hard and fast rule in Kentucky

2023Id. 9 To the extent it may be construed as requiring a final appellate determination of coverage in a third party claim, the holding in Pryor misapplies our bad faith case law, as no case establishes a hard and fast rule for when a third-party claimant can bring a bad faith case.

2023Id. 9 To the extent it may be construed as requiring a final appellate determination of coverage in a third party claim, the holding in Pryor misapplies our bad faith case law, as no case establishes a hard and fast rule for when a third-party claimant can bring a bad faith case.

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

2006In short, I concur with the majority opinion, but I urge our supreme court to clarify this issue. . 922 S.W.2d 371 (Ky.1996). .

2003Id. at 21 , 88 S.Ct. at 1880 .

2003Id. at 21 , 88 S.Ct. at 1880 .

1934The Steamship Styria v. Morgan, *608 186 U. S. 1, 9 , 46 L.

1934The Steamship Styria v. Morgan, *608 186 U. S. 1, 9 , 46 L.

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1932A. (N. S.) 909; Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191 , 153 S. W. 243 ; Green v. Green, 152 Ky. 486 , 153 S. W. 775 . ...” “There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted as to what proportion of the estate of the husband should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony; but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing', and the adjudicated cases show that the allowance has varied from one-fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1919There has never been a hard and fast rule adopted, as to what proportion of the estate of the husband, should be awarded the wife as permanent alimony, but it is a matter confided to the sound discretion of the chancellor, and each case has been determined upon the special facts and circumstances appearing and the adjudicated cases show, that the allowance has varied from a fifth to one-half of the husband’s estate in cases, where divorce has been granted, as will appear from the following cases: Irwin v. Irwin, 107 Ky. 24 ; Muir v. Muir, 133 Ky. 125 ; McKean v. McKean, 83 Ky. 208 ; Hawkins v.

1911In Williams v. Commonwealth, 90 Ky., 596 , this court said it was well settled that the trial judge has a discretion in such a case, but that there should always be good cause for the introduction of testimony out of the regular order, and especially where injury may likely result therefrom.

1909An example of the evil which the Legislature had in mind to correct arose in the case of Langdon-Creasy Co. v. Trustees, 25 R. 823 , 116 Ky. 562 , 76 S. W. 381 .

1909An example of the evil which the Legislature had in mind to correct arose in the case of Langdon-Creasy Co. v. Trustees, 25 R. 823 , 116 Ky. 562 , 76 S. W. 381 .