KOERNER V. KOERNER CHILD SUPPORT JURISDICTION 2008-CA-000080 PUBLISHED: VACATING THOMPSON PRESIDING COUNTY: OLDHAM DATE RENDERED: 10/17/2008 Mom alleged that TC lacked subject matter jurisdiction over child support modification.Read More

FEHR V. FEHR 2007-CA-001495 PUBLISHED: AFFIRMING IN PART AND REVERSING AND REMANDING IN PART THOMPSON PRESIDING COUNTY: OLDHAM DATE RENDERED: 10/3/2008Read More

Young v. Carran, et.al. The issue presented is whether Appellant may maintain a private cause of action against an opposing law firm for violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) for the inadvertent disclosure of her medical and psychiatric records to the opposing party in child custody litigation. Summary judgment...Read More

Frances v. Frances involves relocation issues arising prior to the entry of a final custody decree. These were also the facts in Fenwick v. Fenwick, 114 S.W.3d 767 (Ky. 2003). The Kentucky Supreme Court now recognizes that the effect of relocation must be viewed in light of whether it occurs pre- or post-decree. In making...Read More

Frances v. Frances, but the real discussion of the law is in Pennington v. Marcum. Digest to follow.Read More

Pennington v. Marcum, decided today by the Kentucky Supreme Court. Congratulations to Martha Rosenberg! I dreaded reading Justice Cunningham’s dissent, only to find him cite the “prestigious” AAML and our model relocation act as guidelines that could have given courts greater guidance than best interests. A good day! We will post more on the case...Read More

From The Wall Street Journal Market Watch: “Suggested retail price for an Identigene DNA Paternity Test Collection Kit is $29.99. The Walgreens.com price is the same, plus shipping. The laboratory and processing fee for the personal test is $119. The laboratory and processing fee for test results for legal proceedings is $319.”Read More

Grant v. Lynn, grandparent visitation to parents of children’s deceased mother affirmed as in the best interest of the children, KRS 405.021 not unconstitutional as alleged and standards of appellate practice for pro se litigants.Read More

Murphy v. Murphy, –S.W.3d – (Ky. App. 2008), 2007-CA-002298-ME The parties shared joint custody and equal parenting time of their three children. More than a year after the parties’ last interaction with the court, the father moved to modify custody. He mailed the motion/notice to the mother’s attorney of record. The mother’s attorney of record...Read More

Murphy v. Murphy, trial court reversed because motion to change custody served on lawyer did not effectuate service on party and insufficient findings made. Digest to follow.Read More