Preview:

RENDERED: DECEMBER 15, 2006; 2:00 P.M.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth Of Kentucky
Court of Appeals

NO. 2005-CA-002164-MR
ELEANOR JEAN HUNTON, INDIVIDUALLYAND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF BOBBY GENE HUNTON APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT
v. HONORABLE JOHN R. GRISE, JUDGEACTION NO. 02-CI-01373
CITY OF BOWLING GREEN APPELLEE
OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** BEFORE: DIXON AND TAYLOR, JUDGES; KNOPF,1 SENIOR JUDGE. TAYLOR, JUDGE: Eleanor Jean Hunton, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Bobby Gene Hunton, brings this appeal from a June 13, 2005, summary judgment of the Warren Circuit Court dismissing her claim for negligent exposure to asbestos against the City of Bowling Green. We affirm.
1 Senior Judge William L. Knopf sitting as Special Judge by assignment of theChief Justice pursuant to Section 110(5)(b) of the Kentucky Constitution andKentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 21.580.
In June 1964, the City of Bowling Green purchased real property in Warren County for the construction of a manufacturing plant for Cutler-Hammer, Inc. The City issued and sold 6.5 million dollars of revenue bonds to finance the purchase of the real estate and the construction of the plant. On June 1, 1964, the City and Cutler-Hammer entered into a lease agreement, wherein the City agreed to build the facility and Cutler-Hammer agreed to pay semi-annual rental payments.
Bobby Gene Hunton worked for Cutler-Hammer in the maintenance department at the Bowling Green Plant from 1965 to 1977. While working at the plant, Bobby alleged he was exposed to asbestos from various products including pipe insulation and block insulation. Bobby eventually contracted mesothelioma caused by asbestos exposure.
Bobby filed a complaint, inter alios, against the City claming he was exposed to asbestos at the Cutler-Hammer plant that caused his mesothelioma. During the pendency of the litigation, Bobby died and Eleanor Jean Hunton, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Bobby Gene Hunton, (Hunton) was substituted.
On June 13, 2005, the circuit court entered summary judgment dismissing all claims against the City.2 This summary
2 In the complaint and amended complaint, several other parties were named asdefendants; however, these parties are not named in this appeal.
judgment was final and appealable by order entered on September 14, 2005. This appeal follows.
Hunton contends the circuit court committed error by entering summary judgment dismissing its claims against the City. Summary judgment is proper where there exists no material issue of fact and movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc., 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991). When reviewing a motion for summary judgment, all facts are to be viewed in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. For the reasons hereinafter explained, we are of the opinion that the circuit court properly entered summary judgment dismissing Hunton

Download 2005-ca-002164.pdf

Kentucky Law