In granting summary judgment and dismissing a case against the University of Kentucky and a number of its agents and employees Fayette Circuit Court Judge Pamela Goodwine observed that an issue was "almost too close to call." The issue was "too close to call and therefore should not have been dismissed via summary judgment" ruled the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Carter v. University of Kentucky, No. 2010-CA-1621 (November 18, 2011). The Court of Appeals remanded for trial claims of breach of contract and discrimination.
« No Link Between Tort Reform and Job Growth | Main | Sixth Circuit Hears Appeal of Phen-Fen Lawyers, Gallion and Cunningham »
December 19, 2011
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54fa03477883401675ef537b9970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is An Issue "Almost Too Close to Call" Ripe for Summary Judgment? "No" Rules the Kentucky Court of Appeals:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Categories
- AAJ
- Albany
- American Association for Justice
- arbitration
- asbestos
- attorneys fees
- ATVs
- bad faith insurance practices
- Bath County
- bicycle accidents
- Bourbon County
- car insurance
- car wreck
- Carlisle
- children's toys
- Clark County
- class action
- Clinton County
- coal ash sludge
- consumer fraud
- Consumer Product Safety Commission
- consumer protection
- consumer safety
- corporate accountability
- Cumberland Parkway
- damages
- disability insurance
- drugs
- equal pay
- fair pay
- family safety
- Fayette County
- FDA
- Food and Drink
- Food and Drug Administration
- food safety
- Franklin County
- Garrard County
- Green County
- Greensburg
- Hart County
- Hartford Life
- health insurance
- Henry County
- highway safety
- HIPAA
- hospitals
- I-64
- I-65
- I-75
- insurance claims handling
- insurance coverage
- Jackson County
- Jessamine County
- judicial campaign contributions
- judicial elections
- justice system
- Knott County
- lawsuit procedures
- lawyer advertising
- Letcher County
- Lexington
- Lincoln County
- Madison County
- medical insurance
- medical malpractice
- mine safety
- mining safety
- Montgomery County
- motorcycle
- Mt. Sterling
- Nicholas County
- Nicholasville
- Nicholasville Road
- nursing homes
- Paris
- patient safety
- pay discrimination
- peanut butter
- Pike County
- Pikeville
- predatory lending
- preemption
- product recall
- public safety
- Pulaski County
- Rockcastle County
- Rowan County
- Russell Springs
- salmonella
- sex discrimination
- Somerset
- Supreme Court
- tort reform
- toxic substances
- Toyota
- truck crashes
- U.S. 127
- U.S. 23
- U.S. 27
- U.S. 60
- U.S. 68
- UIM coverage
- underinsured motor vehicle insurance
- unsafe products
- US 150
- Winchester
- Woodford County
- workplace safety
- wrongful death
How sad, hope the case will be open again for a trial.
Posted by: Amanda | January 13, 2012 at 06:48 AM