Opinion
NO. 2018-CA-000827-MR
03-29-2019
DAVID THOMAS COHRON APPELLANT v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS APPELLEE
BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: David Thomas Cohron, pro se LaGrange, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Angela T. Dunham Frankfort, Kentucky
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE PHILLIP J. SHEPHERD, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 18-CI-00179 OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: MAZE, NICKELL, AND K. THOMPSON, JUDGES. NICKELL, JUDGE: David Thomas Cohron, pro se, has appealed from the Franklin Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for declaratory judgment against the Department of Corrections. We affirm.
In his petition to the Franklin Circuit Court, Cohron claimed entitlement to expungement of a disciplinary report from his inmate institutional record. Cohron included a prayer for reimbursement of costs and fees associated with bringing the action. Subsequent to filing the petition, Kentucky State Reformatory Warden Aaron Smith received additional information regarding Cohron's claims. Pursuant to the authority granted under Corrections Policy and Procedure 15.6 (II)(F)(8), the Warden vacated the disciplinary action and restored Cohron's good time credit which had been forfeited due to the infraction. The Department of Corrections moved to dismiss the declaratory judgment action as moot. The trial court agreed after noting the Warden's actions and removal of the disciplinary report from Cohron's inmate institutional record. The order dismissing is silent on the matter of costs. Cohron now appeals, challenging only the trial court's failure to address his request for reimbursement of the costs of bringing the action.
KRS 453.040(1)(a) provides, in pertinent part, "[t]he successful party in any action shall recover his costs, unless otherwise provided by law." CR 54.04(1) similarly states "[c]osts shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party . . .; but costs against the Commonwealth, its officers and agencies shall be imposed only to the extent permitted by law." Cohron's action was dismissed as moot. Clearly, he was not the successful or prevailing party such that he would be entitled to an award of costs. Further, Cohron's assertion he "prevailed" because the disciplinary report was vacated and removed from his record by the Warden is wholly without merit, warranting no discussion. Thus, the trial court did not err in omitting mention of costs in its order of dismissal.
Kentucky Revised Statutes.
Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure. --------
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Franklin Circuit Court is AFFIRMED.
ALL CONCUR. BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT: David Thomas Cohron, pro se
LaGrange, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Angela T. Dunham
Frankfort, Kentucky