Source: http://www.strausstroy.com/practice-areas/labor/notice-of-settlement-regarding-kindred-healthcare-inc/
Timestamp: 2019-08-19 11:57:14
Document Index: 451983092

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 1542', '§ 1542']

Notice of Settlement regarding Kindred Healthcare, Inc. | Strauss Troy Co., LPA
Case No. 16-CI-001246 JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT
DIVISION TWELVE (12)
COLLEEN WITMER PLAINTIFF
PHYLLIS YALE, et al. DEFENDANTS
PROPOSED NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF DERIVATIVE ACTION,
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION,
TO: ALL INDIVIDUALS OR ENTITIES WHO HOLD OF RECORD, OR BENEFICIALLY OWN, COMMON STOCK OF KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC. (THE “COMPANY”) AS OF THE CLOSE OF NOVEMBER 21, 2017, (“CURRENT STOCKHOLDERS”)
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. THIS NOTICE RELATES TO A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSAL OF THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTION, AND CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING YOUR RIGHTS. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY THESE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. IF THE COURT APPROVES THE SETTLEMENT, YOU WILL BE FOREVER BARRED FROM CONTESTING THE APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND FROM PURSUING THE RELEASED CLAIMS.
IF YOU HOLD OR HELD COMPANY STOCK FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANOTHER, PLEASE PROMPTLY TRANSMIT THIS NOTICE TO SUCH BENEFICIAL OWNER.
THE COURT HAS MADE NO FINDINGS OR DETERMINATIONS CONCERNING THE MERITS OF THIS ACTION. THE RECITATION OF THE BACKGROUND AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE SETTLEMENT CONTAINED HEREIN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE FINDINGS OF THE COURT. IT IS BASED ON REPRESENTATIONS MADE TO THE COURT BY COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES.
This Notice is provided pursuant to KRS § 271B.7-400(3) and by Order of the Jefferson Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (the “Court”). The purpose of this Notice is to advise you that, subject to approval of the Court, a proposed settlement has been reached in the action styled as Colleen Witmer v. Phyllis Yale, et al., Case No. 16-CI-001246 (the “Action”).
The proposed settlement would fully, finally, and forever resolve the Action on the terms and conditions summarized in this Notice. The parties to the Action have submitted a Stipulation of Settlement (“Stipulation”) to the Court for approval.
A hearing in the Action (the “Settlement Hearing”) will be held on January 24, 2018, at 1:15 p.m., before the Honorable Susan Schultz Gibson in Courtroom 903 at the Jefferson Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division Twelve, Jefferson County Judicial Center, 700 W. Jefferson St., Louisville, KY 40202, for the purpose of considering: (i) whether the proposed settlement of the Action asserted in this matter on the terms and conditions set for the in the Stipulation will be approved by the Court pursuant to KRS § 271B.7-400(3); (ii) whether the Court should enter the Judgment dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint (the “Complaint”) WITH PREJUDICE AND ON THE MERITS and all claims which arise out of or are related to the facts and/or circumstances set forth in the Complaint, including the releases of claims and other provisions set forth in the Stipulation; (iii) whether, if the Stipulation is approved, the appropriate award to be made to Plaintiff’s Counsel (defined below) for Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees; and (iv) such other matters as may be necessary and proper.
SUMMARY OF THE DERIVATIVE ACTION
THE SUMMARY OF THE DERIVATIVE ACTION AND SETTLEMENT WHICH FOLLOWS HAS BEEN PREPARED BY COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES TO THE DERIVATIVE ACTION. THE COURT HAS MADE NO FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH MATTERS, AND THIS NOTICE IS NOT AN EXPRESSION OR STATEMENT BY THE COURT OF FINDINGS OF FACT.
On March 16, 2016, Plaintiff Colleen Witmer (the “Plaintiff”) commenced this Action by filing in the Court a shareholder derivative complaint (the “Complaint”) against Defendants Phyllis Yale, Joel Ackerman, Jonathan Blum, Thomas Cooper, M.D., Heyward Donigan, Richard Goodman, Christopher Hjelm, Frederick Kleisner, Ann C. Berzin, Eddy J. Rogers, Jr., Edward L. Kuntz, Benjamin Breier, Paul Diaz, and Richard A. Lechleiter (the “Individual Defendants”), and naming the Company as nominal defendant (together, “Defendants”), asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duties in connection with two settlements between the Company and the United States Department of Justice relating to the Company’s RehabCare segment (“RehabCare”), as well as in connection with the compensation of certain executive directors and/or officers of the Company.
On May 13, 2016, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint for failure to plead demand futility and, in the alternative, for failure to plead personal jurisdiction as to certain of the Individual Defendants who do not reside or principally work in Kentucky (the “Motion to Dismiss”). Plaintiff filed her opposition on June 27, 2016, and Defendants filed their reply on July 25, 2016. The Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss on October 5, 2016, at which it reserved decision.
By Memorandum and Order dated January 27, 2017, the Court denied the Motion to Dismiss to the extent it sought dismissal for failure to plead demand futility, but granted that motion in part to the extent that it found the Complaint failed to adequately plead personal jurisdiction as to the Individual Defendants who do not reside or principally work in Kentucky, and allowed Plaintiff to engage in jurisdictional discovery in order to address this issue.
On February 6, 2017, Defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s January 27, 2017 Memorandum and Order to the extent it denied the Motion to Dismiss as to demand futility (the “Motion for Reconsideration”); Plaintiff filed her opposition on February 28, 2017; and Defendants replied on March 14, 2017. On April 18, 2017, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order denying the Motion for Reconsideration.
On February 14, 2017 and February 23, 2017, Plaintiff served requests for production of documents directed at the Company and the Individual Defendants, respectively. The Company and the Individual Defendants served responses and objections thereto on March 20, 2017 and March 28, 2017, respectively.
On March 16, 2017, Plaintiff filed two motions for commissions for out-of-state non-party discovery (the “Non-Party Discovery Motions”); Defendants filed an opposition on April 5, 2017; and Plaintiff filed her reply on April 7, 2017. A hearing on the Non-Party Discovery Motions was scheduled for May 18, 2017.
Following the Motion to Dismiss, the Parties engaged in settlement discussions regarding a possible resolution of the Action. In light of the ongoing settlement discussions, the Parties requested that the Court postpone the hearing on the Non-Party Discovery Motions pending a potential resolution of the Action.
On May 26, 2017, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the Action, which the parties subsequently memorialized in a Memorandum of Understanding dated June 26, 2017. On June 29, 2017, the parties informed the Court that they had reached an agreement in principle to settle the Action.
Following, and pursuant to, the Memorandum of Understanding, the Parties engaged in due diligence and confirmatory discovery to confirm the reasonableness of the settlement. The parties produced documents on July 18 and 19, 2017, and made supplemental productions thereafter. Plaintiff’s counsel conducted an interview of a representative of the Individual Defendants on September 28, 2017.
After the parties completed their due diligence and confirmatory discovery, the parties had further discussions regarding the terms of the Stipulation, including regarding attorneys’ fees, and have reached agreement to settle the Action on the terms set forth in the Stipulation.
The principal terms and conditions of the proposed settlement are set forth in the Stipulation, which has been filed with the Court. The following description of the terms of the proposed settlement is only a summary. Unless otherwise herein defined, all capitalized terms used herein have the same meanings as in the Stipulation.
As consideration for the Settlement, the Company shall implement, to the extent not already implemented, certain corporate governance and compliance enhancements as set forth in Exhibit D to the Stipulation (the “Corporate Governance and Compliance Enhancements”).
The Individual Defendants and the Company have also agreed that they will not object to or otherwise take any position on Plaintiff’s Counsel’s petition to the Court for an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses, based on the benefits provided to the Company and its stockholders from the Settlement and the prosecution of the Action, to be paid by the Company and/or its insurers, and from no other source, which is no greater than $950,000, and subject to the Court’s approval. Additional information about those attorneys’ fees can be found in Section V, infra.
Plaintiff, the Company, and the Individual Defendants believe that the Settlement set forth herein is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. Plaintiff, the Company, and the Individual Defendants have agreed to settle pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Stipulation after considering, inter alia, the substantial benefits that the Company and its stockholders will receive.
Although Plaintiff believes that the Action has merit, Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s Counsel recognize and acknowledge the expense and length of time that would be required to prosecute the Action through trial and appeal. Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s Counsel have also taken into account the uncertain outcome and the significant risks of litigating the Action, as well as the difficulties and delays inherent in such litigation.
Plaintiff, the Company, and the Individual Defendants acknowledge that the Action has been filed, commenced, and prosecuted by Plaintiff and defended by the Company and the Individual Defendants in good faith and consistent with KRS § 271B.7-400, and that the Action is being voluntarily released and settled.
Plaintiff, the Company, and the Individual Defendants acknowledge and agree that the Action filed and prosecuted by Plaintiff and the negotiations leading to this Settlement were a substantial factor in the decisions by the Company to maintain or adopt the Corporate Governance and Compliance Enhancements.
The Individual Defendants, who believe they have substantial defenses to the claims alleged against them in the Complaint, and the Company, have denied and continue to deny the allegations of wrongdoing, liability, and violation of any laws and the existence of any damages asserted in or arising from the Action, but have nevertheless concluded that further litigation in connection with the Action would be time consuming and expensive, and after weighing the costs and uncertainties of continued litigation, have determined that the Action should be fully and finally settled in the manner and upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Stipulation, and that these terms and conditions are fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Company and its stockholders.
WHAT CLAIMS THE STIPULATION WILL RELEASE
IF THE COURT APPROVES THE SETTLEMENT, THE FOLLOWING RELEASES WILL OCCUR:
Upon entry of the Judgment, the Company, Plaintiff, and each and every other shareholder of the Company, on behalf of themselves and any other person or entity who could assert any of the Released Plaintiff’s Claims on their behalf, in such capacity only, shall fully, finally, and forever release, settle, and discharge, and shall forever be enjoined from prosecuting, the Released Plaintiff’s Claims against Defendants’ Releasees.
Upon entry of the Judgment, Defendants and the other Defendants’ Releasees, on behalf of themselves and any other person or entity who could assert any of the Released Defendants’ Claims on their behalf, in such capacity only, shall fully, finally, and forever release, settle, and discharge, and shall forever be enjoined from prosecuting, the Released Defendants’ Claims against Plaintiff’s Releasees.
“Approval Date” means the date on which the Court enters the Judgment.
“Current Stockholders” means all individuals or entities who hold of record, or beneficially own, common stock of the Company as of the close of business on November 21, 2017.
“Defendants’ Counsel” means Fultz Maddox Dickens PLC and Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP.
“Defendants’ Releasees” means Kindred, any and all current and former members of the Kindred Board, Kindred’s current and former executive officers, parent corporations, affiliates, subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, agents, assigns, attorneys, and anyone acting or purporting to act on their behalf.
“Effective Date” means the first date by which the Court has entered the Judgment and the Judgment has become Final.
“Final” means, with respect to any judgment or order, that (i) if no appeal is filed, the expiration date of the time for filing or noticing of any appeal of the judgment or order; or (ii) if there is an appeal from the judgment or order, the date of (a) final dismissal of all such appeals, or the final dismissal of any proceeding on certiorari or otherwise to review the judgment or order, or (b) the date the judgment or order is finally affirmed on an appeal, the expiration of the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari or other form of review, or the denial of a writ of certiorari or other form of review of the judgment or order, and, if certiorari or other form of review is granted, the date of final affirmance of the judgment or order following review pursuant to that grant. However, any appeal or proceeding seeking subsequent judicial review pertaining solely to an order issued with respect to attorneys’ fees or expenses shall not in any way delay or preclude the Judgment from becoming Final.
“Judgment” means the Order and Final Judgment, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C, to be entered by the Court approving the Settlement and dismissing with prejudice the claims asserted in the Complaint.
“Notice” means the Notice of Pendency of Derivative Action, Proposed Settlement of Derivative Action, Settlement Hearing, and Right to Appear, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B.
“Plaintiff’s Counsel” means Strauss Troy, The Weiser Law Firm, and Ryan & Maniskas LLP.
“Plaintiff’s Releasees” means Plaintiff and all other Kindred stockholders, and all parent corporations, affiliates, subsidiaries, successors, predecessors, assigns, and attorneys.
“Preliminary Approval and Scheduling Order” means the Preliminary Approval and Scheduling Order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be entered by the Court pursuant to KRS § 271B.7-400.
“Released Defendants’ Claims” means all claims and causes of action of any kind, nature, or description, whether known claims or Unknown Claims (as defined below), whether based on state, local, foreign, federal, statutory, regulatory, common, or other law or rule, that arise out of, are based upon, or relate in any way to the institution, prosecution or settlement of the Action, except for claims relating to the enforcement of the Settlement.
(i) Plaintiff, and each and every other Kindred stockholder, on behalf of themselves, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, predecessors, successors and assigns in their capacities as such only, and derivatively on behalf of the Company, shall fully, finally, and forever release, settle, and discharge, and shall forever be enjoined and permanently barred from instituting, commencing, or prosecuting any and all Released Plaintiff’s Claims against the Defendants’ Releasees.
(ii) The Individual Defendants, Kindred, and the other Defendants’ Releasees, on behalf of themselves, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, predecessors, successors and assigns in their capacities as such only, shall fully, finally, and forever release, settle, and discharge, and shall forever be enjoined and permanently barred from instituting, commencing, or prosecuting any and all Released Defendants’ Claims (defined above) against the Plaintiff’s Releasees (defined below).
“Released Plaintiff’s Claims” means all claims and causes of action of any kind, nature, or description, whether known claims or Unknown Claims (as defined below), whether based on state, local, foreign, federal, statutory, regulatory, common, or other law or rule, (i) that Plaintiff asserted in the Complaint; or (ii) that any Kindred stockholder could assert in a claim or complaint that are based upon or arise out of or relate to, in any way, any of the actions, transactions, occurrences, statements, allegations, or facts stated in the Complaint, except for claims relating to the enforcement of the Settlement.
“Released Claims” means Released Plaintiff’s Claims and Released Defendants’ Claims.
“Releasees” means Plaintiff’s Releasees and Defendants’ Releasees.
“Releases” means the releases set forth in Section II.B below.
“Settlement Hearing” means the hearing to be set by the Court under KRS § 271B.7-400(3) to consider whether to approve the Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate, and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
“Unknown Claims” means any Released Plaintiff’s Claims that the Company, Plaintiff, or any other Plaintiff’s Releasees does not know or suspect to exist in his, her or its favor at the time of the release of the Defendants’ Releasees, and any Released Defendants’ Claims that any of Defendants or any of the other Defendants’ Releasees does not know or suspect to exist in his, her or its favor at the time of the release of the Plaintiff’s Releasees, which, if known by him, her or it, might have affected his, her or its decision(s) with respect to the Settlement. With respect to any and all Released Claims, the Parties stipulate and agree that the Company, Plaintiff and each of the Individual Defendants shall expressly waive, and each of the other Plaintiff’s Releasees and Defendants’ Releasees shall be deemed to have waived, and by operation of the Judgment shall have expressly waived, any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by California Civil Code § 1542, which provides:
Such waiver also includes any law of any state or territory of the United States, or principle of common law or foreign law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to California Civil Code § 1542. The Company, Plaintiff and each of the Individual Defendants acknowledge, and each of the other Plaintiff’s Releasees and Defendants’ Releasees shall be deemed by operation of law to have acknowledged, that the foregoing waiver was separately bargained for and is a key element of the Settlement.
PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEYS’ FEES
Plaintiff’s Counsel intends to petition the Court for an award of attorneys’ and litigation expenses, based on the benefits provided to the Company and its stockholders from the Settlement and the prosecution of the Action, to be paid by the Company and/or its insurers, and from no other source, which is no greater than $950,000 (the “Fee Application”). Defendants agree that they will not object to or otherwise take any position on the Fee Application.
The Company and/or its insurers shall cause to be paid on the Company’s and Individual Defendants’ behalf to Plaintiff’s Counsel any attorneys’ fees and expenses that are awarded by the Court upon the Fee Application (the “Fee Award”). The Fee Award shall be paid by the Company and/or its insurers to Plaintiff’s Counsel within ten (10) business days of the date that the Court grants the Fee Award, notwithstanding the existence of any timely filed objections thereto, or potential for appeal therefrom, or collateral attack on the Settlement or any part thereof, provided that Plaintiff’s Counsel shall provide payment instructions to Defendants’ Counsel within two (2) business days of the date of the Fee Award.
If, after payment of the Fee Award, the Fee Award is reversed, vacated, or reduced by Final order, or the Settlement is terminated in accordance with the terms of this Stipulation, Plaintiff’s Counsel shall, within ten (10) business days after receiving from Defendants’ Counsel or from a court of appropriate jurisdiction notice of the termination of the Settlement or notice of any reduction of the Fee Award by final non-appealable order, make appropriate refunds or repayments to the Company.
The Fee Award shall be the sole aggregate compensation for Plaintiff’s Counsel in connection with the Action and the Settlement. Plaintiff’s Counsel shall allocate the attorneys’ fees in a manner which they, in good faith, believe reflects the contributions of counsel to achieving the benefits of the proposed Settlement. No payment from any attorneys’ fees award shall be made to any counsel not affiliated with Plaintiff’s Counsel. Defendants’ Releasees shall have no responsibility for or liability whatsoever with respect to the allocation or award of attorneys’ fees or expenses.
Neither Individual Defendants nor the Company shall be liable for or obligated to pay any fees, expenses, costs, or disbursements, or to incur any expense on behalf of, any person or entity (including, without limitation, Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s Counsel), directly or indirectly, in connection with the Action or the Settlement, except as expressly provided for in this Stipulation.
Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiff’s Counsel shall be liable for or obligated to pay any fees, expenses, costs, or disbursements to, or incur any expenses on behalf of, any person or entity (including, without limitation, Individual Defendants, the Company, or their counsel), directly or indirectly, in connection with the Action or the Settlement.
This Stipulation, the Settlement, the Judgment, and whether the Judgment becomes Final are not conditioned upon the approval of an award of attorneys’ fees, either at all or in any particular amount, by the Court.
RIGHT TO BE HEARD AT SETTLEMENT HEARING
The Settlement Hearing will be held on January 24, 2018 at 1:15 p.m., before the Honorable Susan Schultz Gibson, Judge in Courtroom 903 at the Jefferson Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division Twelve, Jefferson County Judicial Center, 700 W. Jefferson St., Louisville, KY 40202. At the Settlement Hearing, the Court will consider and determine whether: (i) to approve the Settlement; (ii) to enter the Judgment dismissing the Action with prejudice, each party to bear his, her, or its own costs except as provided for in the Stipulation; (iii) to bar and enjoin permanently Plaintiff and the Current Stockholders from litigating any of the Released Claims; and (iv) to consider and approve an award of Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees.
The Court may adjourn and reconvene the Settlement Hearing by oral announcement at such hearing or at any time without notice of any kind to anyone other than the parties to the Action. The Court may approve the Settlement with or without modifications, enter the Judgment, and order the payment of Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees without further notice of any kind.
STOCKHOLDERS WHO HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT NEED NOT TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION.
If you are a Current Stockholder, you may have the right to object to any aspect of the Settlement and may, but are not required to, appear in person or through counsel at the Settlement Hearing to object to the terms of the proposed Settlement or Plaintiff’s Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’ fees, or otherwise present evidence or arguments that may be proper and relevant.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO OBJECT, YOU MUST FOLLOW THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES OR YOU WILL NOT BE HEARD, AND NO PAPERS, BRIEFS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS BY YOU WILL BE RECEIVED AND CONSIDERED BY THE COURT.
No later than January 12, 2018, which is ten (10) business days prior to the Settlement Hearing, you must file with the Jefferson Circuit Clerk of Courts the following:
(a) a written notice of objection with your name, address and telephone number, along with a representation as to whether you intend to appear at the Settlement Hearing;
(b) competent evidence that you currently own shares of the Company, when those shares were first purchased, and that those shares were continuously owned or held;
(c) a detailed statement of your specific position with respect to the matters to be heard at the Settlement Hearing, including the grounds therefore and the reasons for your desiring to appear and be heard, as well as all documents or writings you desire the Court to consider; and
(d) the identities of any witnesses you plan on calling at the Settlement Hearing, along with a summary of their likely testimony.
The Jefferson Circuit Clerk of Courts’ address is:
YOUR WRITTEN OBJECTIONS MUST BE ON FILE WITH THE JEFFERSON CIRCUIT CLERK OF COURTS AND SERVED ON COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES NO LATER THAN TEN (10) BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE SETTLEMENT HEARING.
In addition, on or before January 12, 2018, which is ten (10) business days prior to the Settlement Hearing, you must also serve the same documents by electronic mail and by first-class mail, postage prepaid, on each of the following counsel of record:
101 S. Fifth Street, 27th Floor
T: 502-588-2000
F: 502-588-2020
cshapiro@fmdlegal.com
T: 212-225-2000
F: 212-225-3999
mnoveck@cgsh.com
T: (513) 621-2120
F: (513) 629-9426
THE COURT WILL NOT CONSIDER ANY OBJECTION THAT IS NOT TIMELY FILED AND SERVED AS DIRECTED ABOVE. ANY PERSON WHO FAILS TO OBJECT OR OTHERWISE REQUEST TO BE HEARD IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED ABOVE WILL BE DEEMED TO HAVE WAIVED THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO ANY ASPECT OF THE SETTLEMENT (INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO APPEAL) OR TO REQUEST TO BE HEARD AT THE SETTLEMENT HEARING, AND WILL BE FOREVER BARRED FROM RAISING SUCH OBJECTION OR REQUEST IN THIS OR ANY OTHER RELATED ACTION OR PROCEEDING.
This Notice contains only a summary of the Action and the terms of the Settlement. For additional details regarding the Action or Settlement, you may contact a representative of Plaintiff’s Counsel, Strauss Troy Co., LPA, 150 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202, telephone 513-621-2120.
You may also inspect the case files, the Stipulation, and other papers and documents filed with the Court by appearing in person, during regular business hours, at the offices of the Jefferson County Office of Circuit Court Clerk. However, you must appear in person to inspect those documents. The Clerk’s office will not mail copies to you.
PLEASE DO NOT CALL, WRITE, OR OTHERWISE DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS NOTICE, THE SETTLEMENT, OR THE DERIVATIVE ACTIONS TO EITHER THE COURT OR THE CLERK’S OFFICE.
Dated: December 12, 2017 BY ORDER OF THE JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, DIVISION TWELVE