BY BEN L. KAUFMAN
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Two women on opposite sides of a horrific Elsmere triple murder won appeals in federal court on Thursday.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit reversed a finding of misconduct and sanctions against Justice Department lawyer Patricia Reedy.
Appellate Judges Gilbert S. Merritt, Alan E. Norris and J. Clifford Wallace also added about $400,000 to the more than $2.7 million the Department of Veterans Affairs paid to widow Barbara Palmer. The case began in 1990 when John Bundy was released from the Chillicothe VA hospital mental ward.
He went to the home of Mrs. Palmer -- his former wife -- and shot and killed her husband, Elsmere Police Sgt. Bobby Palmer. He also shot and killed the Palmers' children, Robyn, 3, and Casey, 2.
Sgt. Palmer shot and killed Mr. Bundy despite his deadly wounds. Mrs. Palmer sued the VA and won.
U.S. District Judge William O. Bertelsman in Covington said the VA negligently released Mr. Bundy prematurely and without supervision and awarded roughly $3 million to the widow. Those decisions were not appealed.
However, Judge Bertelsman said Ms. Reedy was guilty of three ethical breaches. He awarded about $100,000 additional fees to Mrs. Palmer's lawyers -- Philip Taliaferro, Alice G. Keys and Robert W. Carran -- and sent his complaint to the Kentucky Bar Association, which has not ruled on it.
The 6th Circuit, however, said Judge Bertelsman erred. It overruled the misconduct finding and said the government did not have to pay the additional attorney fees.
When it was her turn, Mrs. Palmer said Judge Bertelsman mistakenly deducted about $400,000 from the total VA payment because he said she would owe that on future federal income taxes.
Mr. Taliaferro said she should get the entire award and resolve any tax obligations without the judge's intervention.
That was correct, the 6th Circuit said, because Kentucky law generally bars judges from considering future taxes when estimating economic loss.
Although Judge Bertelsman followed a majority of the federal appellate courts on that issue, there was a 6th Circuit decision to the contrary and he should have followed that.
Thursday, it was not clear whether the solicitor general would appeal the $400,000 decision. It could not be ruled out because the 6th Circuit rule conflicted with most other circuits.
