A.T.W. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

It should further be noted that in her motion [Mother] cites to non-existent case law .... Again, this causes the Court concerns regarding [Mother's] candor with the Court, and she has been advised as such. The circuit court also rejected Mother's argument that relief was warranted under 60.02(f) for extraordinary cause. Significantly, the court determined that Mother had not filed her motion within a reasonable time: [Mother] has known about and had access to these medical records she now relies on since 2016; almost 10 years ago. Thesemedicalrecordsandherallegedinconsistencieshave also been referenced in the civil cases between [Mother] and the custodians of the children beginning in 2021.... These children were infants when [Mother] first had access to those records. They are now nine and ten years old. The Court cannot find under those facts and circumstances that this motion was filed within a reasonable time. Mother appealed. ... According to the allegations of the petition, the Cabinet had received a referral after the child (then four months of age) was seen at the University of Kentucky Emergency Room due to concerns of non-accidental trauma. At that time, the child had redness on the bottom of her feet, a blister covering the majority of her right foot, a scratch on her right eyelid, and a bruise above her left eye and on the right abdomen. The child was admitted. A skeletal survey revealed healing posterolateral 5th rib fracture, three acute rib fractures, and a distal left tibial metaphyseal corner fracture.