Legal Opinion

Coomer v. Gray

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1988No. 87-SC-53-DGPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAMBERT, Justice.

The issue in this case is whether the ten percent damage for delay provision of KRS 26A.300 applies upon the second appeal from a judgment which determines ownership of sums of money held by a Master Commissioner in an interest bearing account pursuant to an order of the court. On motion, following this Court’s denial of discretionary review in Gray v. Coomer Drilling Co., et al., 85-SC-476-D, the trial court imposed the damage. Reversing, the Court of Appeals held that the judgment appealed from was not

a “judgment for the payment of money” as contemplated by the statute.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Gateway Construction Company v. WallbaumCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1962
  2. Kelly v. KellyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1919
  3. Commonwealth v. FrenchCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
  4. Phillips v. Green, SheriffCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1941
  5. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland v. LyonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1938

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Elk Horn Coal Corp. v. Cheyenne Resources, Inc.Kentucky Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Journey Acquisition-II, L.P. v. EQT Production Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2014
  3. Watts v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2004
  4. Bill HARNESS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HARTZ MOUNTAIN CORP., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989
  5. Bill HARNESS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HARTZ MOUNTAIN CORP., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API