Law Commons^™

Punitive Compensation, Cortney E. Lollar

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Criminal restitution is a core component of punishment. In its current form, this remedy rarely serves restitution's traditional aim of disgorging a defendant's ill-gotten gains. Instead, courts use this monetary award not only to compensate crime victims for intangible losses, but also to punish the defendant for the moral blameworthiness of her criminal action. Because the remedy does not fit into the definition of what most consider "restitution," this Article advocates for the adoption of a new, additional designation for this prototypically punitive remedy: punitive compensation. Unlike with restitution, courts measure punitive compensation by a victim's losses, not a defendant's …

Getting Jurors To Awesome, Cortney E. Lollar

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

A 2011 American Bar Association report on the death penalty in Kentucky revealed that a shocking two-thirds of the 78 people sentenced to death in Kentucky since reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976 have had their sentences overturned on appeal. Kentucky’s reversal rate is more than twice the national average, with a 31% reversal rate in capital cases and almost four times the 17% national reversal rate in all other case types. With a sentence as irreversible as death, troubling does not begin to describe the depth of concern many experience when viewing such a startling statistic.

A closer …

Making Stuff Up, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Beginning with an article in this Journal almost thirty years ago, Professor Underwood continues to research and write about legal ethics and litigation. In this Commentary, he offers a witty look at several cases where, in his opinion, the judge allowed improper arguments to the jury.

Empaneling The Peers Of Polluters: Obtaining A Jury Trial Under The Opa And Cercla As Explained In United States V. Viking Resources, Inc., Addison J. Schreck

Kentucky Journal of Equine, Agriculture, & Natural Resources Law

No abstract provided.

Retribution And Deterrence: The Role Of Punitive Damages In Products Liability Litigation, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Punitive damages constitute an award to an injured party above what is necessary to compensate for actual loss. This Article considers whether punitive damages are an effective means of promoting the goals of products liability law. Section I traces the use of punitive damages in products liability litigation from the early 1960's to the present time. Section II examines the traditional rationales for punitive damages and considers whether they are appropriate in the products liability context. Finally, Section III evaluates some of the measures that commentators have proposed to adapt more fully the concept of punitive damages to products liability …

A Comparative Negligence Checklist To Avoid Future Unnecessary Litigation, John M. Rogers, Randy Donald Shaw

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Systems of comparative negligence, whereby the negligence of a plaintiff serves to reduce rather than to preclude tort recovery in negligence, have been adopted in thirty-nine states. The common law rule that contributory negligence is an absolute bar to recovery is still the law in Kentucky, although modified by the doctrine of "last clear chance." Kentucky may soon join the trend toward comparative negligence, however. In the last legislative session, bills to adopt comparative negligence were introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A hearing on this subject was held by the Interim Judiciary and Civil Procedure …

Compensatory Damages In Federal Fair Housing Cases, Robert G. Schwemm

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The federal fair housing laws became effective in 1968. Since then, courts have often awarded damages to victims of housing discrimination, but their decisions have provided little guidance for assessing the amount of such awards. There is a great range of awards, with some courts awarding only nominal damages of $1 and others setting awards of over $20,000. Compounding the problem is the difficulty of measuring the principal element of damages claimed by most plaintiffs in fair housing cases, noneconomic emotional harm or other forms of intangible injury.

Rarely is the basis for the amount of the court's award satisfactorily …

Voir Dire In Kentucky: An Empirical Study Of Voir Dire In Kentucky Circuit Courts, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Voir dire is the stage of a jury trial at which prospective jurors are questioned under oath by court or counsel to determine their suitability as jurors in the case to be tried. Kentucky's high court has repeatedly recognized the importance of voir dire to the exercise of for-cause and peremptory challenges.

The trial judge's wide discretion in voir dire, however, necessarily makes a review of appellate decisions of minimal assistance in ascertaining what actually occurs during this important phase of a jury trial. Published opinions provide little guidance in this area; information about voir dire must come from a …

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article provides a survey of civil procedure developments in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The most significant civil procedure case decided by the Kentucky Court of Appeals during the period covered by this Survey is Nazareth Literary and Benevolent Institution v. Stephenson. That case, which deals with discovery of privileged communications, may have created problems that will require legislative action. Other decisions by the Court during this period serve to illustrate and amplify existing procedural points. The more important of these decisions will be briefly discussed prior to the consideration of Stephenson.

Sentencing: The Good, The Bad, And The Enlightened, Rutheford B. Campbell Jr., Bill Cunningham

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In June, 1968 the Kentucky Crime Commission, in keeping with legislative instruction, made certain recommendations for a change in Kentucky's current treatment of crime and punishment. Within its report was a suggestion that sentencing in all non-capital criminal cases be rendered by the judge instead of the jury. Thus, it must be emphasized that this discussion is confined only to sentencing in noncapital cases.

The authors have arrived at a definite recommendation which is offered at the conclusion of the paper. It is our opinion that the suggestion outlined is not only the most efficient and proper but also the …