Opinion ID: 2541918
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Board of Claims Decision

Text: The AOC, after filing its answer with the Board of Claims, moved the Board to grant summary judgment, arguing that the Appellants had failed to state a claim for which relief could be granted. The AOC's failure-to-state-a-claim argument was that the judge's failure to reappoint the master commissioner could not have caused the injury complained of and that the judge had no obligation to ensure that the master commissioner's bond was sufficient to cover the complete value of all properties that he sold. The AOC, in its argument based upon jurisdiction, contended that King, Judge Winchester, and the AOC were all engaged in judicial or quasi-judicial functions' for which no liability can exist because such functions are entitled to absolute immunity. The Board granted the AOC's motion for summary judgment, stating that the Appellants' claims were dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted within the Board of Claims Act at KRS Chapter 44. Therefore, the Board of Claims lacks jurisdiction in this matter. The Board's order was summary, consisting almost entirely of the language quoted here and without substantive explanation for its holding that there was no jurisdiction.