5 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 2023–2026 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cabinet for Health & Family Services v. K.H.green2 sentences2026Services v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204, 209 (Ky. 2014). 2025Services v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204, 209 (Ky. 2014). -7- As observed by a prior panel of this Court in M.E.C. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services, 254 S.W.3d 846, 850 (Ky. App. 2008): [A]lthough termination of parental rights is not a criminal matter, it encroaches on the parent’s constitutional rights to parent his or her child, and therefore, is a procedure that should only be employed when the statutory mandates are clearly met. | 3 | 3 |
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Family Servicesgreen1 sentence2025Services v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204, 209 (Ky. 2014). -7- As observed by a prior panel of this Court in M.E.C. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services, 254 S.W.3d 846, 850 (Ky. App. 2008): [A]lthough termination of parental rights is not a criminal matter, it encroaches on the parent’s constitutional rights to parent his or her child, and therefore, is a procedure that should only be employed when the statutory mandates are clearly met. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Englishgreen1 sentence2023Harper has not challenged the trial court’s ruling on that issue before this Court. 7 See, e.g., Meece v. Commonwealth, 348 S.W.3d 627, 645 (Ky. 2011). 8 Commonwealth v. English, 993 S.W.2d 941, 945 (Ky. 1999). 7 prejudice to the defendant. 9 Harper asserts that the evidence at issue was not inextricably intertwined with the Commonwealth’s other evidence and, further, that it did not satisfy the foregoing tripart test for admissibility. | 1 | 1 |
Meece v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2023Harper has not challenged the trial court’s ruling on that issue before this Court. 7 See, e.g., Meece v. Commonwealth, 348 S.W.3d 627, 645 (Ky. 2011). 8 Commonwealth v. English, 993 S.W.2d 941, 945 (Ky. 1999). 7 prejudice to the defendant. 9 Harper asserts that the evidence at issue was not inextricably intertwined with the Commonwealth’s other evidence and, further, that it did not satisfy the foregoing tripart test for admissibility. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
American Beauty Homes Corp. v. Louisville & Jefferson County Planning & Zoning Commission
green
1 sentence2025Id. at 456 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.