Shumaker v. Paxton, Nos. 80-SC-625-M
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky) |
| Writing for the Court | AKER; In his verified Response to Petition for Writ of Prohibition in the Court of Appeals |
| Citation | 613 S.W.2d 130 |
| Parties | Camilla C. SHUMAKER, Appellant, v. Honorable Willard B. PAXTON, as Special Judge of the McCracken Circuit Court, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 10 March 1981 |
| Docket Number | 80-CA-1363-OA,Nos. 80-SC-625-M |
Page 130
v.
Honorable Willard B. PAXTON, as Special Judge of the
McCracken Circuit Court, Appellee.
Page 131
Joseph S. Freeland, Paducah, for appellant.
J. D. Ruark, Morganfield, for appellee.
AKER, Justice.
James R. Daniels, a judge of the McCracken District Court, and Camilla C. Daniels were divorced by a decree of the Union Circuit Court entered January 3, 1978. Camilla was granted custody of the children; Vickie, age 10, and James Christopher, age 8. Both James and Camilla have remarried. Camilla (now Camilla Shumaker) and the children moved to McCracken County shortly after the Union County decree of dissolution was entered and all parties here involved have now resided in McCracken County for over two years.
On April 30, 1980, James filed a petition in the McCracken Circuit Court asking that the Union County decree be modified to allow the parties joint custody, with each parent keeping the children six months of the year. Camilla through counsel moved to dismiss James' petition for lack of jurisdiction.
Both of the regular judges of the McCracken Circuit Court recused themselves and Hon. Willard B. Paxton, the present appellee, was duly designated Special Judge of the McCracken Circuit Court for the purpose of hearing the case. Judge Paxton overruled Camilla's motion to dismiss James' petition. As it was then apparent that Judge Paxton intended to proceed with the case, Camilla filed a petition in the Court of Appeals for a writ of prohibition on the grounds that the McCracken Circuit Court was threatening to act outside its jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals denied the writ by its order dated August 14, 1980. This is a direct appeal from that order. We affirm.
The writ of prohibition is an extraordinary remedy and not a substitute for the appellate process. Such writs are generally issued only when lower courts are proceeding or are about to proceed outside their jurisdiction and there is no adequate remedy by appeal, or when they are about to act incorrectly, although within their jurisdiction "...and there exists no adequate remedy by appeal or otherwise and great injustice and irreparable injury would result to the applicant if they should do so." Evans v. Humphrey, 281 Ky. 254, 258, 135 S.W.2d 915, 917 (1940).
Because there is an adequate remedy by appeal, the writ of prohibition will be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hoskins v. Maricle, No. 2002-SC-0579-MR (KY 12/16/2004), No. 2002-SC-0579-MR.
...& Co., Ky., 926 S.W.2d 449, 452 (1996), Fischer v. State Bd. of Elections, Ky., 847 S.W.2d 718, 720 (1993), Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130, 131 (1981), and Tipton v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 770 S.W.2d 239, 241 (1989), all of which either imposed or recited the "inadequate ......
-
Hoskins v. Maricle, No. 2002-SC-0579-MR.
...& Co., Ky., 926 S.W.2d 449, 452 (1996), Fischer v. State Bd. of Elections, Ky., 847 S.W.2d 718, 720 (1993), Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130, 131 (1981), and Tipton v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 770 S.W.2d 239, 241 (1989), all of which either imposed or recited the "inadequate r......
-
Potter v. Eli Lilly and Co., No. 95-SC-580-MR
...great injustice and irreparable injury would result to the petitioner if the court in question should so act. Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130 (1981); Bender v. Eaton, Ky., 343 S.W.2d 799 We are well aware that CR 60.01 allows a trial court to correct clerical mistakes in its judgmen......
-
Hummeldorf v. Hummeldorf, No. 80-CA-1296-MR
...In addition, our Supreme Court has provided circuit courts with guidance in deciding when to accept jurisdiction. In Shumaker v. Paxton, 613 S.W.2d 130, 28 Ky.L.Summ. 3 (March 10, 1981), Justice Aker wrote for a unanimous court and endorsed a common-sense approach to the problem of litigati......
-
Hoskins v. Maricle, No. 2002-SC-0579-MR (KY 12/16/2004), No. 2002-SC-0579-MR.
...& Co., Ky., 926 S.W.2d 449, 452 (1996), Fischer v. State Bd. of Elections, Ky., 847 S.W.2d 718, 720 (1993), Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130, 131 (1981), and Tipton v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 770 S.W.2d 239, 241 (1989), all of which either imposed or recited the "inadequate remedy" r......
-
Hoskins v. Maricle, No. 2002-SC-0579-MR.
...& Co., Ky., 926 S.W.2d 449, 452 (1996), Fischer v. State Bd. of Elections, Ky., 847 S.W.2d 718, 720 (1993), Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130, 131 (1981), and Tipton v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 770 S.W.2d 239, 241 (1989), all of which either imposed or recited the "inadequate remedy" re......
-
Potter v. Eli Lilly and Co., No. 95-SC-580-MR
...great injustice and irreparable injury would result to the petitioner if the court in question should so act. Shumaker v. Paxton, Ky., 613 S.W.2d 130 (1981); Bender v. Eaton, Ky., 343 S.W.2d 799 We are well aware that CR 60.01 allows a trial court to correct clerical mistakes in its judgmen......
-
Goldstein v. Feeley, No. 2008-SC-000597-MR.
...v. Rose, 249 S.W.2d 775 (Ky. 1952) as authority holding the issuance of such writs is always discretionary. Second, Shumaker v. Paxton 613 S.W.2d 130, 131 (Ky. 1981) held that the lack of an adequate remedy by appeal was essential for the issuance of a "no jurisdiction writ." Hoskins, 150 S......