Feb. 8, 2008 -  KENTUCKY COURT OF APPEALS DECISIONS (2008:07)

PUBLISHED (COA).

STONE V. COM.
CRIMINAL:  Reasonable suspicion of criminal activity found under totality of circumstances to 
2006-CA-002569
PUBLISHED: REVERSING AND REMANDING
PANEL: TAYLOR PRESIDING JUDGE; COMBS, NICKELL CONCUR
COUNTY: JEFFERSON
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

CA held TC erred by denying Stone's motion to suppress evidence gathered as a result of his seizure. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the officers did not possess reasonable suspicion of criminal activity necessary to justify Stone's seizure.

It is uncontroverted that Stone was seated in a legally parked vehicle in front of an apartment building around 8:30 p.m. According to the officer's testimony, they observed Stone in his motor vehicle parked in front of an apartment complex for a period of minutes. The vehicle's engine was not running, and the brake lights were illuminated. Stone was violating no law at that time. The apartment complex was located in a high crime area, but the officers did not observe anyone approach Stone's vehicle. The officers then decided to investigate and parked their police cruisers so as to block Stone's vehicle. Shortly thereafter, Stone attempted to exit his vehicle but was ordered to return to the vehicle. The undisputed facts indicated that both officers parked their police cruisers directly behind Stone's motor vehicle. With the positioning of these cruisers, Stone's motor vehicle was effectively blocked in its parking space. Shortly after the police cruisers parked behind his vehicle, Stone then attempted to exit the vehicle but was ordered to return to the vehicle by Officer Green. Considering these undisputed facts, CA concluded that Stone was “seized” at this time. With his vehicle blocked by police cruisers and upon being ordered by the police back into his vehicle, CA believed that a reasonable person would not feel free to leave at this point.

Digested by Scott C. Byrd
www.OlginandByrd.com

STEEPLECHASE SUBDIVISION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION V. THOMAS
PROPERTY:  Mechanics lien does not include services provided by contractor (mowing, etc).
2006-CA-002146
PUBLISHED: REVERSING
PANEL: THOMPSON PRESIDING JUDGE; BUCKINGHAM, HENRY CONCUR
COUNTY: BOONE
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

Steeplechase Subdivision Homeowners Association, Inc. appealed from an order and judgment awarding judgment on a mechanic's lien asserted against a common area in the Steeplechase Subdivision on which the neighborhood clubhouse and swimming pool are located. Steeplechase asserts that the lien is not enforceable under KRS 376.010. Because the lien was for maintenance, street cleaning services, and mowing services, CPA held that it was unenforceable and reverse as services provided by contractor could not give rise to mechanics' lien.

Michael Stevens

ALCAN ALUMINUM CORP. V. STONE
WORKERS COMP:  No offset for certain employer funded disability pension payments per KRS 342.730(6)
2007-CA-001677
PUBLISHED: AFFIRMING
PANEL: VANMETER PRESIDING JUDGE; NICKELL AND THOMPSON CONCUR
COUNTY: WCB
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

Stone was totally occupationally disabled due to a cervical injury sustained while working for Alcan. At that time, Alcan had three retirement plan options: normal, early and full disability. Under the normal retirement plan, at age 65, an employee could retire and receive a defined benefit calculated by a dollar amount times years of service. Under the early retirement plan, an employee who had reached the age of 60 could retire and receive a discounted amount. The full disability retirement plan available to an employee who met certain medical criteria, was calculated similarly to the normal retirement benefit, without the discount for early retirement. In this case, Stone opted to receive $990.54 per month in disability retirement benefits, which is 15% more than he would have received under early retirement.

Under KRS 342.730(6)(Determination of income benefits for disability -- Survivors' rights -- Termination -- Offsets -- Notification of return to work), an offset is allowed against workers' compensation benefits for income benefits paid from certain employer-funded disability or accident and sickness plans. When Jackie Stone ceased working for Alcan Aluminum due to a total, permanent disability, he elected to receive benefits under Alcan's disability retirement benefits plan. The issue is whether the benefits paid to Stone under the plan met the requirements of KRS 342.730(6). COA affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's opinion which held Alcan should receive an offset only for the amount that Stone's disability pension exceeds the pension to which he would have been entitled under Alcan's early retirement.

Michael Stevens

NOT PUBLISHED (COA)

FITZGERALD V. HAMMOCK
TORTS:  Personal injury claim and spousal property
2006-CA-002347
NOT PUBLISHED: 99
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

YONTS V. YONTS
FAMILY LAW:  VETERAN'S DISABILITY PENSION AND DIVORCE
2006-CA-002147
NOT PUBLISHED: 95
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

TECHNOLOGY SERVICES GROUP V. JOHNSON
WORKERS COMP
2007-CA-001690
NOT PUBLISHED: 69
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

ATKINS V. SPECIALIZED ALTERNATIVES FOR FAMILIES AND YOUTH
WORKERS COMP
2007-CA-002151
NOT PUBLISHED: 116
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

GOATEE V. GOATEE
FAMILY LAW
2005-CA-001861
NOT PUBLISHED: 62
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

SHACKELFORD V. SHACKELFORD
FAMILY LAW
2006-CA-000421
NOT PUBLISHED: 129
DATE RENDERED: 2/21/2008

LOWE V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-000808
NOT PUBLISHED: 85
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

TANNER V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-000917
NOT PUBLISHED: 79
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

SPENCER COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT V. PUCKETT
REVENUE AND TAXATION: AD VALOREM
2006-CA-000938
NOT PUBLISHED: 106
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

MITCHELL V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-001244
NOT PUBLISHED: 84
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

RUMPH V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-001483
NOT PUBLISHED: 91
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

BARTON V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-001700
NOT PUBLISHED: 112
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

STURGILL V. STURGILL
FAMILY LAW
2006-CA-001721
NOT PUBLISHED: 115
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

THORNTON V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-001768
NOT PUBLISHED: 96
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

BAKER V. BAKER
FAMILY LAW
2006-CA-001877
NOT PUBLISHED: 73
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

SHEPHERD V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-002080
NOT PUBLISHED: 90
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

MOSS V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-002096
NOT PUBLISHED: 100
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

GOODLETT V. GOODLETT
FAMILY LAW
2006-CA-002133
NOT PUBLISHED: 95
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

DAVIS V. COM
CRIM
2006-CA-002391
NOT PUBLISHED: 138
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

DOZIER V DOZIER
FAMILY LAW
2006-CA-002541
NOT PUBLISHED: 101
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

JONES V. COM
CRIM
2007-CA-000058
NOT PUBLISHED: 89
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

DAVIS V. DAVIS
FAMILY LAW
2007-CA-000107
NOT PUBLISHED: 101
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

BRUMAGEN V. COM
CRIM
2007-CA-000208
NOT PUBLISHED: 64
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

RILEY V. BRANTLEY
ZONING
2007-CA-000522
NOT PUBLISHED: 134
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

HARRIS V. COM
CRIM
2007-CA-000526
NOT PUBLISHED: 113
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

CAB. FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES V. D (N.J.N.)
FAMILY LAW:  JUVENILE LAW, REHAB SERVICES
2007-CA-001844
NOT PUBLISHED: 65
DATE RENDERED: 2/08/2008

 

Contributors: