RENDERED: OCTOBER 8, 2021; 10:00 A.M.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Court of Appeals

NO. 2020-CA-1273-MR

JAMES T. KNUCKLES, II APPELLANT 

v. 

APPEAL FROM LAUREL CIRCUIT COURT

HONORABLE STEPHEN M. JONES, JUDGE

ACTION NO. 18-CI-00865

ASHLEY KNUCKLES APPELLEE 

OPINION

REVERSING AND 

REMANDING

**   **  **

BEFORE: COMBS, GOODWINE, AND LAMBERT, JUDGES.

COMBS, JUDGE: In this divorce action, James T. Knuckles, II, appeals an order 

of the Laurel Family Court entered on September 25, 2020, that denied his motion 

to alter, amend, or vacate orders entered on March 23, 2020, and May 7, 2020. 

After our review, we reverse and remand.

James Knuckles and Ashley J. Knuckles married in January 2011. 

They have two minor children. Following a temporary custody hearing conducted 
-2-

in October 2019, the matter was set for a final hearing to be held in December 

2019. 

When the parties appeared with counsel for the December 2019, final 

hearing, Ashley’s attorney indicated that he could not stay as he had other 

obligations in another court room. The court dissolved the parties’ marriage 

through a bifurcated decree, and a hearing was rescheduled for January 2020 to 

address the remaining issues of child custody, timesharing, and property division. 

However, Ashley’s counsel failed to appear for the rescheduled final hearing. The 

circuit court again rescheduled the hearing and specifically barred a further 

continuance. 

At the request of Ashley’s counsel, James’s attorney agreed to yet 

another continuance of one week. Consequently, the hearing was rescheduled for 

February 2020. 

Once again, Ashley’s counsel failed to appear for the rescheduled 

hearing. James’s counsel resisted a further continuance and reported that Ashley 

had not filed the required final disclosure statement. Counsel indicated that Ashley 

had filed nothing whatsoever since her answer. The family court ordered the 

parties to submit written depositions and proposed orders by February 18, 2020. 

James timely filed his written deposition and a proposed order, but

Ashley filed nothing. Fourteen (14) days later, on March 3, 2020, the family court
-3-

entered a final order that was based on James’s proposed order. The court left in 

place the children’s equal timesharing schedule; set James’s child support 

obligation; and distributed the parties’ property and debt. James was awarded a 

mobile home, his truck, a bank account, and the household and personal property 

in his possession -- including a collection of Snap-On Tools. He was ordered to 

pay the outstanding debt. Ashley was awarded her vehicle, her bank account, and 

the household and personal property in her possession. 

On March 10, 2020, Ashley tendered a proposed final order. She did 

not file a written deposition. The family court adopted this proposed order, and 

another final order was entered on March 11, 2020. James was now ordered to pay 

to Ashley $6,000.00 to equalize the distribution of personal property. The majority 

of the discrepancy in property value appeared to be based upon the value of 

James’s Snap-On Tool collection, which was now valued by the court at $10,000. 

On March 23, 2020, the court entered an order vacating both the order 

of March 3, 2020, and the order of March 11, 2020. The parties were ordered to 

tender new proposed final orders within twenty (20) days. James timely filed his 

proposed order. This proposed order contained the same provisions as the order 

entered on March 3, 2020. 

Ashley’s proposed order was not filed within the time allotted by the 

court. However, it was filed on April 16, 2020, and contained the same provisions 
-4-

as the order entered on March 11, 2020. Ashley’s written deposition was filed 

simultaneously. 

The court’s new final order was filed on May 7, 2020. It was based 

entirely upon Ashley’s proposed order. 

On May 15, 2020, James filed a motion to alter, amend, or vacate the 

orders of March 23 and May 7. He also filed a motion to strike Ashley’s written 

deposition as it had been filed out of time. James argued that the family court 

erred by vacating its first final order of March 3, 2020, and that the valuation and 

distribution of property provided in the order of May 7, 2020, was not supported 

by the evidence. 

On July 15, 2020, a new final order was entered. This was the same 

as the orders entered on March 11, 2020, and May 7, 2020, that were based upon 

Ashley’s proposed orders. On August 12, 2020, James filed a motion for a ruling 

on his motion to alter, amend, or vacate. Additionally, he filed a motion to alter, 

amend, or vacate the order entered on July 15, 2020. 

The order of the family court denying James’s initial motion to alter, 

amend, or vacate was entered on September 25, 2020. Additionally, the order of 

July 15, 2020, was vacated as the court regarded it as having been “inadvertently 

entered a second time.” This appeal followed. 
-5-

James contends that the family court erred by vacating the order 

entered March 3, 2020 -- the first final order -- because Ashley never filed a 

motion to vacate, alter, or amend it. He also argues that the valuation and 

distribution of property provided by the order of May 7, 2020, was not supported 

by the evidence. 

We need not address the merits of this appeal. Ashley has filed no 

brief, and we conclude that this matter is appropriate for disposition pursuant to the 

provisions of CR 76.12(8)(c). This rule of appellate procedure provides as 

follows: 

If the appellee’s brief has not been filed within the time 

allowed, the court may: (i) accept the appellant’s 

statement of the facts and issues as correct; (ii) reverse

the judgment if appellant’s brief reasonably appears to 

sustain such action; or (iii) regard the appellee’s failure 

as a confession of error and reverse the judgment without 

considering the merits of the case.

CR 76.12(8)(c).

Based on these options provided by the rule, we elect to regard 

Ashley’s failure to file a brief as a confession of error. Having reviewed the record 

before us, and in accordance with the provisions of CR 76.12(8)(c)(iii), we reverse

the family court’s order of September 25, 2020, denying James’s motion to alter, 

amend, or vacate. Our reversal of the court’s order is based solely on the omission 
-6-

of appellee to file an appellate brief in this appeal rather than upon any error by the 

Laurel Circuit Court. 

As a result of our holding, we summarize its effects as follows:

(1) we vacate the order of March 23, 2020 (which had 

vacated orders of March 2, 2020, and March 11, 2020); 

(2) we vacate the order of May 7, 2020. 

We note that the trial court properly vacated its order of July 15, 2020, as 

duplicative when it denied James’s motion to alter, amend, or vacate its order of 

September 25, 2020. We reverse only as to its denial of the motion to alter, 

amend, or vacate the orders of March 23, 2020, and May 7, 2020.

We remand this matter to the Laurel Circuit Court for reinstatement of

its original order of March 3, 2020, the relief requested by James, or for entry of a 

new final order in its discretion. 

ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:

Jennifer Caudill Bundy

London, Kentucky

NO BRIEF FOR APPELLEE.