Go to Home Page Communities
  
Let your voice be heard by joining the community today. Sign up.
Torts and Personal Injury Law Center
Current Focus: Federal Preemption in Drug and Device Cases
RSS Email Alert




Personal Injury
3/14/2008 7:41:10 PM EST
Ronald W. Eades
Eades on the Kentucky Supreme Court's Discussion of Various Personal Injury Issues in Steel Techs., Inc. v. Congleton, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 125 (Ky. 2007)
Posted by Ronald W. Eades
Professor of Law, Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, University of Louisville

In Steel Techs., Inc. v. Congleton, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 125 (Ky. 2007), the Kentucky Supreme Court weighed in on three key issues that many of the state's personal injury litigators often confront. First, the Court confirmed that the state's impact requirement for negligent emotional distress claims remains valid, but, significantly, it also suggested that it may jetison the requirement in the near future. Second, the Court set clear guidelines for preserving a claim of error regarding the insufficiency of evidence at trial. Third, the Court evaluated the Constitutionality of a punitive damage award pursuant to recent U.S. Supreme Court guidelines arising from State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (U.S. 2003) and BMW of N. Am. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (U.S. 1996).

Create an account or login to post comments.

Martindale-Hubbell(R) Connected - Join Now

lexisOne Community

Community Questions