270.781.6500

Kentucky

06.26.2014

Can Window Screen Manufacturer Be Held Liable for Kentucky Toddler’s Fall?

In an unpublished 2013 case, a couple sued a window screen manufacturer and the owners of an apartment building. Their toddler fell through an open window and died. A Kentucky trial court dismissed their claims, and the couple appealed. The issue in the case was whether a manufacturer of the screen that was in the open window owed the family the duty to warn or design its screens such that the child's fall would be prevented. The child who died was in a fourth-floor apartment in which his grandmother lived. The window was open, but the screen was in place. The window sill was 7 inches above the floor. The screen did not have any warnings on it. Other screens in the building did have a label that warned parents that their child should not be near the open window. The toddler's parents brought a wrongful death action against defendants including the window manufacturer and owners and managers of the apartment building. Read More

06.17.2014

Kentucky Wrongful Death Case Involving a Lack of 911 Response

In a 2013 unpublished appellate case, a woman’s estate appealed after the circuit court granted summary judgment on some of the estate’s claims and directed the verdict on the remaining wrongful death claims. The case arose from the death of Cheryl Powers from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Before dying, Powers called 911. A dispatcher took the call. Powers couldn’t speak clearly, but she tried to give her address before the call was disconnected. The dispatcher called the number back, but it went to the woman’s voice mail. The dispatcher called the police dispatcher instead of an ambulance and explained that she thought the woman had given a particular address. The dispatcher replayed the 911 call and called the police dispatcher again, saying that she thought that the woman had said “Vista Apartments.” The police dispatcher sent an officer to the first address, but the first address did not exist. The police dispatcher told the officer there was no additional information and thereby “cleared” the 911 call. Therefore, no emergency services responded to the woman’s 911 call, and she died. On the following morning, the woman’s boyfriend found her dead in the hallway. Read More

06.03.2014

Mike Owsley co-authors article for national school board magazine

Mike Owsley co-authors article for national school board magazine Read More

05.27.2014

Kentucky Police Officers Claim Qualified Immunity for Wrongful Death

In a recent case, a decedent's parents appealed the court's grant of summary judgment in favor of police officers, the police department and the City. The plaintiffs were the parents of a man who was killed in 2009 in a head-on collision with a car that was driving dangerously. Before the collision, several people called 911 to report the dangerous driver. Because of the calls, the police department asked its officers to look out for a green sedan. When the officers responded to the call they encountered a red pickup truck on Ky. 39 and were pointed towards the highway. They thought this meant the green sedan was up ahead. The red pickup pulled up and told one of the officers that the green sedan was stopped on Ky. 39 not far away. As one of the officers drove south on the highway, he saw the green sedan at the end of a driveway on the left side of the road. Traffic stopped him from seeing license plate numbers, but he saw that the driver of the sedan looked lifeless and he was worried it was a medical emergency. Read More

05.22.2014

Superseding Causes in Kentucky Personal Injury Cases

In Kentucky, personal injury cases where negligence is alleged, a plaintiff must establish (1) a duty owed to the plaintiff, (2) breach of the duty, (3) that proximately causes injuries, and (4) actual damages. Negligence, including the element of causation, is never presumed in Kentucky. What happens, however, if some surprising act occurs to cause an accident that is not related to a defendant's otherwise negligent conduct? A "superseding cause" can absolve a defendant if it is extraordinary and independent — that is not arising out of a negligently created condition. In a recent unpublished opinion that illustrates how Kentucky looks at the issue of superseding causes, the Court of Appeals of Kentucky considered a case involving two accidents on opposite sides of an interstate highway. The first accident involved the defendant's car, which she had driven into the median and hit the base of the eastbound bridge under the roadway. The second accident happened when the plaintiffs were driving eastbound. They had come to a total stop in a traffic jam after the defendant's car's accident. A tractor-trailer rear-ended their vehicle, killing a family member and injuring another. The plaintiffs sued the defendant, claiming that her first accident directly and proximately caused their injuries and damages. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that her accident had happened more than a mile away and that the traffic jam was the result of the emergency personnel's response and the negligence of the tractor-trailer driver, not her driving. The defendant argued that both of these events were superseding causes of the plaintiffs' injuries. The trial court agreed, ruling that the first responders had stopped traffic and the  tractor-trailer's negligence were both superseding causes. Read More

05.15.2014

Court decision on guns at work favorable to employers

Court decision on guns at work favorable to employers Read More

04.04.2014

What is a “Daubert Hearing” in Kentucky?

A "Daubert hearing" takes its name from a United States Supreme Court case titled Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. It refers to a hearing in which the trial judge evaluates whether testimony or evidence from a particular expert is admissible. The hearing occurs outside of a jury's presence before trial. This type of hearing is often necessary in a pharmaceutical injury case where the plaintiff alleges the drugs prescribed caused serious harm. In Kentucky, a trial judge must determine whether the expert will be testifying to (1) technical, scientific, or specialized knowledge that (2) will help the trier of fact understand a fact at issue in the trial. A hearing is not always required, but a trial judge can only rule without a hearing if the record before the court is complete enough to measure the proposed evidence against the standards of reliability and relevance. Evidence must be both reliable and relevant to be admitted. A 2008 pharmaceutical injury case involving, among other issues, a Daubert hearing arose when a woman gave birth to her second child by cesarean section. She didn't want to breastfeed, so her obstetrician prescribed the drug Parlodel to stop her lactation. She started the drug and was discharged from the hospital. A few days later, she experienced a headache and pain between her shoulders. The next morning, her mother found her dead. Read More

04.03.2014

ELPO sponsors reception following Lexington legal event

ELPO sponsors reception following Lexington legal event Read More

04.02.2014

Kentucky Statute of Limitations in a Tractor Trailer Injury Case

Negligence lawsuits in Kentucky must be brought within the applicable statute of limitations. There are several causes of action under which recovery may be possible, but if you fail to bring your lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations, you may not be able to proceed. There may only be a small window of time within which you can file suit. An experienced Kentucky personal injury attorney can help determine the appropriate method of recovery and applicable statute of limitations. In a 2011 case, the Kentucky Supreme Court considered whether a 1-year personal injury statute of limitations or the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA) 2-year statute of limitations applied in the case of a man who was hurt as a tractor-trailer was being unloaded. The plaintiff was a contract truck driver at the time. On the day before the accident, the plaintiff was picking up aluminum bundles in Iowa that he planned to deliver in Kentucky. They were loaded into two stacks with three layers each. By the next day, the load had shifted. A forklift operator began unloading. The plaintiff was helping to roll up unattached straps. A bundle of aluminum hit the plaintiff. As a result of his injuries, he wasn't able to work for 6 months. Read More

03.20.2014

Relay for Life fundraising team pens cookbook

Relay for Life fundraising team pens cookbook Read More