Court Opinion

ID: 9761588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 01:46:30.089092+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:24.788718
License: Public Domain

STEPHENS, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
Respectfully, I dissent.
A fair reading of Kentucky’s constitution reveals that there is no matter of right appeal to this Court in workers’ compensation cases.
Sections 111(2) and 115 of the state constitution must be read together. Section 115 affords litigants one direct appeal as a matter of right. The procedure established in Section 111(2) provides this direct appeal — to the Court of Appeals.
Requiring direct appeals of workers’ compensation cases to this Court would also contravene the directive found in Section 115 that appeals be expeditious and inexpensive. What the majority is creating is an excess of procedure. A decision is made by an administrative law judge. This decision may be appealed as a matter of right to the Workers’ Compensation Board, then to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, and now to the Supreme Court. This procedure will be neither inexpensive nor expeditious, as this Court becomes inundated with these appeals as a matter of right. The Judicial Article of the constitution makes it clear that the Supreme Court was intended to be a court of discretionary review, except for the most serious criminal cases. I fear that the spirit and intent of the Judicial Article will be negated as the Supreme Court’s ability to perform its discretionary review function is impaired.