5 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Martin v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2025“When an appellate court engages in a palpable error review, its focus is on . . . whether the defect is so manifest, fundamental and unambiguous that it threatens the integrity of the judicial process.” Martin v. Commonwealth, 207 S.W.3d 1, 5 (Ky. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Brewer v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2025Accordingly, pursuant to RCr 10.26, we will only review Anderson’s claim for “palpable error.” An error is palpable if it is “easily perceptible, plain, obvious and readily noticeable.” Brewer v. Commonwealth, 206 S.W.3d 343, 349 (Ky. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
Ford Motor Co. v. Jobegreen1 sentence2021Stores, 560 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Ky. 1977). 9 Ford Motor Co. v. Jobe, 544 S.W.3d 628, 631 (Ky. 2018) (citing Bowerman v. Black Equip. | 1 | 1 |
Caudill v. Maloney's Discount Storesgreen1 sentence2021Stores, 560 S.W.2d 15, 16 (Ky. 1977). 9 Ford Motor Co. v. Jobe, 544 S.W.3d 628, 631 (Ky. 2018) (citing Bowerman v. Black Equip. | 1 | 1 |
Motorists Mutual Insurance Co. v. Glassgreen1 sentence2017See Motorists Mut., 996 S.W.2d at 454 (damages for anxiety and mental anguish are recoverable in an action for statutory bad faith, if clear and satisfactory evidence supports inference that anxiety or mental anguish occurred). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Curry v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.
green
2 sentences2017Co., 784 S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989)), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three-part Anderson test for a bad faith claim. 71 1 S.W.2d at 846 -47 (citing Anderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .) Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson’s three-part test, but we have never 54 III. 2017Co., 784 S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three-part Anderson test for a bad faith claim, 711 S.W.2d at 846 -47 (citing Anderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .) Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson's three-part test, but we have never embraced Anderson’s requirement that the plaintiff must "prove substantial damages aside and apart from the emotional distress,” nor have we barred recovery for emotional distress damages that were not severe. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Anderson v. Continental Insurance
green
2 sentences2017Co., 784 _ S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989)), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three~part Anderson test for a bad faith claim. 71 1 S.W.2d at 846-47 {citingAnderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .] Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson’s three-part test, but we have never 54 III. 2017Co., 784 S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three-part Anderson test for a bad faith claim, 711 S.W.2d at 846 -47 (citing Anderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .) Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson's three-part test, but we have never embraced Anderson’s requirement that the plaintiff must "prove substantial damages aside and apart from the emotional distress,” nor have we barred recovery for emotional distress damages that were not severe. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
Federal Kemper Insurance Co. v. Hornback
red
1 sentence2017Co., 784 S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three-part Anderson test for a bad faith claim, 711 S.W.2d at 846 -47 (citing Anderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .) Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson's three-part test, but we have never embraced Anderson’s requirement that the plaintiff must "prove substantial damages aside and apart from the emotional distress,” nor have we barred recovery for emotional distress damages that were not severe. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Overmeyer v. Rogers
green
1 sentence2017Co., 784 S.W.2d 176 (Ky. 1989)), but in his dissent Justice Leibson advocated adopting the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s three-part Anderson test for a bad faith claim. 71 1 S.W.2d at 846 -47 (citing Anderson, 271 N.W.2d at 371 .) Eventually, the Curry Court (and later Wittmer v. Jones) adopted Anderson’s three-part test, but we have never 54 III. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Joseph v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1969However, this case falls under a well-recognized exception to the Anderson rule, which was first stated in Joseph v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 712 , 199 S.W.2d 135 (1947) and which has been followed since. 1969However, this case falls under a well-recognized exception to the Anderson rule, which was first stated in Joseph v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 712 , 199 S.W.2d 135 (1947) and which has been followed since. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.