Opinion ID: 1638061
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: A Declaratory Judgment Action is the Appropriate Vehicle for Raising the Appellants' Administrative Procedure Act Claim

Text: In a June 19, 2008 Order, this Court sua sponte asked the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the related issues of res judicata, claim preclusion and the rule against splitting causes of action and whether a civil action, declaratory or otherwise, is the appropriate procedural vehicle for raising the type of challenges brought by the Appellants. Baze/Bowling I implicitly recognized what we now expressly hold, namely that a single declaratory judgment action pursuant to KRS 418.040 and the civil rules is the appropriate vehicle for determination of all issues regarding implementation of the death penalty which are not cognizable in a defendant's criminal action. KRS 418.040 provides In any action in a court of record of this Commonwealth having general jurisdiction wherein it is made to appear that an actual controversy exists, the plaintiff may ask for a declaration of rights, either alone or with other relief; and the court may make a binding declaration of rights, whether or not consequential relief is or could be asked. The declaratory judgment act is to be liberally interpreted and administered and is intended to make the courts more serviceable to the people by way of settling controversies, and affording relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect to rights, duties and relations.... KRS 418.080; Continental Ins. Co. v. Riggs, 277 Ky. 361, 126 S.W.2d 853 (1939). Recently in Mammoth Medical v. Bunnell, 265 S.W.3d 205 (Ky.2008), we noted that although the scope of KRS Chapter 418, Declaratory Judgments is liberal and wide, there are, however, limits. Declaratory judgment does not fit every occasion and does not replace the existing system of remedies and actions. For example, an action for a declaratory judgment cannot be instituted to secure a determination of substantive rights involved in a pending suit. Gibbs v. Tyree, 287 Ky. 656, 154 S.W.2d 732, 733 (1941). Moreover, declaratory relief is not appropriate where a special statute is clearly intended to provide an exclusive remedy. Iroquois Post No. 229 v. City of Louisville, 279 S.W.2d 13, 14 (Ky.1955). Finally, CR 57 provides that the procedure for obtaining a declaratory judgment pursuant to statute shall be in accordance with these rules.... Appellants correctly note that there is no statute providing an exclusive remedy for addressing their APA claim or for that matter any other challenge to the lethal injection protocol which would involve the Department. Clearly an actual controversy existed between Appellants and the Department regarding the implementation of the death penalty through lethal injection and, as we implicitly recognized in Baze/Bowling I, a declaratory judgment action is the appropriate vehicle for challenges of the type raised by Appellants. Baze, 217 S.W.3d at 209-210. The availability of a declaratory action does not, however, mean that multiple declaratory actions may be filed seriatim challenging implementation of the death penalty on selected grounds. When a capital defendant files a declaratory judgment action, he must join all claims then available to him with regard to the implementation of his judgment because res judicata will apply full force to bar successive declaratory judgment actions.