270.781.6500

Blog

01.12.2016

Federal Court rules insured’s bad faith claim failed under Kentucky Law

By Kyle Roby, Attorney and Partner English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP It often comes as a surprise to those injured in car accidents that dealing with one's own insurance company can be just as vexing and contentious as dealing with the insurance company of the driver whose negligence or recklessness caused the accident. Fortunately, the law does provide some protection for insureds who have to fight with their own insurance company to get that to which they are contractually entitled. However, the threshold for success in such cases is high, and not every case results in a judgment in the insured's favor. Read More

01.08.2016

Liability issues for employees in work-related vehicle accidents

By Kurt Maier, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP Many people drive a company car as part of their work. If you drive often, chances are, at some point, you’ll be involved in some kind of vehicle accident. After you’ve made sure you’re not injured and that everyone else involved is OK, too, one of the first things that might come to mind is whether or not you’ll be liable for the damage caused by the accident. If you’re driving your employer’s vehicle with your employer’s permission, you are not liable in most circumstances for a work-related vehicle accident. I address this very topic in a recent video I created. You can watch it here: Read More

12.22.2015

Tennessee court rules that Texas driver was entitled to coverage under his employer’s uninsured motorist policy

By Kyle Roby, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP Many people assume that making a claim on an uninsured motorist insurance policy is fairly straightforward. After all, the other driver either had insurance or didn't have insurance, right? Unfortunately, uninsured motorist cases can be just as contentious and adversarial as lawsuits that are litigated between injured parties and defendants who have insurance. Not only is the amount to which the injured party is entitled a common source of dispute, but also it is not unusual for there to be a disagreement about whether the uninsured motorist policy covered the accident in question. Read More

12.17.2015

Tennessee Court of Appeals says driver’s comparative fault barred recovery in truck wreck

By Kyle Roby, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP Although the basic law of negligence is the same across the country - namely, that to be successful, the plaintiff must show duty, breach of duty, causation, and damages - there are some nuances of negligence law that are different in various states. Thus, the outcome of a particular case can vary considerably, depending upon the state in which the accident occurred. For instance, under the law of comparative fault, there can be wide variations in the outcome of a suit based on similar circumstances, depending upon the state where the suit is filed. The state of Tennessee follows what is called the "modified system of comparative fault." Beginning with the 1992 case of McIntyre v. Balentine, a plaintiff may recover damages in proportion to a defendant's percentage of fault in an accident, as long as the defendant's fault outweighed any fault by the plaintiff. In cases in which the jury finds the parties to be equally at fault (or finds the plaintiff to be more than 50 percent at fault), the plaintiff recovers nothing. Read More

12.09.2015

Tips for seniors on avoiding competency battles

By Elizabeth J. McKinney, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP As we age, one of our collective greatest fears is that we’ll lose the power to make our own decisions. This happens sometimes because our faculties begin to betray us. The things that once seemed simple – such as keeping up with a checkbook and paying bills – are more challenging. Physical limitations, such as loss of sight, diminished hearing and failing handwriting, can contribute to those challenges and call into question our mental competency. Many people have children or a spouse ready or willing to step in. But that may also feed our fear – that as those other people come into the scene to help handle routine tasks, they’ll do things without our knowledge or consent, and that we’ll lose control of our money, our homes and even healthcare decisions. Read More

11.30.2015

Kentucky Supreme Court holds that comparative fault doctrine applies to slip and fall case

By Jessica Surber, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP Sometimes, a single individual, business, or governmental entity is clearly to blame for negligently inflicting harm on an accident victim. But there are also times when the injured person must share in the blame for what happened. When more than one party bears the responsibility for an accident, fault is determined under the principles of comparative fault, such that an injured party's settlement or judgment is reduced in proportion to his or her level of fault. Recently, in the case of Carter v. Bullitt Host, LLC, the Kentucky Supreme Court addressed whether the doctrine of comparative fault was also applicable in premises liability cases involving the allegedly "open and obvious" hazards of snow and ice that caused a slip and fall injury. Read More

11.27.2015

Tax moves to make by the end of 2015

By Nathan Vinson Attorney, English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP We’re about five weeks out from January 1, 2016. Yes, really. That means if there are financial moves you intended to make this year to save on your 2015 tax bill, you need to get going. I’ve outlined here a brief checklist to get you started. Read More

11.27.2015

Practical Considerations after Obergefell v. Hodges: Is a loss of consortium claim available for married, same-sex couples?

When a husband or wife dies or is severely injured as a result of someone’s negligence, the surviving spouse can typically seek damages for past medical expenses, future medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost wages, impairment of earning capacity and what’s called “loss of consortium.” Essentially, loss of consortium is the loss of the loved one’s love, care, services, assistance, and companionship. Loss of consortium seeks to compensate the surviving spouse for the harm endured to the marital relationship. Damages for loss of consortium can be awarded not only in wrongful death cases but also in cases in which a spouse has been severely injured and is unable to provide the love, care, services, assistance, and companionship that the couple enjoyed when both persons were healthy. Damages for loss of consortium are only available to married couples. KRS 411.145 states that “either a wife or husband may recover damages against a third person for loss of consortium, resulting from a negligent or wrongful act of such third person.” Read More

11.24.2015

School bus, tractor-trailer wreck leads to lawsuit

By Kyle Roby, attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP In tractor-trailer wreck lawsuits, one obvious defendant is the truck driver whose negligent driving led to the crash. The trucking company that employed him or her is usually also named as a defendant, under the doctrine of respondeat superior (which holds employers liable for the tortious acts of their employees, if the act was within the scope of the employment relationship). In some instances, the circumstances of the accident may give rise to possible claims against others with a less obvious connection to the case. For instance, in the recent case of Commonwealth v. Collins, the state was named as a defendant in a suit arising from a tractor-trailer wreck that also involved a school bus. Read More

11.16.2015

Tennessee car crash case implicates state in construction of intersection

By Kyle Roby, Attorney English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, LLP At one time, a person injured by the negligence of a governmental entity was without a remedy, due to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Basically a carryover from the English common law under which "the King could do no wrong," the doctrine precluded a would-be plaintiff from asserting what might otherwise have been a meritorious claim against a state or local government. Now, however, most governmental entities have consented to be sued through various tort claims acts. Such acts set forth the procedure for filing a claim, the statute of limitations, and the maximum damages that may be sought. It is important to note that, since such actions are purely statutory in nature, an injured person must strictly comply with all procedural requirements, or else his or her suit will likely be dismissed. Even when all requirements are met, it is ultimately up to the courts to determine whether a particular claim is valid. Read More