Law Enforcement’s Unfettered Use of Video Technology Is Strangling the Fourth Amendment’s Right to Privacy

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Note | 101 KY. L. J. ONLINE 2 | Dec. 21, 2012

Jerad Blair

Have new technologies eviscerated individuals' privacy protections under the Fourth Amendment? Jerad Blair examines the implementation of body-worn video devices by law enforcement and its effect on individuals' privacy rights. View the PDF Click Here Citation Jerad Blair, Law Enforcement’s Unfettered Use of Video Technology Is Strangling the Fourth Amendment’s Right to Privacy, 101 Ky. L.J. Online 16 (2012), http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/blair-bvd-note. Permanent Link http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/blair-bvd-note

American Needle: Has the Supreme Court Deflated Synergistic Gains in Joint Ventures Among Competitors?

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 100 KY. L. J. ONLINE 5 | Sept. 19, 2012

 Jerrad Howard

The 2010 Supreme Court case American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League represents a drastic change in antitrust jurisprudence. Though the Supreme Court has ordinarily been very suspicious of cooperation among industry competitors, over the past several decades, joint ventures have operated in a special, protected arena. However, American Needle makes it apparent that the Court may begin viewing these arrangements with more skepticism going forward. This Article analyzes prior Supreme Court precedent related to joint ventures as well as the Supreme Court's opinion in American Needle. The Article concludes by discussing the scholarly response to this Supreme Court opinion and venturing a hypothesis of what this decision means for the future of antitrust jurisprudence.

View the PDF

Click Here

Citation

Jerrad Howard, American Needle: Has the Supreme Court Deflated Synergistic Gains in Joint Ventures Among Competitors?, 100 Ky. L.J. Online 67 (2012), http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/american-needle.

Permanent Link

http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/american-needle

The 2012 Amendments to Kentucky's Business Entity Statutes

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 101 KY. L. J. ONLINE 1 | July 30, 2012

Thomas E. Rutledge

While the most significant alterations to Kentucky’s business entity laws enacted by the 2012 General Assembly were the adoption of the Kentucky Uniform Statutory Trust Act and the Kentucky Uniform Limited Cooperative Association Act, other changes were made to pre– existing statutes. Largely technical in nature, the amendments continue the effort in recent years to eliminate ambiguities and to provide consistent procedures. This article provides a thorough but concise overview of these latest changes to Kentucky's business entity laws. Topics  covered include:

  • Changes to the limited liability provisions of KyRUPA and KyULPA

  • Partial codification of the law of piercing the veil

  • Newly permitted conversion of an LLC to an LLP

  • Organic transactions with statutory trusts

  • The definition of "transacting business" for a foreign LLP

  • Consent to the jurisdiction of Kentucky Courts by directors, officers and managers

  • The effective date of judicial dissolution

  • Amendment filing requirements for limited partnerships

  • Preservation of limited liability after dissolution

  • Qualification to transact business for foreign entities seeking state contracts

  • Dissociation of LLC members

  • Elimination of the fairness defense for violations of the duty of loyalty in partnerships

  • The mythological limited liability corporation

Download the PDF

The 2012 Amendments to Kentucky's Business Entity Statutes

Citation

Thomas E. Rutledge, The 2012 Amendments to Kentucky's Business Entity Statutes, 101 Ky. L.J. Online 1 (2012), http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/the-2012-amendments-to-kentuckys-business-entity-statutes.

Permanent Link

http://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/the-2012-amendments-to-kentuckys-business-entity-statutes

Constitutional v. Statutory Takings Protections: Is One Really Better Than the Other?

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 100 KY. L. J. ONLINE 4 | June 16, 2012

Duane L. Ostler

A number of constitutional and statutory provisions constrain a “taking” at the state level in the United States. All states but one have specific takings protection language in their state bills or declarations of rights, modeled after the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, through the “incorporation doctrine” of the Fourteenth Amendment, federal takings protections of the Fifth Amendment are applied directly to state acts. Each state also has portions of its statute books devoted to eminent domain. Finally, the common law itself has been understood to provide basic takings protections, from the days of the Founding Fathers. The importance of these multiple levels of takings protections is rarely questioned. Federal and state constitutional and statutory takings protections are clearly assumed as the best way to deal with government appropriations of private property, with the emphasis on constitutional protections as construed by the courts.  These are considered the highest level of protections and trump any statutory or common law protections. And as regulatory takings have assumed prominence in modern times, constitutionally based takings law has become the tool to identify the existence and scope of such takings. But what if it were not so? What if there were no constitutional protections that applied to state takings at all? What if state legislation and the common law were all that protected private property owners faced with an expropriation? Would private property be any less secure? Would property owners fear for their rights? Would current approaches to regulatory takings be the same? In short, are the constitutional protections really necessary? Would the realm of regulatory takings be less difficult if the constitution were not the tool to identify them? This article addresses these questions. Rather than speculate about the consequences of having no constitutional takings protections, however, the article contrasts the constitutional takings protections in the United States with those in Australia, a similar country in which there are indeed no constitutional takings protections at the state level at all. Part One briefly traces the formation of constitutions in the United States and Australia, and examines why specific constitutional takings language was adopted in 49 of the 50 American states, but not in any of the Australian states. Part Two contrasts eminent domain legislation in both countries to see the extent of protections that private citizens enjoy, with particular emphasis on regulatory takings. As this part demonstrates, in a country without constitutional takings protections, physical and regulatory takings tend to be seen as legislative functions and more statutes tend to be enacted to cover such cases. Accordingly, protections still exist for such takings. Indeed, legislatures often prove surprisingly adept at addressing regulatory taking questions. This suggests that constitutional takings protections may be less essential than is often thought. However, constitutional takings protections still present an obvious benefit where statutes fail to provide an adequate remedy in a regulatory case. The question becomes one of balance between court-applied regulatory takings law and legislatively enacted regulatory takings laws. The increasing number of American state regulatory takings statutes suggests a shift in oversight of regulatory takings from the judiciary to the legislature. If this trend continues, constitutional takings protections may soon be seen primarily as a “backup,” to be used only where the legislature fails to adequately address a regulatory taking situation.

Download the PDF

Constitutional v. Statutory Takings Protections: Is One Really Better Than the Other?

Citation

Duane L. Ostler, Constitutional v. Statutory Takings Protections: Is One Really Better Than the Other?, 100 Ky. L.J. Online 45 (2012), http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/constitutional-v-statutory-takings.

Permanent Link

http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/constitutional-v-statutory-takings

Open for Business in a Bad Economy: Improving Federal Assistance to Small Business

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 100 KY. L. J. ONLINE 4 | Mar. 1, 2012

By Jim R. Moye

Recent news shows that small businesses may be rebounding after an increase in consumer demand:

A poll last month conducted by the University of Michigan revealed that 58 percent of small business CEOs expect the economy to improve this year, while just 5 percent expect further declines. That was the most favorable outlook for economic growth since 2004, based on prior results of the quarterly survey of more than 1,700 small business chief executives. The poll, sponsored by Visage International Inc., also showed for the first time in three years that a majority of small businesses — 54 percent — planned to add employees to handle increased sales.

Ted is an experienced, high-performing satellite salesman. Over the last ten years, he has sold satellite dishes to commercial and personal customers. After talking to a number of customers, distributors and others, he concluded he could distribute satellite dishes cheaper than the company he works for and expand into other areas of satellite development. Ted does not have a business plan, financial support, employees or even the least bit of knowledge on how to develop those requirements. All Ted knows is that he has an idea, backed by his ten years of experience in the business and a fundamental understanding of the satellite industry.Ted is like so many Americans attempting to live out the American dream by becoming a business owner. Since the economic collapse in 2008, however, the dream has become even harder to achieve. Most experts agree any economic recovery must start with small businesses, as they are the most likely to spur job growth. While the federal government expends billions of dollars each year on small business development and still billions more on federal contracting, small business growth is essentially stagnant. Need proof of this disconnect? Consider three different situations, which spurred massive government spending, and the impact they had on small businesses.First, to stave off a complete collapse of the American economy, the U.S. government passed various legislation, including the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). ARRA allowed the Federal Government to spend over $787 billion to stabilize the American economy. Of that total sum, $274 billion of which was set aside for federal contracts, grants and loans. As of June 2011, $42,410,094,497 has been made specifically available for contracts. As part of this effort, the United States Small Business Administration was allocated $730 million to stabilize and attempt to stimulate small businesses. There is no evidence this $730 million allocation had a significant impact on small business growth and development during the crisis.Second, the United States has been involved in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Federal government total spending has exceeded $1 trillion dollars. From 2004 through 2006, the Federal Government spent $11 billion, $17 billion and $25 billion, respectively, on contracting in Afghanistan and Iraq. While large defense contractors grew exponentially behind these efforts, there is no evidence small business growth or development was impacted. In fact, the only discernible impact for small business was the training made available to war veterans who wanted to start their own businesses.Third, on August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina, considered one of the worst natural disasters in American history, made landfall in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico region. Hurricane Katrina, a Category 4 Storm, displaced thousands of people in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama and caused over $2 billion in damages. To assist in the reconstruction of the region, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), part of the Department of Homeland Security, distributed over $33 billion by late 2007. FEMA awarded $8.8 billion in contracts related to hurricane damage, mostly for Katrina victims. Subsequent to Hurricane Katrina, to meet the emergent need, FEMA awarded four no-bid contracts, which eventually totaled $3 billion. In all the contracts awarded, again, small businesses were left out. In fact, a probe conducted by the Department of Homeland Security’s Inspector General noted that contracts were awarded to companies that were allegedly small and local, but there was no evidence these companies actually even met the criteria.While there have been billions of dollars spent by the federal government in the situations described above, small business growth and development has continued to lag. Many experts agree the only way the economy can rebound from the constant barrage of events over the last five years is to bolster the small business community, which in turn will create more jobs. With that in mind, and with so many federal government contracting opportunities available, the United States Small Business Administration’s (“SBA”) outreach and assistance to the small business community takes on new importance. There is a range of programs offered through the SBA to support small businesses, including certification, funding, mentoring and educational opportunities. The SBA opines there are 27.5 million small businesses in the United States. However, with the current state of the economy, and with so many contracting opportunities available, how much progress is being made with small businesses? How can the government stabilize this important sector of the business world, even as it looks to tighter budgets over the next few years?This Article explores what options are available to the Federal Government in its quest to improve the economy and create new jobs through the small businesses community. Part I examines the Small Business Act of 1953 , which laid the framework for the current, federal support meachanisms for small business. Part II analyzes the federal government’s most current major initiative to create jobs, which is the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010. Part III reviews the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the applicable regulations governing small business. Part IV makes legislative and policy recommendations to improve, and actually enhance, small business participation in federal contracting. This analysis concludes that the time is right, for the economy and the Federal Government, to provide greater support for small businesses. Further, this discussion concludes that with adjustments to law and policy, the SBA’s programs can actually reach those businesses that need help the most.

Download the PDF

Open for Business in a Bad Economy: Improving Federal Assistance to Small Business

Citation

Jim R. Moye, Open for Business in a Bad Economy: Improving Federal Assistance to Small Business, 100 Ky. L.J. Online 29 (2011), http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/open-for-business.

Permanent Link

http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/open-for-business

Chapman v. Regional Radiology Associates, PLLC: A Case Study in the Consequences of Resignation

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 100 KY. L. J. ONLINE 2 | Jan. 17, 2012

Thomas E. Rutledge

The decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Chapman v. Regional Radiology Associates, PLLC is a helpful, but still not complete, review of the implications of resigning from an LLC absent a binding agreement as to the consequences that will follow therefrom. Cyrus Chapman, a physician, was an employee of Regional Radiology Associates, PLLC, a Kentucky limited liability company (hereinafter “RRA”). At that time, Rosemary Shiben was the sole member and manager of RRA. After a year’s employment, there were discussions as to Chapman becoming a member of the LLC, but those discussions were never memorialized in a written operating agreement. While Chapman tendered $10,000 as his initial capital contribution, those funds were returned because the terms of the buy-in were still under discussion. Still, beginning on January 1, 2003, Chapman was treated as a member. His prior salary was reduced and recharacterized as a guaranteed payment and the tax reports stated him to be a 40% member. For the full years that Chapman was a member, he received his guaranteed payment as well as a distribution of 40% of company earnings. In January 2006, Chapman gave notice that he was leaving the practice, working only intermittently from that date through April 14, 2006, and thereafter entirely leaving RRA. Through April 14, Chapman continued to receive his guaranteed payment. He requested, coincident with his departure, an additional distribution from RRA based upon his status as a former member. No agreement was reached on that point. Eventually RRA filed a declaratory judgment action, in which Chapman counterclaimed seeking a determination as to the amount of net income and accounts receivable due to Chapman.

Download the PDF

Chapman v. Regional Radiology Associates, PLLC: A Case Study in the Consequences of Resignation

Citation

Thomas E. Rutledge, Chapman v. Regional Radiology Associates, PLLC: A Case Study in the Consequences of Resignation, 100 Ky. L.J. Online 15 (2011), http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/chapman-v-regional/.

Permanent Link

http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/chapman-v-regional/

The Legality of Assessing Court Costs Against Kentucky's Indigent Criminals

This Online Original is available for download (PDF) here.

Article | 100 KY. L. J. ONLINE 1 | Jan. 10, 2012

Hon. Craig Z. Clymer and Kristen Worak

The Department of Public Advocacy is responsible for providing legal representation to indigent persons charged with crimes in Kentucky. For years, statutes designed to provide adequate funding for the DPA through recoupment of attorney’s fees from indigent defendants have been in place. The Kentucky Supreme Court has, however, misinterpreted statutes designed to recoup DPA costs from its defendant clients. As explained in this article, the current statutes are designed for courts to require indigent defendants to repay all or a portion of their attorney fees, services, and court costs, but the Kentucky Supreme Court has negated the legislative intent by holding that these statutes instead prohibit courts from collecting funds. The legal result is that Kentucky courts are enforcing statutes in a manner directly opposite to legislative intent. The practical result is that indigent defendants are not receiving the legal representation to which they are entitled.

Download the PDF

The Legality of Assessing Court Costs Against Kentucky's Indigent Criminals

Citation

Hon. Craig Z. Clymer and Kristen Worak, The Legality of Assessing Court Costs Against Kentucky's Indigent Criminals, 100 Ky. L.J. Online 1 (2011), http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/indigent-court-costs/.

Permanent Link

http://kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals-2/indigent-court-costs/