Legal Opinion · Dissent

Furtula v. University of Kentucky

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided June 19, 2014No. 2011-SC-000332-DGPublished

1DissentNoble, J.

A majority of this Court, with Chief Justice Minton’s separate concurrence, has concluded that Vera Furtula and Anthony Miller did not have lawfully authorized written contracts with their employer, the University of Kentucky, and that their claims are therefore not covered by the sovereign immunity waiver in KRS 45A.245 regardless of its applicability to state universities. I cannot join either conclusion, and therefore I dissent.

The majority concludes there were no contracts at all. To reach this conclusion, the majority focuses on disclaimers in the employee handbook and other documents…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. The City of Houston v. Steve WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. CampbellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1987
  3. Cook v. Heck's Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Kellum v. Browning's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  5. Ammerman v. Bd. of Educ., Nicholas CountyKentucky Supreme Court · 2000

13 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