Appeals
Mr. Bartenstein has extensive experience handling appeals, and welcomes the opportunity to strategize with other attorneys on potential errors that might adequately support a reversal on appeal of an adverse result.
Appeals Cases
Sellers of real property sought specific performance of auction bid made by by-bidder, who had been hired by auctioneer ostensibly for sellers’ benefit, and for damages. Court held that the by-bidder was acting as an agent for the sellers, via extension with the auctioneer, and that, since no memorandum of sale was made, the action failed because it violated the statute of frauds.
Involved dispute between the insurers of two vehicles as to which one should pay the no-fault benefits for a pedestrian that was struck by the first vehicle, and knocked onto the second vehicle. Issue of which vehicle caused the injuries was not relevant. Assigned claims insurer was involved because the first vehicle left the scene. It was found to owe secondary coverage.
Involving claims of insurance bad faith on a cargo coverage claim. Established the principle under Kentucky law that an insurer has the right to litigate a debatable issue of first impression on a policy interpretation issue where different jurisdictions had reached different conclusions.
Involved an “owned or available for regular use” exclusion. No-fault insurer did not owe coverage to insured’s son, who was injured in accident while driving his own uninsured automobile, despite living in the same household as his father.
Up-the-Ladder immunity for worker’s compensation claims applied to the utility that retained an independent contractor to test smoke-stack emissions. Deemed to be a regular and recurring part of the utilities business.
An attorney sued a court-appointed supervisor of visitation for defamation because of statements made in a report to the Court filed by the psychologist. The statements made in the course of judicial proceedings were found to be privileged.
Slip and fall on ice and suit against the home’s owners and real estate agents having an open house. The court held there is no duty to remedy or warn, and thus no liability for natural, open and obvious conditions.
Involved whether the insurance provided to a lessee of a vehicle will be considered primary over the insurance afforded to the repossession agent that picked up the car. The repossession agent’s policy contained an excess other insurance clause which made it secondary to the lessee’s insurance policy, which was primary, and could not recover against the excess insurer.
Involved the question of whether Louisville Metro can limit its exposure to liability as the owner of a take-home police car when it is being driven by an off-duty officer.
Involved fraud in the application for insurance when a son listed a vehicle that he owned on his father’s policy as if the father owned the vehicle. Jury found coverage, but the Court of Appeals reversed that decision.
Involved issues surrounding whether a named, but not appointed Executrix from Maryland, has standing to pursue claims on behalf of the decedent’s estate against the personal representative of a the Kentucky Estate of her estranged, but not divorced husband.
Involved the question of decanting a trust, and whether a spouse-trustee could decant to allow herself to remain a beneficiary before the couple’s divorce became final.