-
Family Court Opinion Vacated and Case Remanded for a New Hearing on Petition for Adoption
Emily Cecconi
W.R.G. v. K.C. Case No. 2022-CA-1319-ME Caldwell Circuit Court Decided by Dixon, Goodwine, and Karem, Judges. Opinion by Goodwine, Judge Date Rendered: August 4, 2023 Issue: Whether the Family Court erred in granting stepparent adoption when Father was not served with notice of the final hearing order pursuant to CR 5.02(1). Stepmother filed a petition…
-
Barren Circuit Court Affirmed in Holding Cabinet for Health and Family Services in Contempt
admin
…compensatory penalties are within the scope of civil contempt, where one purpose of civil contempt is to compensate for the losses the noncompliance occasioned.
-
Plaintiff/Petitioner Cannot Voluntarily Dismiss Action After Answer/Response Has Been Served; CR 37.02(3) Does Not Permit Sanctions Against Non-Parties
admin
Megronigle v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. Case No. 2021-SC-0196-DG Jefferson Circuit Court Decided by VanMeter, Conley, Keller, Lambert, Nickell, McTighe, and Reynolds Opinion by VanMeter Date Rendered: June 15, 2023 Issue: Whether a plaintiff/petitioner may unilaterally dismiss an action after an answer/response has been served. Issue: Whether a non-party can be ordered to…
-
CR 41.01 Not Effective to Dismiss Petition for Order of Protection Post-Judgment; CR 60.02 May Be Effective to Dismiss for โExtraordinary Reasonsโ or Clear Legal Necessity
admin
CR 41.01 implicitly only applies to matters prior to a final judgment, noting that the rule allowing for a party to enter a notice of dismissal operating as an adjudication of the merits under some circumstances does not apply where the court has already adjudicated the merits of a case itself and entered judgment
-
Cabinet for Health and Family Services May Appeal from Order Requiring Public Funds for Expert Witness in Dependency, Neglect, and Abuse Cases; Family Court Affirmed in Granting Motion for Public Funds
Nathan Hardymon
Because the Cabinet needed to consult an expert before bringing its petition, the Court of Appeals found that it was fundamentally fair that the parents be able to hire an expert.