test rule in Kentucky

2009See Harp, 266 S.W.3d at 818 (explaining the test as simply whether an error affected the verdict.) ; Monroe, 244 S. W.3d at 78 (describing the test as whether an error had a "reasonable probability" affecting the verdict) ; Emerson, 230 S.W.3d at 570 (applying a test of whether there was a "reasonable possibility, that [the error] affected the verdict") ; Vau -hn, 230 S.W.3d at 561 (employing a test of whether the error "possibl[y] . . . had an effect on the verdict").

2009See Harp, 266 S.W.3d at 818 (explaining the test as simply whether an error affected the verdict.) ; Monroe, 244 S. W.3d at 78 (describing the test as whether an error had a "reasonable probability" affecting the verdict) ; Emerson, 230 S.W.3d at 570 (applying a test of whether there was a "reasonable possibility, that [the error] affected the verdict") ; Vau -hn, 230 S.W.3d at 561 (employing a test of whether the error "possibl[y] . . . had an effect on the verdict").

2009See Harp, 266 S.W.3d at 818 (explaining the test as simply whether an error affected the verdict.) ; Monroe, 244 S. W.3d at 78 (describing the test as whether an error had a "reasonable probability" affecting the verdict) ; Emerson, 230 S.W.3d at 570 (applying a test of whether there was a "reasonable possibility, that [the error] affected the verdict") ; Vau -hn, 230 S.W.3d at 561 (employing a test of whether the error "possibl[y] . . . had an effect on the verdict").

2009See Harp, 266 S.W.3d at 818 (explaining the test as simply whether an error affected the verdict.) ; Monroe, 244 S. W.3d at 78 (describing the test as whether an error had a "reasonable probability" affecting the verdict) ; Emerson, 230 S.W.3d at 570 (applying a test of whether there was a "reasonable possibility, that [the error] affected the verdict") ; Vau -hn, 230 S.W.3d at 561 (employing a test of whether the error "possibl[y] . . . had an effect on the verdict").

2025At the time of the writing of this Opinion, over one year has transpired. -3- evading review[.]” (Citation omitted.) The test for this exception has two elements: “(1) the challenged action must be too short in duration to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there must be a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party will be subjected to the same action again.” Id. (citation omitted).

2025Although there are exceptions to the mootness doctrine, as outlined in Morgan v. Getter, 441 S.W.3d 94, 100 (Ky. 2014), the only one which appears potentially applicable is that the issue is “capable of repetition, yet evading review[.]” (Citation omitted.) The test for this exception has two elements: “(1) the challenged action must be too short in duration to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there must be a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party will be subjected to the same action again.” Id.

2025The test for whether an error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt “is not simply whether there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction aside from the improper evidence.” Staples v. Commonwealth, 454 S.W.3d 803, 827 (Ky. 2014).

2025Rather, it is “whether the improper evidence was of a weight, was of a striking enough nature, or played a 16 prominent enough role in the Commonwealth's case to raise a reasonable possibility that it contributed to the conviction.” Id.

2020See, e.g., United States v. Powell, 379 U.S. 48, 57-58 (1964) (holding that investigations by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service into potential tax fraud must be conducted pursuant to a legitimate purpose, that the inquiry may be relevant to that purpose, that the information is not already within the administrative body’s possession, and that the appropriate administrative steps have been followed).

2017Consequently, if appellee was engaging in the type of horseplay conceded for the purpose of the motion for summary judgment, it is quite likely that he could not have recovered compensation for injuries he might have sustained in the accident and therefore he would not meet the test for immunity[.] Id. at 591 (citation omitted).

1991Commonwealth, Department of Public Safety v. Powers, Ky., 453 S.W.2d 260, 263 (1970).

1946See Continental Realty Co., etc., v. Little, 135 Ky. 618 , 117 S. W. 310; 37 G.

1946See Continental Realty Co., etc., v. Little, 135 Ky. 618 , 117 S. W. 310; 37 G.