Ashley C. Pack

Experience

Successfully Defended Appeal of the Dismissal of Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Conversion Claims

We obtained dismissal of breach of fiduciary duty and conversation claims against our client, a bank, based upon the statute of limitations. The plaintiff, an attorney, had deposited client funds into an account under his name. These funds were seized by the state of West Virginia as a result of the lawyer owing back taxes. The lawyer sued the bank, alleging that it should not have permitted the state to seize the funds because they were client funds, despite being in an account in his name. We argued that the lawyer knew for more than five years of the seizure of the funds before he filed suit and that the claims should be dismissed under the statute of limitations. After we prevailed at the Circuit Court, the lawyer appealed to the West Virginia Supreme Court, which upheld the dismissal.

Cape Publications v. City of Louisville

Our firm represented The Courier-Journal in a suit involving the issue of access to the performance evaluations of employees terminated by a public agency.  The Court of Appeals of Kentucky ruled that such records were available, with redactions to remove truly personal information.

Cape Publications v. City of Louisville

The firm represented The Courier-Journal, Inc. in an action involving the issue of an exemption under the Open Records Law for the names in police records of the victims of alleged sexual offenses.  The Court of Appeals of Kentucky ruled that the City of Louisville was entitled to redact identifying information of alleged sexual violence victims in police records available to the public.

Central Kentucky News-Journal v. George, 306 S.W.3d 41 (Ky. 2010)

A public school employee filed suit against her employing school district, claiming sexual harassment by a school district official. She filed suit against another school district, claiming to have been wrongfully refused employment. Both claims were settled, but the settlement agreements contained confidentiality provisions. The newspaper sought, but was denied, access to the settlement agreements under the Open Records Act. After the trial court and Court of Appeals refused to grant access, we prevailed in the Kentucky Supreme Court, which held that settlement of litigation between private citizens and a governmental entity was matter of legitimate public concern that the public is entitled to scrutinize regardless of the existence of a confidentiality clause.

Hallahan v. Courier-Journal

The firm represented The Courier-Journal before the Court of Appeals of Kentucky in a matter involving summary judgment standards and disability issues.  The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's determination of summary judgment for the Defendant employer.

Hospitality Industry

Plaintiff, a current employee and chef at a large resort, claimed that she was discriminated against based in her gender, specifically that she did not receive five promotions to which she alleged she was entitled. Despite a demand for damages in the upper six figures, during a mediation we resolved the case favorably for the client by offering her an open position at the resort as she was still a current employee, but paid no damages to settle the case.

Roman Catholic Diocese v. Noble

Our firm represented Intervening Partial-Defendant The Courier-Journal in an issue involving the sealing of court documents and a motion to hold the newspaper in contempt for publishing information contained in the sealed documents.  The Motion for Contempt was overruled.

Shepherd v. Rite Aid of West Virginia, Inc.

We obtained summary judgment in a case involving the Plaintiff, who claimed that she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender, race, and that she was wrongfully terminated in violation of public policy after failing a drug test. She alleged that the drug test itself was against public policy concerning drug testing of current employees. The circuit court granted our client summary judgment on the wrongful termination issues. The Plaintiff then filed a writ of mandamus, requesting that the Supreme Court of Appeals in West Virginia accept the appeal. the Court, 5-0, rejected the Plaintiff's request. Because the gender and race claims hinged on the wrongful termination claim, the Plaintiff dismissed those claims.