was required and the pleas were valid.

criminal lawprocedure

In Shabazz v. Commonwealth, the defendant was convicted of two felony drug offenses and found to be a first-degree persistent felony offender, resulting in a twenty-year sentence. On appeal, Shabazz argued that the prosecutor's redirect questions and closing statements about uninvestigated aspects of the case, along with a witness's response during cross-examination, warranted a mistrial, and that the evidence was insufficient to support the PFO determination. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that any improper questions were addressed by sustained objections and withdrawals without causing sufficient prejudice for a mistrial. Regarding the PFO, the court found that evidence of the defendant's 1997 probation combined with the 2001 offenses created a reasonable inference that he was on probation at the time of the new crimes, meeting the statutory requirements under a directed verdict standard.

criminal lawprocedure

In Grange Mutual Insurance Co. v. Trude, an insurance company petitioned for a writ of prohibition after a trial court ordered it to respond to sixteen discovery requests in a bad faith claim stemming from an auto accident personal injury lawsuit against its insured. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Court of Appeals' denial of the writ, finding most requests proper but a few improper. The court reasoned that the requests were generally aimed at relevant information about claims handling and that the company had not adequately shown irreparable harm from trade secret disclosure or undue burden to justify extraordinary relief.

proceduretorts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

In Miller v. Eldridge, a medical malpractice action alleging that a physician negligently performed a diagnostic angiography leading to a patient's death from a brain embolism, the dispute centered on the admissibility of a biomedical engineer's expert testimony challenging the plaintiffs' causation theory under Daubert standards. The trial court conducted a hearing and allowed the expert to testify without presenting certain bench models to the jury. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the admission an abuse of discretion, but the Kentucky Supreme Court reversed that decision, ruling that the appellate court had improperly reviewed the trial court's factual findings de novo rather than for abuse of discretion and that the trial court had made no clear error or abuse of discretion in admitting the testimony.

proceduretorts & liabilityhealthcare

The case involved a divorced couple's 1991 settlement agreement, under which the husband agreed to pay child support equal to 30% of his income plus education and medical costs, and 10% of his income as lifetime maintenance to the wife, amounts far exceeding Kentucky guidelines or the children's reasonable needs. After the husband fell into arrears, the trial court enforced the agreement as conscionable and awarded only postjudgment interest on the arrearages of over $348,000; the Court of Appeals reversed on the child-support provisions but affirmed the interest ruling. The Kentucky Supreme Court held that parents may voluntarily agree to child-support obligations exceeding statutory minimums or needs, so the provisions were enforceable, and that unpaid support installments become liquidated debts on which prejudgment interest accrues automatically from the due date rather than at the trial court's discretion.

family lawprocedure

In Regenstreif v. Phelps, a negligence lawsuit arose after defendant Linda Phelps lost control of her vehicle on black ice, crossed the center line, and collided head-on with plaintiff Charlotte Regenstreif's car, injuring Regenstreif and her daughter. The trial court instructed the jury on Phelps's duties while qualifying them with a sudden emergency instruction due to the ice, and the jury returned a verdict for Phelps. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the sudden emergency doctrine remains valid and compatible with comparative negligence, and therefore overruled its prior decision in Bass v. Williams that had eliminated the doctrine. The court reasoned that comparative negligence requires assessing each party's fault proportionally, and the sudden emergency instruction properly aids the jury in determining whether a party's conduct was reasonable under the circumstances without creating an all-or-nothing defense.

torts & liability

The case involved a wrongful death action brought by the estate of John G. Moore, Jr., who was killed when a trench wall collapsed on him while he worked for Environmental Construction Corporation on a sewer project. A jury found that the employer had caused the death through deliberate intention, but the trial court granted the employer's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the JNOV, holding that the evidence showed at most negligence or recklessness in failing to follow OSHA trench safety requirements, which did not meet the statutory standard of deliberate intention under KRS 342.610(4) needed to overcome the exclusivity of workers' compensation remedies. The court reasoned that the employer's decisions, including leaving safety equipment behind and deeming the soil stable, lacked the actual intent to harm required by precedent.

labor & employmenttorts & liabilityprocedure

In MacK v. Commonwealth, Reginald Mack was convicted of first-degree robbery after grabbing a 71-year-old woman's purse from her car in a store parking lot, slamming her hand in his car door, shoving her to the ground, and fleeing with about $1,000 in cash; he admitted the theft but argued the force was not used to accomplish it. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court properly refused jury instructions on the lesser-included offenses of theft by unlawful taking over $300 and fourth-degree assault. The court reasoned that force used during escape is part of committing the theft under robbery statutes, the evidence did not support a reasonable doubt on the force element, and assault charges are not lesser-included offenses of robbery due to distinct elements and merger principles under double jeopardy analysis.

criminal lawprocedure

In Donahoo v. Dortch, a prisoner indicted on felony charges including escape and assault filed a pro se motion under KRS 500.110 requesting final disposition of the untried indictment and later sought dismissal when trial was not scheduled within 180 days. He petitioned the Court of Appeals for a writ of prohibition to halt the trial, which was denied, and he appealed. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that the record did not conclusively establish that a detainer had been lodged against the appellant or that he had properly served written notice of his request on the Commonwealth’s Attorney as required by the statute. The court clarified that a detainer need not be filed solely by a prosecutor but found the appellant failed to meet his burden on both elements needed to trigger the 180-day deadline.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned Thomas Peerce, a sergeant with the Jefferson County Corrections Department who was terminated for alleged excessive force and falsifying reports; he appealed to the Jefferson County Merit Board, which found the conduct occurred but ordered reinstatement with demotion and back pay because termination was inconsistent with prior discipline. County officials, including the Fiscal Court and Judge-Executive, refused to comply and overruled the Merit Board, prompting Peerce to sue in circuit court to enforce the administrative order. The trial court and Court of Appeals held that the Merit Board had final statutory authority over the personnel decision, rendering the officials' override ineffective. On further review, the Supreme Court of Kentucky examined whether the county defendants were entitled to Eleventh Amendment or sovereign immunity from the suit seeking enforcement of the reinstatement order.

labor & employmentprocedurecivil rights

The case involved whether guaranty agreements signed by Appellee on a credit application for his company, HICO Transport, were enforceable by Appellant Wheeler & Clevenger Oil Co. for unpaid fuel purchases totaling over $13,000. Appellee argued the guaranties were invalid under KRS 371.065 because they lacked a specified maximum liability amount and termination date. The trial court and Court of Appeals agreed with Appellee and found the guaranties unenforceable, but the Kentucky Supreme Court reversed. The court held that KRS 371.065's requirements do not apply when the guaranty is set forth on the instrument being guaranteed, making the agreements valid and enforceable. This conclusion rested on statutory interpretation of the law's scope and plain language regarding guaranties of commercial paper and other obligations.

business & regulatory

In this dissolution-of-marriage case, the central issue was whether the husband’s 94% nonmarital interest in an apartment building he owned before and during the marriage became marital property when the building was exchanged for a one-sixth partnership interest in Autumn Park that was titled in both spouses’ names. The trial court found that the husband retained a 94% nonmarital share of the partnership interest (worth $476,965 at trial) while the spouses shared a 6% marital share, and it awarded the nonmarital portion to the husband alone; the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court likewise affirmed, holding that the nonmarital character was preserved because legal title is not controlling in classifying property and because the husband’s parents, who facilitated the exchange and later forgave related debt, intended the benefit solely for their son and not for the wife. The court further noted that the partnership’s value increase resulted from the efforts of the husband’s father rather than from marital contributions.

family lawproperty

The case involved Shirley Martin, convicted in 1995 of incest and later in 1999 of additional sexual offenses, who challenged the Kentucky Department of Corrections' refusal to apply good time credits under KRS 197.045(1) and (3) to his 1999 sentences because he had not completed the required Sex Offender Treatment Program under a 1998 statute, KRS 197.045(4). Martin filed a habeas petition claiming this application violated federal and state ex post facto protections by increasing his punishment retroactively. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed the denial of relief, holding that the statute did not violate ex post facto clauses. The court reasoned that good time credits are discretionary rather than automatic, so conditioning them on program completion did not lengthen Martin's sentence or alter the legal consequences of his prior conduct, and his concurrent sentences meant the later ones determined his overall release date.

criminal law

This case involves a Kentucky circuit judge's request for review of two opinions from the Ethics Committee of the Kentucky Judiciary regarding judicial conduct. In JE-98, the committee advised that judges or judicial candidates may attend political fundraisers but cannot make contributions beyond a nominal ticket price covering food or drink, relying on Canon 5A(1)(c)'s prohibition on contributions to political organizations or candidates. In JE-100, the committee stated that a judge may not serve on the board of a local mediation organization due to the appearance of impropriety under Canon 2. The court adopted JE-98, finding a distinction between permissible ticket purchases and prohibited contributions, but vacated JE-100, concluding that service on a non-profit mediation board does not create an improper appearance and aligns with canons allowing judges to advance public interest in justice administration.

elections

In Holland v. Commonwealth, a Hardin Circuit Court jury convicted Melissa Holland of two counts of attempted murder and one count of first-degree burglary after she shot her former lover and his ex-wife inside his apartment with a handgun she had recently acquired, and the trial court imposed consecutive sentences totaling forty years. The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed the judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. The court held that the trial court's jury instructions were prejudicially erroneous because they failed to properly account for Holland's defense, which raised issues of intoxication, lack of intent to kill, and potential extreme emotional disturbance that could support lesser-included offenses such as first-degree manslaughter.

criminal law

The case involved Charles Jackson, who was convicted of first-degree assault following a bench trial in Warren Circuit Court and sentenced to twenty years in prison. Jackson appealed, arguing that the record showed no knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to a jury trial, as his attorney had requested the bench trial without Jackson personally confirming the waiver on the record or in writing. The Kentucky Supreme Court agreed that the record lacked a valid waiver under the Sixth Amendment and Kentucky Constitution, which guarantee the right to a jury trial. The court vacated the conviction but remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Jackson had actually waived his rights knowingly and voluntarily or whether the error required a new trial.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

The case concerned whether non-lawyers may conduct real estate closings in Kentucky without direct attorney supervision, specifically reviewing KBA Advisory Opinion U-58, which declared such activity to be the unauthorized practice of law. Movants including lenders, title companies, and real estate associations asked the court to vacate U-58 and reinstate the earlier Opinion U-31, which had permitted lay closing agents to handle ministerial tasks like document execution and fund disbursement provided they gave no legal advice. The Kentucky Supreme Court vacated U-58, holding that U-31 correctly states the law, because real estate closings are primarily non-legal, financial functions and public policy does not require attorney involvement absent the rendering of legal advice. The court relied on the ministerial nature of closings, prior precedent distinguishing legal from non-legal acts, and the absence of evidence that lay closings harm the public when legal questions are referred to attorneys.

propertybusiness & regulatory