392 S.W.3d 388
Ky.2013Background
- Preece owns dominant estate with a 16-foot easement along the boundary with Browning and the Horns.
- The roadway runs along the Horns’ fence; one side abuts the Horns’ property.
- Horns obstructed the roadway; Preece sued the Horns to remove obstruction and to secure the easement.
- Browning was added as a defendant to the suit.
- The trial court found the easement width 16 feet along the boundary, with boundary line on the roadway twelve to sixteen feet from the Horns’ fence.
- Browning appeals the trial court decision; the Court of Appeals dismissed for failure to join indispensable parties (Horns) in the Notice of Appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are Brooksie and Tammie Horn indispensable parties to the appeal? | Browning argues Horns are not indispensable to the appeal. | Preece contends Horns’ interests could be affected; they are indispensable. | Yes; both Horns indispensable to pursue complete relief. |
| Was Brooksie properly named in the Notice of Appeal? | Caption naming Brooksie suffices; body need not name him. | Caption alone satisfies CR 73.03. | Brooksie properly named in the caption; sufficient. |
| Was Tammie Horn properly named in the Notice of Appeal? | Tammie not named in caption or body; argues et al. suffices. | CR 73.03 forbids et al.; not named means not a party. | Tammie not named; not a party to the appeal. |
| Does CR 73.03 require naming all necessary parties in the notice to confer jurisdiction? | Failure to name indispensable parties bars jurisdiction. | Jurisdiction hinges on proper notice of indispensable parties. | Failure to name indispensable party defeats jurisdiction; dismissal affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Milligan v. Schenley Distillers, Inc., 584 S.W.2d 751 (Ky.App. 1979) (definition of indispensable party; not remedying after appeal period)
- Nelson County Bd. of Educ. v. Forte, 337 S.W.3d 617 (Ky. 2011) (indispensable party must be named for appellate jurisdiction)
- City of Devondale v. Stallings, 795 S.W.2d 954 (Ky. 1990) (failure to name indispensable party in notice is jurisdictional defect)
- Lassiter v. American Exp. Travel Related Servs. Co., Inc., 308 S.W.3d 714 (Ky. 2010) (naming party in caption can satisfy notice; et al. not proper designation)