Diana Skaggs's blog

Journal Categories

Taping Phone Conversations

We found this helpful site, Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press, thanks to John Stout on the ABA Family Law Section listserve. We tell our clients in KY that phone conversations cannot be taped if the client is not a party to the conversation. The tricky part is conversations between persons in different states. Even if the client is a party, they may be illegal. The rcfp gives a state-by-state guide to what can be done where.

S.R.D. v. T.L.B., 174 SW3d 502 (Ky. App., 2005)

S.R.D. v. T.L.B., 174 SW3d 502 (Ky. App., 2005)
Husband who held himself out to be child's father for 9 years
was equitably estopped to deny paternity and child support
obligation when at the time of the divorce decree there was and
uncontested assertion that the marriage produced three

Com., Cab. For Health & Family Services v. Byer, 173 SW3d 247 (Ky.App,. 2005)

Com., Cab. For Health & Family Services v. Byer,
173 SW3d 247 (Ky.App,. 2005)
Cabinet for Health & Family Services was a party to the action
because it initiated dependency action, but trial court order
directing the Cabinet to pay expert witness fees was reversed
because KRE 760(A) requires a court to enter a show cause order
why expert witnesses should not be appointed when the court
desires to appoint its own expert. This process guarantees the
parties will have notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Cox v. Cox, 170 SW3d 389 (Ky., 2005)

Cox v. Cox, 170 SW3d 389 (Ky., 2005)
Where Texas lacked minimum contacts with the husband
and, therefore, lacked jurisdiction to impose a lien on
property in Kentucky, its judgment regarding the lien was
not entitled to full force and credit and was not a "foreign
judgment" under the UEFJA.

Dobson v. Dobson, 159 SW3d 335 (Ky.App., 2004)

Dobson v. Dobson, 159 SW3d 335 (Ky.App., 2004)
Spouse granted innocent spouse relief by the IRS is
not entitled to res judicata and trial court assignment
of tax deficiency 40% to innocent spouse was upheld.
Tax audit has uncovered a tax deficiency, but trial court
reasoned that the parties benefited from the lower tax burden
and innocent spouse was later required to pay the share of
taxes for which she would have been responsible had the
deductions not been disallowed.

Goff v. Goff, 172 SW3d 352(Ky.,2005)

Goff v. Goff, 172 SW3d 352 (Ky., 2005)
Applying the UCCJA, Kentucky had subject matter jurisdiction
to enter the initial custody decree, but was without continuing
jurisdiction to modify it because Tennessee was unquestionably
the home state of the child.

Parties were married in Tennessee (June 1996) and purchased a home in Nashville. Less than a month after the wedding, Mr. Goff filed a petition for annulment in Warren County, Kentucky, where he had moved. Wife remained in Tennessee.


Now that we are a bit public, it seems appropriate to talk about the scholarship of legal blogs. In a posting on 3L Epiphany a U.S. District Court Judge is interviewed about his use of blogs as secondary authority. We found it today from a Dennis Kennedy posting on Corante. and then saw it all over the blawg world with the most notable comment being "the future will belong to the flexible."

New Case Categories

Michael Stevens was very kind to announce the presence of this blog in his KentuckyLawBlog today. The good news is you're reading it. The bad news is that you will see the learning curve in progress as we improve it.

Allen v. Devine, 178 SW3d 517 (Ky.App., 2005)

Allen v. Devine, 178 SW3d 517 (Ky.App., 2005)
Once a finding is made that persons are de facto custodians,
they then are on equal footing and court must then determine
best interest. Blood relationship is but one of many factors for
the trial court to consider.

Crossfield v. Crossfield, 155 SW3d 743 (Ky.App., 2005)

Crossfield v. Crossfield, 155 SW3d 743 (Ky.App., 2005)
Change of residential parent within two years of custody decree
requires supporting affidavits and finding of endangerment or
placement with de facto custodian.

Syndicate content

This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be considered to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer-client relationship. Persons accessing this site are encouraged to seek independent counsel for advice regarding their individual legal issues.
© Diana L. Skaggs + Partners, PLLC · 623 W. Main Street · Louisville, KY · 40202 · Tel: (502) 562-0050 · Fax: (502) 582-3523