Legal Opinion

Arnett v. Kennard

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided April 10, 1979PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PALMORE, Chief Justice.

This is a boundary dispute in which the movants brought suit against the respondent to quiet their title. The principal question to be decided by this court is whether CR 6.05, which adds three days to the time in which a party may or must act when he has been served by mail, applies to the 10-day limit prescribed by CR 59.05 for motions to amend or vacate a judgment. The answer is “No.”

The salient procedural events were as follows:

January 29, 1974 Judgment entered for movants.

February 5,1974 Respondent served motion to amend judgment and reopen proceedings for further…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth, Department of Highways v. BerrymanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1962
  2. Coca-Cola Bottling Works (Thomas) Inc. v. Hazard Coca-Cola Bottling Works, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1970
  3. Ford Motor Credit Company v. SwarensCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1969

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SteadmanKentucky Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Stewart v. Kentucky Lottery Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1999
  3. Hagg v. Kentucky Utilities Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API