Kentucky Court of Appeals Opinions Released November 13, 2026

Every Friday at 10:00 a.m., the Kentucky Court of Appeals releases its new opinions through its published minutes. Below is everything that came down today, with the family law cases first. Keep in mind that an unpublished opinion is not binding authority; under RAP 41 it may be cited only for consideration when no published opinion adequately addresses the issue.

Which Kentucky family law opinions came down today?

Turner v. Higgins, No. 2025-CA-1356-ME (Fayette Circuit Court) | Affirmed | Unpublished

The parties dated for several months. After the breakup, the petitioner testified that the respondent was always armed, had texted that he would shoot her in the head, kept trying to contact her, and that an unknown Airtag later tracked her. On cross examination she admitted sending a similar joking text herself and posting videos about him. The Court of Appeals affirmed the IPO. Unrefuted sworn testimony of texted threats was substantial evidence that dating violence occurred, and the likelihood that it may occur again is judged on the totality of the circumstances under Pettingill v. Pettingill, 480 S.W.3d 920 (Ky. 2015), even though the respondent had apparently moved to Chicago. The opinion is also a warning about citations: the panel found that four cases cited in the pro se appellant’s brief do not exist and that a real case, Baird v. Baird, was cited for a proposition it does not support. Check every citation, whoever or whatever drafted it.

Hager v. Commonwealth, No. 2025-CA-1394-MR (Meade Circuit Court) | Affirmed | Unpublished

A December 2024 agreed order expanded the father’s parenting time and stated that child support would not be modified. A month later the county attorney moved to modify support based on the new schedule, and the court cut support from $1,866 to $898.47 per month. The Court affirmed. The guidelines apply in every modification proceeding under KRS 403.211(2), and a guideline result that differs by 15 percent or more is a rebuttable presumption of a material change under KRS 403.213(2), with no change in income required, as Wiegand v. Wiegand, 862 S.W.2d 336 (Ky. App. 1993) holds. The mother’s complaint that the court used her older income figures failed because she never produced current income documentation as KRS 403.212(3)(h) requires.

C.D. v. Commonwealth, Nos. 2025-CA-1069-ME, 2025-CA-1071-ME, and 2025-CA-1072-ME (Simpson Family Court) | Affirmed | Unpublished

The family court found three children neglected or abused after a great aunt and a police officer testified the children said their mother had been gone for two days. The mother offered screenshots of texts showing the aunt had agreed to watch the children, and the family court did not believe them, in part because the aunt’s number was not saved as a contact. The Court affirmed under KRS 620.100(3). Authenticating a text message under KRE 901 takes only a prima facie showing, but the judge still decides whether it is genuine and how much it is worth, citing Brafman v. Commonwealth, 612 S.W.3d 850 (Ky. 2020). The Court also noted that the mother’s brief had no preservation statement and almost no authority, said sanctions were warranted, and declined to impose them.

T.S.C.T. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services, No. 2026-CA-0663-ME (Warren Family Court) | Affirmed | Unpublished

The child entered care in 2023 after he was found alone near a street in the middle of the night. The parents made essentially no case plan progress, moved to Illinois, and saw the child in person only at court dates. Appointed counsel filed an Anders brief, and the Court independently reviewed the record and affirmed. The child had been in care about 33 months, so the 15 of 48 months ground in KRS 625.090(2)(j) was undisputed, and abandonment was also proven. Only one statutory ground is needed. Counsel was allowed to withdraw.

White v. Hon. Lauren Adams Ogden, No. 2026-CA-1437-OA (Jefferson Family Court) | Order Denying Emergency Relief

A mother asked the Court to stay family court orders that placed her daughter with her stepfather, which were entered on an unopposed verified motion before anyone decided whether the stepfather qualified as a de facto custodian. Judge Easton’s order is sharply critical of the family court and states that awarding temporary custody under KRS 403.270 and KRS 403.280 without that determination may have been improper. Relief was still denied, because the record supported emergency custody under KRS 403.828(1) or KRS 620.060(1), the mother never responded to the motion, and she later agreed to the arrangement and to continuing the hearing. The writ petition will proceed before a three judge panel.

Other family orders

L.W. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services, No. 2026-CA-0053-ME (Jefferson Family Court) was dismissed after a pro se appellant’s brief came in a week past an extended deadline without a motion for more time. Taila v. Taila, No. 2026-CA-0686-MR (Jefferson Family Court) was dismissed because no appellant’s brief was ever filed. Philpot v. Commonwealth, No. 2026-CA-0715-MR (Daviess), a child support appeal, was dismissed after the case settled and no one answered a show cause order.

Which five opinions did the Kentucky Court of Appeals designate for publication?

None of today’s Kentucky family law opinions made the publication list. Even so, practitioners should note these five, because published opinions bind every Kentucky trial court.

Swain v. Louisville Metro Housing Authority, No. 2025-CA-0921-MR (Jefferson Circuit Court) | Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part, and Remanded | Published

A housing authority security manager said he was fired for reporting subletting fraud to HUD. The Court held that HUD is an appropriate body or authority under the Kentucky Whistleblower Act, KRS 61.102(1), that good faith is ordinarily a jury question, and that information learned in the course of job duties is still protected. His claim on a later report failed because he never defended it in the trial court.

Freedom Waste Services, LLC v. McAlpin, No. 2025-CA-0935-MR (Lyon Circuit Court) | Affirmed | Published

Four motorcyclists crashed in human waste spilled from a waste hauler’s truck on Interstate 24, and the jury awarded $11 million for pain and suffering. A photo of a latch added the day after the spill was admissible under the impeachment exception in KRE 407, because the driver’s testimony about the latch created an inconsistency. Most other objections were unpreserved, and the excessive verdict argument was waived because the defense tendered instructions with the same caps.

Ball v. Beshear, No. 2025-CA-1303-MR (Franklin Circuit Court) | Affirmed | Published

The State Auditor sued to make the Governor and the Cabinet carry out a 2024 law extending the time for relative and fictive kin caregivers to become foster parents. The Court held the Auditor lacked standing to force implementation of a statute and that her claims about access to Cabinet records were not ripe. It also held she does not have to issue subpoenas before going to court to enforce her right of access under KRS 43.080(1).

Howard v. Transcend Credit Union, No. 2026-CA-0009-MR (Bullitt Circuit Court) | Affirmed | Published

In a case of first impression, the Court held that KRS 286.6-495 allows Kentucky credit unions to issue credit cards to members. The opinion also lists four RAP 32 defects in the appellant’s brief and warns that the Court’s patience is not boundless.

Commonwealth v. McKinney, No. 2025-CA-1164-MR (Estill Circuit Court) | Vacated and Remanded | Published

A motion for a new trial based on trial errors must be filed within five days under RCr 10.06(1), and the one year period for newly discovered evidence does not extend that deadline. The Court vacated a new trial order and directed the trial court to reinstate the verdict.

What other civil opinions did the Kentucky Court of Appeals release?

Wagner v. Lenihan Real Estate, No. 2026-CA-0161-MR (Jefferson Circuit Court) | Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part | Unpublished

A seller who bought his listing agent’s own house, allegedly without being told whose it was, may pursue fiduciary duty and related claims against the agent and brokerage.

Arcelli v. Ghasem Properties, Inc., No. 2025-CA-0045-MR (Jefferson Circuit Court) | Affirmed in Part, Vacated in Part | Unpublished

A commercial landlord’s judgment was cut to the 6 percent statutory interest rate and to rent already due; future rent cannot be awarded without an acceleration clause.

Dick v. Lake Cumberland Resort Community Association, Inc., No. 2024-CA-1230-MR (Pulaski Circuit Court) | Affirmed; Cross Appeal Reversed | Unpublished

A lot owner’s claims against his resort association failed, and because summary judgment is a ruling on the merits, the dismissal must be with prejudice.

Miller v. Camp, No. 2025-CA-1355-MR (Breckinridge Circuit Court) | Vacated and Remanded | Unpublished

A road maintenance suit was revived because the trial court relied on matters outside the pleadings and granted what was really summary judgment before any discovery.

Penziner v. Discover Bank, No. 2026-CA-0099-MR (Mercer Circuit Court) | Vacated and Remanded | Unpublished

A credit card judgment was vacated because the debtor’s pro se filings, including an identity theft claim, raised a genuine fact issue.

Adient US, LLC v. Gibson, No. 2026-CA-0557-WC (Workers’ Compensation Board) | Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part | Unpublished

An ALJ cannot disregard uncontradicted medical proof of at least a temporary work injury.

Other civil appeals, all affirmed

• Perry v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, No. 2025-CA-1308-MR (Jefferson). Caveat emptor applies to a Master Commissioner sale.
• Turpin v. The Allen Company, Inc., No. 2025-CA-1121-MR (Jessamine). Defense verdict in a work zone collision upheld.
• McCann v. Cooper, No. 2025-CA-0997-MR (Campbell). Law of the case barred a contractor’s second challenge to liability.
• Laupp v. Ashby, No. 2025-CA-1202-MR (Oldham). An inmate must take an open records denial to the Attorney General before suing.

Which criminal and postconviction opinions did the Kentucky Court of Appeals decide?

Besides McKinney, the Court decided five criminal and postconviction appeals.

• Commonwealth v. Crawford, No. 2025-CA-1340-MR (Hopkins). Affirmed in part, vacated in part. The stop was unlawful, but the trial court must still decide whether the evidence came from flight, arrest, or an abandoned bag.
• Polk v. Commonwealth, No. 2025-CA-1494-MR (Fulton). Vacated. Jail fees require proof of the approved jail policy for the period of incarceration.
• Beck v. Commonwealth, No. 2025-CA-0511-MR (Henderson). Affirmed. Probation was properly denied to a youthful offender at final sentencing.
• Wilson v. Commonwealth, No. 2025-CA-0862-MR (Henderson). Affirmed. An unreported program credit did not end a diversion period.
• Harris v. Commonwealth, No. 2025-CA-1412-MR (Kenton). Affirmed. Jail credit claims require exhausting the Department of Corrections process first.

What orders did the Court enter?

• Blair v. Hon. Julie Marie Kaelin, No. 2026-CA-0968-OA. Writ denied; a trial court may refuse repeated motions to reconsider and warn of CR 11 sanctions.
• Johnson v. Hon. Ann Bailey Smith, No. 2026-CA-1141-OA. Writ denied; delay in a pending case is not irreparable harm when an appeal is available.
• Poteet v. Hon. Christopher T. Cohron, No. 2026-CA-1358-OA. Emergency relief denied over a repossessed car; money damages and a supersedeas bond are adequate remedies.
• Vanderyt v. Norton Healthcare, Inc. and Jennmar Services v. Podium Mining, LLC. Petitions for rehearing denied.
• Michals v. Makk. Motion to reconsider denied.
• Dollar General Partners v. Martin. Dismissed on the appellant’s motion.
• We summarized the White, L.W., Taila, and Philpot orders with the family law cases above.

Frequently asked questions about Kentucky family law appeals

When does the Kentucky Court of Appeals release opinions?

The Court releases opinions on Fridays at 10:00 a.m. through its published minutes, which list every opinion and order released that week.

Can an agreement that child support will not be modified stop a later modification?

Not by itself. In Hager v. Commonwealth, the Court applied the guidelines and the 15 percent presumption in KRS 403.213(2) even though an agreed order said support would not be modified. A parent who opposes modification should come to the hearing with current income documentation.

Do text message screenshots prove what they show?

Not automatically. A screenshot can be admitted with a modest showing under KRE 901, but the judge still decides whether it is genuine and how much weight it deserves. Corroboration, such as saved contacts, metadata, or the other person’s records, makes a difference.

What happens if a brief cites cases that do not exist?

The Court of Appeals checks citations. In Turner v. Higgins, the panel identified four nonexistent cases in a brief and warned the appellant that future noncompliant filings may be penalized. Fabricated or miscited authority damages credibility and can lead to sanctions.

Can a stepparent get custody before being found a de facto custodian?

Temporary emergency custody can rest on other statutes, such as KRS 403.828 or KRS 620.060, but in the White order the Court said awarding temporary custody under KRS 403.270 and KRS 403.280 without first deciding de facto custodian status may have been improper. Timing and the legal basis for a custody award matter.

Need help with a Kentucky family law appeal?

We round up Kentucky family law opinions every Friday. In the meantime, you can read our November 6 roundup. If you believe a Kentucky family court got your case wrong, act quickly, because appeal deadlines are short and strictly enforced. You can learn more about Kentucky family law appeals at Bowman Legal or call (502) 861-7414.