Skip to main content

Mehr Fairbanks Trial Lawyers Receives Favorable Decisions Against the University of Kentucky

Mehr Fairbanks Trial Lawyers recently received two favorable orders from Judge Shepherd and Judge Wingate of Franklin Circuit Court. Pursuant to these opinions, employees of the University of Kentucky (“UK”) have a constitutional right to sue UK regarding entitlement to long-term disability benefits. UK previously set up a trust, administered by a Trustee, which will pay entitled employees long-term disability benefits in the event that they should become disabled. Pursuant to the Franklin Circuit Court’s orders, UK employees may now sue UK under Section 2 of the Kentucky Constitution. With these orders, UK employees will now have a remedy and won’t be denied a judicial review because of sovereign immunity: UK employees can seek judicial review of UK’s administrative decision under an arbitrary and capricious standard.


UK is currently appealing these decisions.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Trial Lawyers

Austin Mehr of Mehr, Fairbanks & Peterson Trial Lawyers received an invitation on July 17, 2017, to The National Trial Lawyers Top 100 Civil Plaintiff Trial Lawyers. As stated in his invitation: “Membership in The National Trial Lawyers is by invitation only and extended to those attorneys who exemplify superior qualifications, trial results and leadership in their respective state based upon objective and uniformly applied criteria.”  Congratulations, Austin!

Kentucky Supreme Court Reaffirms Standard for Insurance Bad Faith

In Hollaway v. Direct General Ins. Co. of Miss., 497 S.W.3d 733 (Ky. 2016), the Kentucky Supreme Court addressed the first substantive insurance bad faith case to come before it in ten years.  In the September 22, 2016, decision, the Court affirmed a summary judgment granted by Fayette Chief Regional Circuit Judge Thomas Clark, who had found an absence of evidence of bad faith on the part of the insurer.  The Court had no trouble agreeing with Judge Clark, who had found that liability for the disputed parking lot fender bender that gave rise to the claim was never reasonably clear.  Without clearly proving liability for the accident, or the injuries stemming from it, the plaintiff could not prevail on a claim of bad faith, which requires that an insurer be obligated to pay under the terms of the policy. There are three key takeaways from Hollaway. Most importantly, the Court rejected the idea that a claimant must prove an “evil motive” on the part of the insurance company.  As practi…