|
Kentucky Court of Justice
Supreme Court of Kentucky to hear arguments Oct. 19-20 in Frankfort
 |
The seven justices of the Supreme Court of Kentucky are (back row, from left) Justice Will T. Scott, Justice Wil Schroder, Deputy Chief Justice Mary C. Noble, Justice Bill Cunningham, (front row, from left) Justice Lisabeth Hughes Abramson, Chief Justice John D. Minton Jr. and Justice Daniel J. Venters.
Photo credit: Kentucky Office of Creative Services |
FRANKFORT, Ky. -- The Supreme Court of Kentucky will convene Wednesday and Thursday, Oct. 19-20, in Frankfort to hear oral arguments in cases that originated in Floyd, Jefferson, Kenton, Madison and Pike counties. Proceedings are open to the public and will take place at 9, 10 and 11 a.m. EDT each day in the Supreme Court Courtroom. The courtroom is located on the second floor of the state Capitol at 700 Capitol Ave.
The public may also observe oral arguments via the Supreme Court live stream on the Kentucky Court of Justice website. Oral arguments are available online as they occur in real time and are not available as archives.
The Supreme Court is the state court of last resort and the final interpreter of Kentucky law. Seven justices (bios) sit on the Supreme Court and all seven justices rule on appeals that come before the court. The justices are elected from seven appellate districts and serve eight-year terms. A chief justice, chosen for a four-year term by fellow justices, is the administrative head of the state’s court system and is responsible for its operation. The Supreme Court may order a ruling or opinion to be published, which means that the ruling becomes the case law governing all similar cases in the future in Kentucky.
WEDNESDAY, OCT. 19, 2011
9 AM
2009-SC-843-DG
HASHMI, M.D. V. KELLY, ETC.
Summary: “Medical Malpractice. Expert Witnesses. Witness Disclosure. Issues include the admissibility of expert witness testimony by the defendant where the plaintiff took expert’s deposition but defendant failed to disclose his intent to utilize deposition as expert testimony.”
Discretionary Review granted 12-8-2010
Madison Circuit Court, Judge William T. Jennings
Attorneys For Movant: Steven Glenn Kinkel and John Christian Lewis
Attorneys For Respondent: Kenneth L. Sales, Paul Jason Kelley and David G. Bryant
10 AM
2010-SC-681-DG
MAYNES V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Summary: “Criminal Law. Indigent or Needy Person. Court Costs. The issue is whether the trial court can order a defendant, previously found to be indigent, to pay court costs as part of defendant’s final sentencing.”
Discretionary Review granted 3-16-2011
Jefferson Circuit Court, Judge Audra Jean Eckerle
Attorney For Movant: Bruce P. Hackett
Attorney For Respondent: James Hays Lawson
11 AM
2008-SC-789-DG and 2009-SC-390-DG
SCHNUERLE, ET AL. V. INSIGHT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., ET AL.
and
(CROSS-MOTION) INSIGHT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., ET AL. V. SCHNUERLE, ET AL.
Summary: “Contracts. Arbitration. Issues include the validity of mandatory dispute resolution contract clauses barring consumer class actions.”
Discretionary Review granted 6-17-2009 and 8-19-2009
Jefferson Circuit Court, Judge A. C. McKay Chauvin
Attorneys For Movants: H. Philip Grossman, Jennifer Ann Moore, Leslie A. Bailey, Frank Paul Bland Jr. and Melanie Hirsch
Attorneys For Respondents: Laurence John Zielke, Nancy Jane Schook, Janice M. Theriot and David N. Hise
THURSDAY, OCT. 20, 2011
9 AM
2011-SC-43-DGE
DAUGHERTY (NOW BUCHER) V. TELEK
Summary: “Emergency Protective Orders. Domestic Violence Orders. Time for Hearing. The issue is whether statutory time frames involve general subject matter jurisdiction, which cannot be waived, or are jurisdictional aspects of the particular case, which can be waived by a party.”
Discretionary Review granted 3-16-2011
Kenton Circuit Court, Judge Christopher J. Mehling
Attorneys For Movant: Dina Abby Bartlett and Michael Joseph Jurek
Attorney For Respondent: Carl Edwin Knochelmann Jr.
10 AM
2010-SC-222-DG
DOTSON V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Summary: “Criminal Law. Post-Conviction. RCr 11.42. The issue is whether a defendant who has served out his sentence prior to the lower courts’ adjudication of his post-conviction claim can proceed with his case or are the issues moot thus meriting a dismissal of the claims. The Court has been invited to re-examine its ruling in Parrish v. Commonwealth, 283 S.W.3d 675 (Ky. 2009)”
Discretionary Review granted 1-14-2011
Pike Circuit Court, Judge Steven D. Combs
Attorney For Movant: Meggan Elizabeth Smith
Attorney For Respondent: Perry Thomas Ryan
11 AM
2010-SC-376-DG
CONNIE HANCOCK, FLOYD COUNTY PROPERTY VALUATION ADMINSTRATOR, ET AL. V. PRESTONSBURG INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, ET AL.
Summary: “Charitable Organizations. Tax Exemptions. The issue is whether Prestonsburg Industrial Corporation (“PIC”) is a charitable organization under Kentucky Constitution § 170 and thus exempt from ad valorem taxes.”
Discretionary Review granted 3-16-2011
Floyd Circuit Court, Judge Danny P. Caudill
Attorneys For Movants: Douglas M. Dowell and Dwight Stacy Marshall
Attorneys For Respondents: Richard E. Fitzpatrick, Thomas M. Smith and Martin L. Osborne
|