6 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2022 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fortney v. Airtran Airways, Inc.green1 sentence2022In Fortney v. Airtrain Airways, 319 S.W.3d 325, 329 (Ky. 2010), the Court explained this exception to the going and coming rule: The rule excluding injuries that occur off the employer's premises, during travel between work and home, does not apply if the journey is part of the service for which the worker is employed or otherwise benefits the employer. | 1 | 1 |
Wittmer v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2021Kentucky, unlike many states, allows a third-party to bring a cause of action for claims of bad- faith, and this Court explained the standard for such claims in Wittmer v. Jones.5 The Court held that a plaintiff has a “steep burden” of satisfying three requirements before a trial court should find the plaintiff to have brought a viable bad-faith claim.6 Those requirements are: (1) the insurer must be obligated to pay the insured's claim under the terms of the policy; (2) the insurer must lack a reasonable basis in law or fact for denying the claim; and 4 Davidson v. American Freightways, Inc., 2021Kentucky, unlike many states, allows a third-party to bring a cause of action for claims of bad- faith, and this Court explained the standard for such claims in Wittmer v. Jones.5 The Court held that a plaintiff has a “steep burden” of satisfying three requirements before a trial court should find the plaintiff to have brought a viable bad-faith claim.6 Those requirements are: (1) the insurer must be obligated to pay the insured's claim under the terms of the policy; (2) the insurer must lack a reasonable basis in law or fact for denying the claim; and 4 Davidson v. American Freightways, Inc., | 1 | 1 |
Davidson v. American Freightways, Inc.green1 sentence2021Kentucky, unlike many states, allows a third-party to bring a cause of action for claims of bad- faith, and this Court explained the standard for such claims in Wittmer v. Jones.5 The Court held that a plaintiff has a “steep burden” of satisfying three requirements before a trial court should find the plaintiff to have brought a viable bad-faith claim.6 Those requirements are: (1) the insurer must be obligated to pay the insured's claim under the terms of the policy; (2) the insurer must lack a reasonable basis in law or fact for denying the claim; and 4 Davidson v. American Freightways, Inc., | 1 | 1 |
GTE v. Revenue Cabinet, Commonwealth of Kentuckygreen1 sentence2001In GTE v. Revenue Cabinet, Ky., 889 S.W.2d 788, 792 (1994), this Court explained the doctrine of contemporaneous construction as follows: This Court has held that interpretation of a statute made by an administrative agency, once made and applied over a long period of time, cannot be unilaterally revoked by the agency. | 1 | 1 |
Hagan v. Farrisgreen1 sentence2001See Hagan v. Farris, Ky., 807 S.W.2d 488 (1991); Grantz v. Grauman, Ky., 302 S.W.2d 364 (1957); Paducah Marine Ways v. Revenue Cabinet, Ky.App., 730 S.W.2d 956 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Anderson v. Johnson
green
1 sentence2022In Anderson v. Johnson, 350 S.W.3d 453 (Ky. 2011), the Court explained the rule requires parties to assist the trial court in its good faith efforts to render sufficient findings of fact by making a written request for additional findings where, as Tonya alleges here, they are incomplete. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
New Life Cleaners v. Tuttle
green
1 sentence2022In New Life Cleaners v. Tuttle, 292 S.W.3d 318 (Ky. App. 2009), this Court explained the doctrine as follows: Parol evidence has been defined as oral evidence rather than written evidence. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Bartley v. Pikeville National Bank & Trust Co.
green
1 sentence2002Bank & Trust Co., Ky., 532 S.W.2d 446 (1975), the court explained the doctrine of marshaling of assets as follows: The doctrine of marshaling assets requires that where two or more creditors seek satisfaction out of the assets of their common debtor, and one of them can resort to two funds where another has recourse to only one of the funds, the former creditor may be required to seek satisfaction out of the funds which the latter creditor cannot reach, before resorting to the other fund. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Paducah Marine Ways, Inc. v. Revenue Cabinet Commonwealth
neutral
1 sentence2001See Hagan v. Farris, Ky., 807 S.W.2d 488 (1991); Grantz v. Grauman, Ky., 302 S.W.2d 364 (1957); Paducah Marine Ways v. Revenue Cabinet, Ky.App., 730 S.W.2d 956 (1987). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Grantz v. Grauman
green
1 sentence2001See Hagan v. Farris, Ky., 807 S.W.2d 488 (1991); Grantz v. Grauman, Ky., 302 S.W.2d 364 (1957); Paducah Marine Ways v. Revenue Cabinet, Ky.App., 730 S.W.2d 956 (1987). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
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.