Tales from Kentucky Lawyers

17. Judges' Support of the Accused

17 JUDGES' SUPPORT OF THE ACCUSED Judges are typically highly respected, both by lawyers and others appearing before them during court sessions. However, on occasion, judges do make judicial mistakes, thus causing lawyers to appeal the decision for reversal. At other times, the judge may dismiss all charges against the accused, only to find out later that the accused was indeed guilty and continued to commit illegal acts. Stories in this section portray judges engaged both in various courtroom proceedings and, sometimes, in questionable activity outside the courtroom. 216. "SOME]UDGES NOT WILLING TO BE CHALLENGED" I represented a widow whose husband was killed in a truck accident. And before he was killed, his employer, without notice to his employees , canceled their life insurance benefits. So we sued the former employer essentially for what is called estoppel law, or promissory estoppel. When you promise a benefit to me, and then I rely on that promise to my detriment, and you fail to follow through, then you can be liable to me for your failure to follow through. That was the case in which I was proud to be able to get a benefit for this woman. We had to try the case twice, but I was able to win it for the woman. When I tried it the first time, the judge didn't think the employer owed that responsibility to this employee, so he dismissed the case. I appealed the case, and the decision is recorded as McCarthy vs. Louisville Cartage Company, 796 S.W 2d 10 (1990). The case 180 Tales from Kentucky Lawyers was tried a second time, and I won it. It was under a different judge, but only because the initial judge had retired. Appeals are kind of tricky in that way. When you're appealing a case, 99 percent of the time the reason you have an appealable issue is because of an error the judge has made. If you succeed in the appeal in reversing the judge's decision because of an error the judge has made, you go straight back to that same judge. Most judges are able to take all that in stride and understand that that is simply the process. We're humans and we're fallible. But some don't like to be challenged, so that can make it difficult. Peter Ervin, Louisville, April 26, 2001 217. "LITTLE BOY KEEPS RUNNING AWAY" I was in district court in front ofthe famousJudge Clay here in Morehead years ago. Judge Clay and I were eventually to become good friends. I was involved in two juvenile cases. After I tell you about this, I don't know why I had any credibility in that court whatsoever. My law firm had been called upon to represent a young juvenile who was famous for running away from home, away from whatever facility he was put in. He was a nice enough kid, as he wasn't like someone who stole cars. But he was a chronic runner-runaway. That was his thing; run away from home, or run away from the juvenile center. Didn't matter where he was, he'd run away from it. I was talking to the judge about him and mentioned the fact that this boy was not what is called a public offender. He'd never committed any crime other than just running away from home and running away from the authority. That's what he does. He'd never stay where they'd put him. Just run away. He was a young, young man, maybe ten or twelve years old, so the judge was concerned about what might happen to him while he was on the run. I'll never forget my young client telling me and the judge that he had learned his lesson and that he would stop running. Well, since the judge had been around for some time, he was rather skeptical. At any rate, we were making this argument, and the judge was giving some consideration to give him a try back at the house one more time rather than at one of the detention facilities. Well, just about the time I got the sentence out-"Judge, he will not run again"-my client turned and bolted out of the courtroom. Well, you can imagine the impact JUDGES' SUPPORT OF THE ACCUSED 181 that had. I turned around and took out after...