-
Plaintiff/Petitioner Cannot Voluntarily Dismiss Action After Answer/Response Has Been Served; CR 37.02(3) Does Not Permit Sanctions Against Non-Parties
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 “Extraordinary Reasons” or Clear Legal Necessity
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
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.
-
Family Court Has No Custody Modification Jurisdiction When Parents and Child Do Not Reside in State; Custody Forum-Selection Clause Is Not Binding on Family Court
Day v. Day Case No. 2022-CA-1250-MR McCracken Family Court Decided by J. Susanne M. Cetrulo, J. Audra Jean Eckerle, and J. Pamela R. Goodwine Opinion by J. Susanne M. Cetrulo Date Rendered: August 4, 2023 Issue: Whether a Kentucky court has jurisdiction to modify custody or parenting time pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction…
Search
Recent Post
- Family Court (rather than Circuit Court) was Proper Forum for Claims Arising out of the Former Marriage of Parties
- United States Supreme Court Upholds Federal Statute Prohibiting Individuals Subject to Domestic Violence Orders from Possessing Firearms as Constitutional
- Supreme Court Strictly Enforces Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Family Court Violated Father’s Express Due Process Rights under KRS 403.300(3) by Allowing Testimony and Admitting Friend of the Court Report After Prohibiting Father from Taking the Deposition of Children’s Therapist Prior to Hearing
- Order Lacking CR 54.02 Finality Language Is Final When All Issues Are Resolved
