Court Opinion

ID: 9642706
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 18:07:26.023095+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:13.582282
License: Public Domain

CAMMACK, Judge
(concurring).,
I feel that the decision reached in this case, on the question of service of notice by mail, is the only one that could be reached under our present Rules of Civil Procedure. However, I am concerned as to whether the rule represents the best policy in providing that all kinds of notices may be served by ordinary mail. The instant case illustrates the fact that under some circumstances, substantive relief sought by one party may be granted without the other party ever having received actual notice of the particular claim for relief.
It is my thought that the policy of the rule should be reconsidered, through the procedure provided in KRS 447.152 and 447.153. A possible amendment might be that if a motion is for an order or judgment granting a claim for substantive relief in the nature of a judgment in personam, which relief is in addition,to that sought in the original complaint in the action or granted by a previous order or judgment in the action, and the opposing party is not represented by an attorney, notice of the motion should be served by registered mail.