CHAPTER 411 Rights of Action and Survival of Actions

411.010. Action for assault — Battery — Provocation as a defense or in mitigation of punitive damages.

In any civil action for damages inflicted by an assault or by an assault and battery, the defendant may plead as a defense to the claim for punitive damages, and introduce in evidence in mitigation of punitive damages, any matter of provocation that preceded the assault or battery, if the provocation prompted the assault or battery and was of a nature to cause a person of ordinary prudence and judgment to take the action taken by the defendant.

History. 73a-1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section abolishes the rule prohibiting proving acts of provocation at a different time. Renfro v. Barlow, 131 Ky. 312 , 115 S.W. 225, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Roberson v. Woodfork, 155 Ky. 206 , 159 S.W. 793, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1913 ); Marshall v. Glover, 190 Ky. 113 , 226 S.W. 398, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 550 ( Ky. 1920 ); Hamilton v. Howard, 234 Ky. 321 , 28 S.W.2d 7, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 1930 ).

This section permits defendant to plead and prove any matter of provocation, although prior to time of assault and battery, in mitigation of punitive damages but not in mitigation of actual or compensatory damages. Renfro v. Barlow, 131 Ky. 312 , 115 S.W. 225, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Roberson v. Woodfork, 155 Ky. 206 , 159 S.W. 793, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1913 ); Marshall v. Glover, 190 Ky. 113 , 226 S.W. 398, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 550 ( Ky. 1920 ); Hamilton v. Howard, 234 Ky. 321 , 28 S.W.2d 7, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 1930 ).

This section is broad enough to cover prior provocation caused defendant by abuse or gross behavior towards members of his family. Marshall v. Glover, 190 Ky. 113 , 226 S.W. 398, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 550 ( Ky. 1920 ).

This section did not change the rule in criminal prosecutions for assault and battery. Hill v. Commonwealth, 204 Ky. 440 , 264 S.W. 1045, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 466 ( Ky. 1924 ).

In a civil action for assault and battery, this section merely permits proof of provocation in mitigation of punitive damages. Sturgeon v. Baker, 312 Ky. 338 , 227 S.W.2d 202, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1950 ).

2.Insufficient Provocation.

Fact that prisoner in jail was guilty of insanitary conduct and noisy and abusive language did not justify an assault by other prisoners or furnish grounds for denying liability on part of jailer and his deputy for failing to prevent or stop assault. Lamb v. Clark, 282 Ky. 167 , 138 S.W.2d 350, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 152 ( Ky. 1940 ).

3.Contributory Negligence.

Contributory negligence is no defense in an action for assault. Lamb v. Clark, 282 Ky. 167 , 138 S.W.2d 350, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 152 ( Ky. 1940 ).

4.Pleading.

Before any matter of provocation can be introduced in evidence, it must be pleaded, and the right to plead it is limited to mitigation of punitive damages. Barth v. Stewart, 229 Ky. 840 , 18 S.W.2d 275, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 847 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Where provocation was not pleaded, an instruction on that issue would not have been proper. Gargotto v. Isenberg, 244 Ky. 493 , 51 S.W.2d 443, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 450 ( Ky. 1932 ).

5.Evidence.

Evidence of previous overtures to defendant’s wife was admissible in mitigation of punitive damages for assault and battery. Hamilton v. Howard, 234 Ky. 321 , 28 S.W.2d 7, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 1930 ).

In action for assault and battery and false arrest, defendant’s testimony that unidentified persons had shot pistols and shotguns near his home; that the roof of his barn had been damaged by bullets; that a lock on his barn had been shot off; that property had been stolen from his barn and from his storehouse; that one of his gates had been carried away; and that his watering trough had been destroyed were all admissible under the peculiar facts of the case, although plaintiffs were not identified as the perpetrators of the acts, for said acts might have had some bearing upon defendant’s state of mind at the time of the shooting and could have been construed by the jury as offering some justification for his conduct. Alexander v. Jones, 249 S.W.2d 35, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 788 ( Ky. 1952 ).

6.Proof.

Proof of malice is not essential to recover in civil action for damages resulting from assault and battery. Sigler v. Ralph, 417 S.W.2d 239, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 253 ( Ky. 1967 ).

7.Instructions to Jury.

Where there is a plea and proof of provocation, the court should instruct the jury to consider proof heard in support of plea by way of mitigation of punitive damages. Louisville R. Co. v. Frick, 158 Ky. 450 , 165 S.W. 649, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 640 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Error, if any, arising from failure of court to define the words “wilfully and maliciously,” in an instruction to the jury on punitive damages, was not prejudicial, where award was modest and not in excess of a reasonable allowance for compensatory damages alone and the evidence showed the assault was willful and not without malice. Herring v. Lunderman, 302 Ky. 271 , 194 S.W.2d 506, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 650 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In an action for assault, an instruction offered under this section to the effect that the law was for the defendant if the jury believed from the evidence that the conduct of the plaintiff was such as to excuse an ordinarily prudent man in making the assault was properly refused for failing to limit its application to mitigation of punitive damages and for failure to plead provocation as provided by this section. Herring v. Lunderman, 302 Ky. 271 , 194 S.W.2d 506, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 650 ( Ky. 1946 ).

The statute does not require the trial court to instruct the jury on punitive damages in any civil action seeking recovery for assault and battery; the statute merely permits a defendant to introduce evidence of provocation in mitigation of a claim for punitive damages. Banks v. Fritsch, 39 S.W.3d 474, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 22 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action against non-resident operator of motor vehicle, KRS ch. 188.

Action against the Commonwealth, Ky. Const., § 231.

Actions, limitations on, KRS ch. 413.

Actions to recover for:

Cattle injured by railroad, KRS 277.330 .

Confession of judgment for another, KRS 372.140 , 372.990 .

Entering inclosed grounds and injuring game, KRS 150.300 .

Failure of court to require sufficient bond of guardian, KRS 387.070 .

Failure of officer to return execution, KRS 426.340 , 426.350 , 426.990 .

Improper fee bill of officer, KRS 64.450 .

Interest paid over legal rate, KRS 360.020.

Loss in game of chance, KRS 372.020 to 372.050 .

Mining within 25 feet of adjoining land, KRS 352.490 .

Overcharge or delay by tollkeeper or ferryman, KRS 280.250 , 280.260 , 280.990 .

Taking or destroying property by felon, KRS 431.200 to 431.210 .

Using timber brand of another, KRS 364.090.

Work of laborer, workman or mechanics on public works, KRS 337.550 .

Wrongful act of crew of vessel, KRS 376.370 .

Cruelty to animals, KRS 525.125 , 525.130 .

Landowner, liability when consenting to hunting, trapping, camping or hiking on premises, KRS 150.645 .

Private fish pond, treble damages for destroying, KRS 150.700 .

Property, criminal damage to, criminal mischief, KRS 512.020 to 512.040 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Taylor, With Temperate Rod: Maintaining Academic Order in Secondary Schools, 58 Ky. L.J. 616 (1970).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Provocation in Mitigation of Punitive Damages Claim, Form 120.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Assault and Battery, § 120.00.

411.020. Battery with certain weapons — Punitive damages.

Any person struck by another with any of the weapons popularly known as colts, brass knuckles, slung shots or sandbags, or any imitation or substitute therefor, may recover for the injury done. The jury may also award punitive damages.

History. 3.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Battery with Blackjack.

Verdict of $7,500, including both compensatory and punitive damages, was not excessive where plaintiff was struck on the head with a blackjack and received permanent injuries. Brink v. Kennedy, 286 Ky. 566 , 151 S.W.2d 58, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 287 ( Ky. 1941 ).

2.Punitive Damages.

Punitive damages must have some reasonable relation to the injuries and cause of them but need bear no relation to actual damages sustained and are allowable even when compensatory damages are nominal. Brink v. Kennedy, 286 Ky. 566 , 151 S.W.2d 58, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 287 ( Ky. 1941 ).

411.025. Action against terrorist for injury to person or property — Damages.

  1. As used in this section:
    1. “Act of terror” means an activity that:
      1. Involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
      2. Appears to be intended to:
        1. Intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
        2. Influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
        3. Affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
      3. Occurs primarily within the Commonwealth; and
    2. “Terrorist” means a person who commits an act of terror, including a person who acts as an accessory before or after the fact, aids or abets, solicits, or conspires to commit an act of terror or who lends material support to an act of terror.
  2. Any person whose property or person is injured by a terrorist may file a claim for and recover damages from the terrorist.
  3. Any person who files an action under this section is entitled to recover three (3) times the actual damages sustained or fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), whichever is greater, as well as court costs and attorney’s fees in the trial and appellate courts if the person prevails in the claim.
  4. A civil action brought under this section is remedial and does not limit any other civil or criminal action provided by law. Civil remedies provided under this section are supplemental and not exclusive.

HISTORY: 2018 ch. 111, § 1, effective July 14, 2018.

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(7/14/2018). 2018 Ky. Acts ch. 111, sec. 3 provided that this statute as created in Section 1 of that Act shall be known and may be cited as Andy’s Law.

411.030. Action for seduction — Proof.

An action for seduction may be maintained without any allegation or proof of the loss of service of the victim by reason of the wrongful act of the defendant.

History. 2: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 386, § 105.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section does not repeal the common-law remedy but has afforded a cumulative remedy. Monahan v. Clemons, 212 Ky. 504 , 279 S.W. 974, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1926 ). See Kelly v. Combs, 229 Ky. 502 , 17 S.W.2d 435, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 792 ( Ky. 1929 ).

By this section the seduction act is made the cause of action, and not loss of service or expense. Kelly v. Combs, 229 Ky. 502 , 17 S.W.2d 435, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 792 ( Ky. 1929 ).

2.Definition of “Seduction.”

The word “seduction,” when applied to the conduct of a man towards a woman, means the use of some influence, artifice, promise or means on his part by which he induces the woman who is then, and has theretofore for a reasonable time been, a woman of chaste conduct to submit to unlawful intercourse with him. Stowers v. Singer, 113 Ky. 584 , 68 S.W. 637, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 395 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1902 ).

3.Persons Who Could Bring Action.

Female could not sue for her seduction. The law gave the right of action to those only who could sue at common law. Its object was to dispense allegation and proof of loss of service. Woodward v. Anderson, 72 Ky. 624 , 1873 Ky. LEXIS 14 ( Ky. 1873 ). See Cline & Co. v. Templeton, 78 Ky. 550 , 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 276 , 1880 Ky. LEXIS 59 ( Ky. 1880 ) (decided under prior law).

This section being silent on the question as to who may bring an action for seduction, the common-law rule upon this question is therefore in full force, and the relation of master and servant, or parent and child, must still appear in the pleading. Taylor v. Daniel, 98 S.W. 986, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 377 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 382 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907).

4.Age.

Where mother in her petition failed to allege that her illegitimate daughter was under 21 years of age, she failed to state a cause of action for seduction under this section. Taylor v. Daniel, 98 S.W. 986, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 377 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 382 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907).

5.Loss of Services.

This section did not repeal the common-law remedy but gives the parent a right of action for daughter’s seduction, and his resulting loss of service, without allegation or proof of loss of service. Monahan v. Clemons, 212 Ky. 504 , 279 S.W. 974, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Slight evidence of loss of service is all that is required in action at common law and no loss of service is required under this section. Kelly v. Combs, 229 Ky. 502 , 17 S.W.2d 435, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 792 ( Ky. 1929 ).

An action for seduction brought under this section does not require any proof of loss of services of the female but, in an action brought under the common law, it is necessary for plaintiff to establish some right to the services of the one seduced and to allege and prove the loss of her services, although slight evidence of loss of services is all that is required and proof of emancipation, if alleged and proved, is a defense. Collis v. Hoskins, 306 Ky. 391 , 208 S.W.2d 70, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 570 ( Ky. 1948 ).

6.Defenses.

A showing that intercourse was accomplished by force will not defeat the action. Monahan v. Clemons, 212 Ky. 504 , 279 S.W. 974, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1926 ).

7.Exemplary Damages.

Malice is not necessary to authorize exemplary damages. Stowers v. Singer, 113 Ky. 584 , 68 S.W. 637, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 395 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1902 ).

8.Instruction to Jury.

An instruction that if the jury believes that defendant seduced, debauched, and carnally knew plaintiff’s daughter and that by reason or means of such seduction and carnal knowledge of defendant of said daughter, said daughter became pregnant and they should find for plaintiff is not sufficient. Stowers v. Singer, 113 Ky. 584 , 68 S.W. 637, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 395 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1902 ).

9.Action at Common Law.

Law that provided for an action for seduction did not repeal the common-law remedy for seduction. Wilhoit v. Hancock, 68 Ky. 567 , 1869 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1869 ) (decided under prior law).

In common-law action for seduction, defense that daughter was emancipated must be specifically pleaded. Collis v. Hoskins, 306 Ky. 391 , 208 S.W.2d 70, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 570 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Proof of emancipation, if alleged and proved, is an affirmative defense to an action for seduction brought under the common law. Collis v. Hoskins, 306 Ky. 391 , 208 S.W.2d 70, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 570 ( Ky. 1948 ).

10.Limitation on Action.

In an action under the law, the limitation of one year commenced to run from the act of seduction. In the common-law action, the limitation started to run from the female’s recovery after the birth of the child. Wilhoit v. Hancock, 68 Ky. 567 , 1869 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1869 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Limitation of action on seduction, KRS 413.140 .

Parents entitled to earnings of minor child, KRS 405.010 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Comments, The Kentucky Divorce Statute: A Call for Reform, 66 Ky. L.J. 724 (1977-1978).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Seduction, § 262.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Minors, § 30.27.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Promise of Marriage, § 2.7.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Suits for Breach of Marriage Promise, § 3.1.

411.040. Accusation of incest, fornication or adultery — Proof of damage.

An accusation of incest, fornication or adultery against any person shall be actionable. In such a case the plaintiff shall not be required to allege or prove special damage.

History. 1: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 386, § 104.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

It is actionable under this section to impute a want of chastity to a female without allegation or proof of special damage and it is not necessary that the words make the charge in express terms. Williams v. Riddle, 145 Ky. 459 , 140 S.W. 661, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 882 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Martin v. White, 188 Ky. 153 , 221 S.W. 528, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1920 ); Holman v. Plumlee, 206 Ky. 275 , 267 S.W. 221, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 361 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Were it not for this law, a charge of fornication against a female would not be actionable per se. Hickerson v. Masters, 190 Ky. 168 , 226 S.W. 1072, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1921 ).

To be slanderous per se under this section, the words uttered must clearly and unequivocally import the charge alleged. Bishop v. Smith, 198 Ky. 230 , 248 S.W. 538, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 420 ( Ky. 1923 ).

2.Actionable Language.

The words “Has one of N’s girls had a young one? I heard it” made a charge of fornication and are therefore actionable per se. Nicholson v. Merritt, 109 Ky. 369 , 59 S.W. 25, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 914 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1900 ).

“You often went to Dr. Duvall’s office, pulled the blinds down and locked the door, and stayed for hours, and got the medicine you went for. You are a bitch and I can prove it” was sufficient to prefer a charge of unchastity and adulterous conduct, independent of the innuendo. Martin v. White, 188 Ky. 153 , 221 S.W. 528, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Words accusing a woman of being a whore are actionable per se, as they accuse her of fornication or adultery. Justice v. Wellman, 260 Ky. 479 , 86 S.W.2d 132, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1935 ).

A statement by landlord to woman tenant in the presence of third parties that the police were making him get rid of all lewd women and that she had to move was actionable per se. Vanover v. Wells, 264 Ky. 461 , 94 S.W.2d 999, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1936 ).

In an action of slander by a female where the alleged slanderous language was “She (plaintiff) is going to have a baby, she is in a family way,” it was essential to plaintiff’s cause of action that her petition expressly set out that she was a single woman, since such an accusation concerning a married woman would not impute a want of chastity. Parks v. Berry, 307 Ky. 21 , 209 S.W.2d 726, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Presumption of singleness which arose from statement that plaintiff was under 16 years of age did not cure fatal error in petition of failure to allege that plaintiff was unmarried. Parks v. Berry, 307 Ky. 21 , 209 S.W.2d 726, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1948 ).

3.Words Not Actionable.

The words “She is a dirty bitch; she has no character, and is no account” could not be extended beyond their natural meaning by innuendo and are not actionable words in themselves importing that she was a whore, common prostitute or was guilty of fornication or adultery. Craig v. Pyles, 101 Ky. 593 , 39 S.W. 33, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 1043 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1897 ).

The use of the words “She is a damned slut, she is a damned bitch, she is a damned sow and those who know her know that she is no account” could not be extended by innuendo to mean that the person about whom they were spoken was an improper, indecent, and unchaste character who indulged in vile and improper practices and that she was not worthy of association of the people, and were not actionable. Peters v. Barth, 50 S.W. 682, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1934 (1899).

4.Innuendo.

Innuendo may not enlarge meaning of spoken words beyond their natural and ordinary import. Martin v. White, 188 Ky. 153 , 221 S.W. 528, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1920 ).

5.Publication.

Addressing defamatory remarks to woman in presence and hearing of others was sufficient publication, although her name was not mentioned. Justice v. Wellman, 260 Ky. 479 , 86 S.W.2d 132, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1935 ). See Vanover v. Wells, 264 Ky. 461 , 94 S.W.2d 999, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1936 ).

6.Malice.

Decedent's beneficiaries did not have to arbitrate wrongful death claims against a nursing home because the decedent's arbitration agreement, when admitted to the nursing home, did not bind the beneficiaries, as the beneficiaries' claims accrued independently, so no such agreement could encompass the claims. HQM of Pikeville, LLC v. Collins, 2014 Ky. App. LEXIS 127 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2014 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1049 (Ky. Ct. App. July 18, 2014).

Charge of fornication is actionable without proof of malice. Nicholson v. Dunn, 52 S.W. 935, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 643 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 363 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899). See Morris v. Curtis, 45 S.W. 86, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 56 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 268 (Ky. Ct. App. 1898).

It was error to require jury to believe words were spoken maliciously in order to find for plaintiff. Nicholson v. Merritt, 109 Ky. 369 , 59 S.W. 25, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 914 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1900 ).

If words are libelous per se, a showing of malice is not required in order to recover punitive damages. Justice v. Wellman, 260 Ky. 479 , 86 S.W.2d 132, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1935 ).

7.Truth.

Evidence in action for accusation of fornication that defendant at the time he repeated slanderous rumor stated his disbelief in its truth is admissible, but only in mitigation of damages. Nicholson v. Merritt, 109 Ky. 369 , 59 S.W. 25, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 914 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1900 ).

8.Accusation.

To say a female “is a drunken whore“ was to accuse her of fornication or adultery. Williams v. Greenwade, 33 Ky. 432 , 1835 Ky. LEXIS 121 ( Ky. 1835 ) (decided under prior law).

For a man to say of a woman that he had sexual intercourse with her was an accusation of fornication or adultery. Adams v. Rankin, 62 Ky. 58 , 1863 Ky. LEXIS 20 ( Ky. 1863 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Incest, Penal Code, KRS 530.020 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Comments, The Kentucky Divorce Statute: A Call for Reform, 66 Ky. L.J. 724 (1977-1978).

Treatises

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Torts and Crimes, § 18.2.

411.045. Defenses allowed in action for libel or slander.

In the actions for libel or slander, the defendant may state the truth of the alleged libel or slander, and any mitigating circumstances; and, whether he prove the justification or not, he may prove the mitigating circumstances to reduce the amount of damages.

History. C.C. 124: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Denial Must Be Positive.

Averment that defendant had no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief that he ever spoke the words of and concerning the plaintiff, “I discharged E for stealing,” and had no recollection of speaking the words, and therefore denies he ever spoke such words, is not a denial of the charge made. Defendant is presumed to know whether or not he spoke the words and must make a positive denial that he ever made the charge or an admission of the facts will follow. McCauley v. Elrod, 27 S.W. 867, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 291 (1894).

2.Truth.

Where defendant, by his answer, admitted that he spoke the words charged but averred they were spoken to his wife in the privacy of his family and were accidentally overheard by another person in the house not known to be within hearing and thus, without having been so intended by him, became public and, in reply, the plaintiff averred that it was not true that the defendant spoke the words complained of under the circumstances stated in the answer and also averred that the defendant had often spoken the words, or the substance of them, in the presence of divers persons, the court held that the plaintiff had no right to recover for any other publication than that admitted in the answer. Campbell v. Bannister, 79 Ky. 205 , 2 Ky. L. Rptr. 72 , 1880 Ky. LEXIS 113 (Ky. Ct. App. 1880).

In action for libel charging appellee with acting corruptly as a juror and perjuring himself wherein the defendants pleaded the truth of the accusation in justification and, by way of mitigation, also relied upon general rumor that the appellant would act as charged and that defendants had good reasons for their belief that the publication was true, the court held: (1) where the truth of the words was pleaded in justification, it was a complete defense to a civil action for libel and the burden of the issue was upon the defendants; (2) the object of offering matters in mitigation was, as the very name implied, to mitigate the damages that might be recovered and therefore, where recovery was denied, plaintiff was not prejudiced by evidence of any circumstances in mitigation; and (3) the jury having found the publication was in fact true, it was entirely immaterial whether the appellees were or were not actuated by malice, and testimony to that effect was not prejudicial to appellant. McIntyre v. Bransford, 17 S.W. 359, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 454 (1891).

Where publication was admitted and defendant pleaded the truth of the same but utterly failed to sustain the truth, he was guilty of libel and the mere fact that he may have believed that the statements or charges made were true was no defense. Louisville Press Co. v. Tennelly, 105 Ky. 365 , 49 S.W. 15, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1231 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Ordinarily, the truth of an alleged libel must be pleaded as a defense, but that rule can only apply when there is a necessity for such a plea and, if the petition shows that to be true which would be a good defense on plea, the latter becomes unnecessary and a demurrer exposes the infirmity of the petition. Rollins v. Louisville Times Co., 139 Ky. 788 , 90 S.W. 1081, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1054 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906).

The rule is well settled that in a civil action for libel the substantial truth of the publication is a complete defense. Rollins v. Louisville Times Co., 139 Ky. 788 , 90 S.W. 1081, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1054 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906).

The rule that the truth of an alleged libel must be pleaded as a defense did not apply and a demurrer reached the defect where the petition alleged that the statement that plaintiff had “left the county and his friends were unable to locate him” was false but, as amended, showed a number of his friends knew his whereabouts and that he had been summoned by the sheriff to appear as a witness in another county and that he returned home the day after the article was published, since the petition showed on its face that he had left the county and that some of his friends did not know where he was. Rollins v. Louisville Times Co., 139 Ky. 788 , 90 S.W. 1081, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1054 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906).

Defendant by his plea admitted that he spoke the words alleged except that he did not use the word “dishonestly” and pleaded that the words spoken by him were spoken in confidence and were a privileged communication and, being required to elect whether he would stand by his denial of having charged the plaintiff with taking the goods “dishonestly” or upon his plea of privileged communication, under protest, elected to stand upon the latter defense. The court in its instruction said to the jury that it was admitted by the pleadings that the defendant had spoken the words alleged in the petition, which included the word “dishonestly.” The court held that this was error and prejudicial to the defendant. Shipp v. Patton, 123 Ky. 65 , 93 S.W. 1033, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 480 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 125 ( Ky. 1906 ).

In an action for libel, pleading and proof of the truth of the written statements is always a complete defense, although the publication may be inspired by malice or ill will and be libelous per se. Pennington v. Little, 266 Ky. 750 , 99 S.W.2d 776, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where petition made no allegation by way of colloquium or innuendo tending to extend the meaning of the written statement or to show that the language of the letter was libelous per se in its statements by reason of their tending to discredit or injure the plaintiff as a public officer, alleging that he was such, and, defendant answered, denying only that he had falsely or maliciously made the statements complained of in the letter as libelous, and where the things set forth as done by defendant were, by complainant’s testimony, shown and admitted to have been in fact done by him, demurrer to the petition should have been sustained and peremptory instruction given to the jury to find for the defendant. Pennington v. Little, 266 Ky. 750 , 99 S.W.2d 776, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1936 ).

3.Mitigating Circumstances.

It is no justification for a repetition of the slander that it had been reported in the neighborhood or that appellant, at the time he communicated the slander, gave the party to whom he related it the name of the person from whom he learned said report or that he informed him at the time that he did not believe said report to be true, and it cannot be relied on by way of justification that he did not intend to charge appellant with the offense of fornication. It was, however, competent under this action to have inquired of all witnesses whether or not the report spoken of was generally known in the neighborhood, but there the inquiry should have ceased. It was also competent for appellee to prove the fact that he had stated he did not believe the report and that he gave the name of his author and any other mitigating circumstances for the purpose of rebutting actual malice and to escape the infliction of punitive damages. Nicholson v. Rust, 52 S.W. 933, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 645 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 392 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

This section, which permits the pleading of mitigating circumstances in connection with a plea of the truth of the alleged slander, does not seem to have changed the common-law rule, and the mitigating circumstances might properly be introduced in evidence under the general issue without a plea setting them forth. Nicholson v. Merritt, 109 Ky. 369 , 59 S.W. 25, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 914 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Since it is well settled in this state that although it is no justification to say that defendant merely repeated what he had heard, it is competent for the defendant, in an action of this character, to show in mitigation of damages that the rumor was generally known in the neighborhood, although he will not be permitted to show, in detail, conversations had with different persons with regard to the alleged rumor. Provision of this section which permits the pleading of mitigating circumstances in connection with a plea of the truth of the alleged libel or slander does not seem to have changed the common-law rule that such testimony might have been introduced under the general issue; therefore, such mitigating circumstances might properly be shown without a plea setting them forth. Marksberry v. Weir, 173 Ky. 316 , 190 S.W. 1108, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 454 ( Ky. 1917 ).

4.Privileged Communications.

Where, upon trial of a member before a lodge of Masons, plaintiff was called before a committee of the lodge to testify, whereupon defendant made an affidavit in reference to plaintiff’s evidence that he could not be believed on oath, the court held that defendant’s affidavit could not be regarded as a privileged communication, neither plaintiff nor defendant being members of the lodge. Nix v. Caldwell, 81 Ky. 293 , 5 Ky. L. Rptr. 275 , 1883 Ky. LEXIS 62 (Ky. Ct. App. 1883).

5.Evidence.

In an action for libel for falsely publishing that it was rumored that plaintiff had committed murder, it was competent, under this section, for the defendant to show that the rumor was generally known in the neighborhood; but it was not competent to show in detail the conversations had with different persons with regard to the alleged rumor. Reid v. Sun Pub. Co., 158 Ky. 727 , 166 S.W. 245, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 710 ( Ky. 1914 ).

6.Opinion.

Kentucky has adopted the view that defamatory communication may consist of a statement in the form of an opinion, but a statement of this nature is actionable only if it implies the allegation of undisclosed defamatory facts as the basis of the opinion. In the case at bar, the evidence at trial, in which the book was scrutinized in detail, showed that defendant arrived at the conclusion that the plaintiff had committed adultery on the basis of rumor and circumstantial evidence which was persuasive to her; the facts on which she based the conclusion were disclosed in the book. Therefore, the action for defamation must fail. Lassiter v. Lassiter, 456 F. Supp. 2d 876, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70286 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ), aff'd, 280 Fed. Appx. 503, 2008 FED App. 0318N, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12064 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

6.Denial of Speaking Words Charged.

Where the answer was merely a denial of speaking the words charged, nothing was admissible in evidence which tended either to prove the truth of the charge or to establish a defense on the ground that they were spoken on a justifiable occasion. Harper v. Harper, 73 Ky. 447 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1874 ) (decided under prior law).

7.Multiple Defenses.

In action for slander by appellee against appellant for accusing her of the crime of perjury in testifying to which appellant set up the defenses of not guilty and of justification, action of lower court in requiring defendant to elect was held erroneous in view of law which permitted defendant to set forth in his answer as many grounds of defense, counterclaim, and setoff, whether legal or equitable, as he had. Horton v. Banner, 69 Ky. 596 , 1869 Ky. LEXIS 220 ( Ky. 1869 ) (decided under prior law).

The defendant could, in his answer, deny the speaking of the defamatory matter charged, in a second paragraph admit the publication and allege its truth, and in still another admit the words and, without averring their truth or falsity, justify by alleging such facts as were relied on to excuse their publication. Harper v. Harper, 73 Ky. 447 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1874 ) (decided under prior law).

8.Plea in Confession and Avoidance.

Answer which, in effect, admitted the speaking of the words complained of and set up and relied on the time and circumstances attending the speaking to show that they were privileged and therefore not the subject of an action for slander was held essentially a plea in confession and avoidance. Morgan v. Booth, 76 Ky. 480 , 1877 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1877 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Cox, Torts—Right of Privacy in Kentucky, 38 Ky. L.J. 487 (1950).

Kentucky Law Survey, Mobley, Torts, 70 Ky. L.J. 527 (1981-82).

411.050. Action for libel; retraction of statement; effect. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (2438b-1) was repealed by Acts 1964, ch. 66, § 2.

411.051. Libel actions against newspaper, magazine, or periodical — Demand for and publication of correction — Effect.

  1. In any action for damages for the publication of a defamatory statement in a newspaper, magazine, or periodical, the defendant shall be liable for actual damages sustained by plaintiff. The defendant may plead the publication of a correction in mitigation of damages. Punitive damages may be recovered only if the plaintiff shall allege and prove publication with legal malice and that the newspaper, magazine, or periodical failed to make conspicuous and timely publication of a correction after receiving a sufficient demand for correction.
  2. A “sufficient demand for correction” is a demand for correction which is in writing; which is signed by the plaintiff or his duly-authorized attorney or agent; which specifies the statement or statements claimed to be false and defamatory, states wherein they are false, and sets forth the facts; and which is delivered to the defendant prior to the commencement of the action.
  3. A “correction” is either:
    1. The publication of an acknowledgment that the statement or statements specified as false and defamatory in the plaintiff’s demand for correction are erroneous; or
    2. The publication, in a fair and impartial manner as a matter of law, of the plaintiff’s statement of the facts (as set forth in his demand for correction) or a fair summary thereof, exclusive of any portions thereof which are defamatory of another, obscene, or otherwise improper for publication.

      If the demand for correction has specified two (2) or more statements as false and defamatory, the correction may deal with some of such statements pursuant to (a) above and with other of such statements pursuant to (b) above.

  4. A “conspicuous publication” in a newspaper is a publication which is printed in substantially as conspicuous a manner as the statement or statements specified as false and defamatory in the demand for correction.
  5. A “timely publication” in a daily newspaper is a publication within ten (10) business days after the day on which a sufficient demand for correction is received by the defendant. A “timely publication” in a newspaper, magazine, or periodical other than a daily newspaper is a publication in or prior to the next regular issue which is published not less than ten (10) business days after the day on which a sufficient demand for correction is received by the defendant.

History. Enact. Acts 1964, ch. 66, § 1; 1996, ch. 202, § 3, effective July 15, 1996.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Libelous Per Se.

Where a newspaper article erroneously stated that an older boy pounded the victim’s head against the pavement, and that he was “beaten into insensibility,” no extrinsic facts were needed to show that the statement was defamatory, for friends and acquaintances who were familiar with the incident were certain to recognize the unnamed perpetrator of the offense; therefore, the article was libelous per se. E. W. Scripps Co. v. Cholmondelay, 569 S.W.2d 700, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 567 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

2.Malice.

If words were libelous per se, a showing of malice was not required in order to recover punitive damages. Reid v. Sun Pub. Co., 158 Ky. 727 , 166 S.W. 245, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 710 ( Ky. 1914 ) (decided under prior law).

Where publication was libelous per se, the law presumed malice and authorized recovery of punitive damages. Reid v. Sun Pub. Co., 158 Ky. 727 , 166 S.W. 245, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 710 ( Ky. 1914 ). See Reid v. Nichols, 166 Ky. 423 , 179 S.W. 440, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 722 ( Ky. 1915 ) (decided under prior law).

Defendant’s attempt to verify his story and his readiness to write another article giving the defamed person’s side of the story are not examples of reckless disregard for the truth, nor do they indicate that defendant knew the story was false, and while defendant’s reporting may not have met the proper standards for a journalist, his reporting was not so reckless as to be malicious; thus the trial court should have directed a verdict for defendant on the issue of punitive damages. E. W. Scripps Co. v. Cholmondelay, 569 S.W.2d 700, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 567 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

Where a newspaper article was defamatory per se, the argument that the reasonably prudent editor and publisher were not warned of the article’s defamatory potential was without substance, and the argument that the defamed person had to prove legal malice and special damages was without merit. E. W. Scripps Co. v. Cholmondelay, 569 S.W.2d 700, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 567 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

3.Damages.

The publication of a libel exposed the publisher not only to compensatory damages for the loss of business but also to a judgment for the mental suffering that the libel or slander inflicted upon the plaintiff; if the publication was malicious or made in reckless disregard of the rights of the plaintiff, the defendant was also liable for punitive damages. Louisville Press Co. v. Tennelly, 105 Ky. 365 , 49 S.W. 15, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1231 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1899 ) (decided under prior law).

If statements contained in an article published by a newspaper were false, and the defendants were negligent in investigating, researching, reporting and publishing the article, then the defamed person was entitled to compensatory damages for libel. E. W. Scripps Co. v. Cholmondelay, 569 S.W.2d 700, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 567 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

3.1.—Correction Demand Required for Punitive Damages.

Court denied a newspaper owner’s motion to dismiss a physician’s claim for punitive damages in a defamation action because the available evidence regarding the conspicuousness of the publication of the physician’s demand letter was not so persuasive as to require the conclusion that the publication was conspicuous within the meaning of KRS 411.051(4). A reasonable jury could determine that the publication was not substantially as conspicuous as the original articles. Trover v. Kluger, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21585 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 26, 2005).

Decision of whether a correction is substantially as conspicuous under KRS 411.051(4) should remain with a jury, unless a court can decide it as a matter of summary judgment. Such an interpretation should not prevent the fair application of subsection (4) protecting publishers from punitive damage claims. Trover v. Kluger, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21585 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 26, 2005).

4.—Correction Demand Required for Punitive Damages.

Since plaintiff, in an action for defamation, invasion of privacy and outrageous conduct as a result of an allegedly untrue and insulting newspaper article published by defendants, failed to make a written demand for correction prior to filing her defamation claim as required by subsection (1) of this section, she was not entitled to punitive damages on that claim. White v. Manchester Enter., 871 F. Supp. 934, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18671 (E.D. Ky. 1994 ).

5.—Correction Demand Required in False Light Claims.

Because the torts of defamation and false light invasion of privacy are so closely related, courts have held that the procedural requirements applicable to one of these causes of action are applicable to the other as well; accordingly, plaintiff’s failure to submit a written demand for retraction prior to initiating this action, as required by this section, bars her demand for punitive damages on both her defamation and false light claims. White v. Manchester Enter., 871 F. Supp. 934, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18671 (E.D. Ky. 1994 ).

6.Class Defamation.

To defame a class, the statement must be applicable to every member of the class, and if the words used contain no reflection upon any particular individual, no averment can make them defamatory. Kentucky Fried Chicken, Inc. v. Sanders, 563 S.W.2d 8, 1978 Ky. LEXIS 336 ( Ky. 1978 ).

7.Actionable Words.

A newspaper publication that an undertaker was the meanest man on earth and that he conducted a note-shaving business and refused to release a little girl for burial unless the expense of embalming was paid and, when the father went away, kept the body of the little girl in a back room as an advertisement for the superiority of his embalming fluid was libelous. Louisville Press Co. v. Tennelly, 105 Ky. 365 , 49 S.W. 15, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1231 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1899 ) (decided under prior law).

8.Retraction.

Law that provided in an action for libel either party could prove that plaintiff requested retraction or omitted to request retraction and that, upon such proof, plaintiff could not recover punitive damages conferred upon defendant the right to show a retraction to defeat punitive damages; it did not give plaintiff the right to show a failure to retract in order to show malice or aggravating damages. Reid v. Nichols, 166 Ky. 423 , 179 S.W. 440, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 722 ( Ky. 1915 ) (decided under prior law).

9.Place of Action.

An action for libel could, at the option of the plaintiff, be brought in the county of defendant’s residence or in any county in which the injury to his character had been inflicted by the publication of the libel. Louisville Press Co. v. Tennelly, 105 Ky. 365 , 49 S.W. 15, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1231 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1899 ) (decided under prior law).

10.Pleadings.

It was not necessary to state any extrinsic facts for the purpose of showing the application to plaintiff, but it was sufficient to allege the publication was intended to apply to plaintiff. Louisville Press Co. v. Tennelly, 105 Ky. 365 , 49 S.W. 15, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1231 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1899 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited in:

McCall v. Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., 623 S.W.2d 882, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1981 ), cert. denied, Courier-Journal v. McCall, 456 U.S. 975, 102 S. Ct. 2239, 72 L. Ed. 2d 849, 1982 U.S. LEXIS 2104, 50 U.S.L.W. 3916 (1982); O’Brien v. Williamson Daily News, 735 F. Supp. 218, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11395 (E.D. Ky. 1990 ); Warford v. Lexington Herald-Leader Co., 789 S.W.2d 758, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1990 ); Shepherd v. Wellman, 313 F.3d 963, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26449 (6th Cir. 2002).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Indictment for libel, RCr 6.10.

Venue of a lien for libel, KRS 452.460 .

Venue of prosecution for publishing libelous matter in newspaper, KRS 452.610 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Mobley, Torts, 70 Ky. L.J. 527 (1981-82).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Elder, Kentucky Defamation and Privacy Law — The Last Decade, 23 N. Ky. L. Rev. 231 (1996).

2012 Law & Informatics Issue: Article: The Emerging Conflict between Newsworthiness and the Right to be Forgotten, 39 N. Ky. L. Rev. 119 (2012).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Other Defenses Applicable to Media Defendants, Form 129.08.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Libel Against Newspaper, Form 129.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.00.

ALR

What constitutes “publication” of libel in order to start running of period of limitations. 42 A.L.R.3d 807.

411.060. Action for libel — Privileged communications.

The publication of a fair and impartial report of any proceeding before any state or city legislative or executive body, board or officer, or the whole or a fair synopsis of any bill, report, resolution, bulletin, notice, petition, or other document presented, filed, or used in any proceeding before any state or city legislative or executive body, board or officer, shall be privileged, unless it is proved that the publication was maliciously made. The publication of a fair and impartial report or the whole or a synopsis of any indictment, warrant, affidavit, pleading or other document in any criminal or civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction shall be privileged, unless it is proved that it was published maliciously, or that the defendant after request by the plaintiff has failed to publish a reasonable explanation or contradiction thereof, giving the explanation or contradiction the same prominence and space as the original publication, or that the publisher has refused after request by the plaintiff to publish the subsequent determination of the proceeding. This section shall not authorize the publication of any indecent matter.

History. 2438b-2.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Privileged Communications.

Trial court erred in granting summary judgment dismissal to a former mayor’s defamation claims against a current mayor, arising from publication of a newsletter that recounted remarks made at a city council meeting, as the publication was entitled to a qualified privilege under KRS 411.060 if the defense applied, but the trial court failed to determine whether the privilege applied; the trial court did not determine whether the newsletter was fair and accurate or whether it was maliciously made. Smith v. Martin, 331 S.W.3d 637, 2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 22 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).

2.Fair and Impartial Report.

Newspaper headline “Rustlers Get Cow” and the item following which stated that a cow had been stolen and three named individuals arrested and charged with grand larceny in the theft of a cow had to be read together to determine whether they constituted a “fair and impartial” report of the indictment as a privileged document under this section and, when that was done, the use of the term “rustlers” was sufficiently explained and did not constitute libel per se or malicious publication. Helton v. Joplin, 281 S.W.2d 917, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1955 ).

There was no proof that publication of a filler “It’s surprising how few breaks really deserving people sometimes get,” which was separated from acquittal article by a cutoff line, in any way referred to the acquittal article, and to connect the two was fanciful. Helton v. Joplin, 281 S.W.2d 917, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1955 ).

The question of whether an article impartially and fairly stated the situation and plaintiff’s part in it should have been submitted to the jury for determination where different conclusions could have been drawn, and trial court erred in dismissing complaint on ground the allegedly libelous publication was privileged. Kremer v. Kopmeyer, 418 S.W.2d 237, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Newspaper publisher was entitled to summary judgment on a physician’s claim of false-light invasion of privacy, which arose from the publication of articles that reported on a medical center’s investigation into the physician’s work as a radiologist, because the articles were accurate accounts where the court previously held that the newspaper was shielded from defamation liability for the articles at issue under KRS 411.060 . Trover v. Paxton Media Group, L.L.C., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89549 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 4, 2007).

3.Malice.

The issue of malice in publication was for the jury, since the great weight of authority supports the view that the motive by which defendant was activated must be determined by the triers of the fact whenever the evidence raises the issue. Kremer v. Kopmeyer, 418 S.W.2d 237, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1967 ).

As used in this section, the phrase “maliciously made,” with respect to defamatory publications, means a statement made solely for the purpose of causing harm to the person defamed. Pearce v. Courier-Journal, 683 S.W.2d 633, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 496 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

4.Sovereign Immunity.

This section did not waive the doctrine of sovereign immunity in action for slander against the school board for statement by a member thereof. Carter v. Pfannenschmidt, 467 S.W.2d 777, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1971 ).

NOTES TO UNPUBLISHED DECISIONS

1.Privileged Communications.

Unpublished decision: Certain statements in an affidavit made preparatory to the filing of a petition to set aside a judgment on the ground of fraud were libelous per se unless they were privileged, and they were privileged if they were material and pertinent to the cause, regardless of whether the statements were made maliciously or in good faith. Schmitt v. Mann, 291 Ky. 80 , 163 S.W.2d 281, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Unpublished decision: Dismissal of a libel complaint filed against a newspaper was proper because the term “carjacking” was a fair and accurate description of the alleged facts giving rise to an accused’s criminal charges; moreover, the newspaper article was absolutely privileged under KRS 411.060 . The accused’s complaint was devoid of any allegation of maliciousness, and he did not request an explanation or contradiction concerning the article. Akins v. News Enter., 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 954 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2011), review denied, ordered not published, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 299 (Ky. Nov. 16, 2011).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Venue of a lien for libel, KRS 452.460 .

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Mitchell, Beyond McCall: Toward a Neutral Reportage Privilege in Kentucky, Volume 55, No. 1, Winter 1991 Ky. Bench & B. 32.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Mobley, Torts, 70 Ky. L.J. 527 (1981-82).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Elder, Kentucky Defamation and Privacy Law — The Last Decade, 23 N. Ky. L. Rev. 231 (1996).

2012 Law & Informatics Issue: Article: The Emerging Conflict between Newsworthiness and the Right to be Forgotten, 39 N. Ky. L. Rev. 119 (2012).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Alleging Some Qualified Privilege Defenses, Form 129.07.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Other Defenses Applicable to Media Defendants, Form 129.08.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.00.

ALR

Libel and slander: Privilege of reporting judicial proceedings as extending to proceeding held in secret or as to which record is sealed by court. 43 A.L.R.3d 634.

411.061. Actions against a radio or television broadcasting station for damages for publication of a defamatory statement — Definitions.

  1. In any action against a radio or television broadcasting station for damages for the publication of a defamatory statement by a visual or sound radio broadcast, the plaintiff shall recover no more than special damages unless he shall allege and prove that he made a sufficient demand for correction and that the radio or television broadcasting station failed to make conspicuous and timely publication of said correction.
  2. A “sufficient demand for correction” is a demand for correction which is in writing; which is signed by the plaintiff or his duly authorized attorney or agent; which specifies the statement or statements claimed to be false and defamatory, states wherein they are false, and sets forth the true facts; and which is delivered to the defendant prior to the commencement of the action.
  3. A “correction” is either (a) the publication of an acknowledgment that the statement or statements specified as false and defamatory in the plaintiff’s demand for correction are erroneous, or (b) the publication of the plaintiff’s statement of the true facts (as set forth in his demand for correction) or a fair summary thereof, exclusive of any portions thereof which are defamatory of another, obscene, or otherwise improper for publication. If the demand for correction has specified two (2) or more statements as false and defamatory, the correction may deal with some of such statements pursuant to (a) above and with other of such statements pursuant to (b) above.
  4. A “conspicuous publication” in a visual or sound radio broadcast is a publication which is broadcast at substantially the same time of day, and with the same sending power, as the statement or statements specified as false and defamatory in the demand for correction. A publication in a particular manner which is agreeable to the plaintiff shall in any event be deemed “conspicuous.”
  5. A “timely publication” in a visual or sound radio broadcast is a publication within one (1) business day after the day on which a sufficient demand for correction is received by the defendant. A “business day” is any day other than a Sunday or legal holiday. A publication on a particular day which is agreeable to the plaintiff shall in any event be deemed “timely.”
  6. “Special damages” are pecuniary damages which the plaintiff alleges and proves that he has suffered in respect to his property, business, trade, profession, or occupation (including such amounts of money as the plaintiff alleges and proves he has expended as a proximate result of the alleged defamation), and no other.

History. Enact. Acts 1956, ch. 43, § 1(1), effective May 18, 1956.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Jury Instructions.

In an amusement park’s defamation suit arising out of statements broadcast by a television station following an accident involving a roller coaster at the park, the trial court’s instructions to the jury on punitive damages, which included language from KRS 411.061 , was not erroneous. The jury found actual malice and also malice and oppression as those terms are defined in KRS 411.184 by clear and convincing evidence. Ky. Kingdom Amusement Co. v. Belo Ky., Inc., 179 S.W.3d 785, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 2005 ).

Cited:

Belo Ky., Inc. v. Ky. Kingdom Amusement Co., 75 S.W.3d 218, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000), rehearing denied, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 1188 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001), rev’d, 179 S.W.3d 785, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 2005 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Mobley, Torts, 70 Ky. L.J. 527 (1981-82).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Other Defenses Applicable to Media Defendants, Form 129.08.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Television Station for Libel of Professional, Form 129.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.00.

411.062. Defense to actions for damages for publication of a defamatory statement against a radio or television broadcasting station.

If in any action for damages for the publication of a defamatory statement on a visual or sound radio broadcast, the defendant proves that said defamatory statement has been uttered by one other than the owner, licensee, or operator of the broadcasting station or one acting as the agent or employee of said owner, licensee or operator, the action shall be dismissed unless the plaintiff shall allege and prove that such owner, licensee, operator, agency or employee has failed to exercise due care to prevent the publication of said statement in said broadcast; provided, however, that bona fide compliance with any federal law or the regulation of any federal regulatory agency shall be construed as the exercise of due care; and provided, further, that in no event shall the owner, operator or licensee of a radio or television broadcasting station, or one acting as the agent or employee of such owner, operator or licensee, be held liable for the utterance of a defamatory statement in a visual or sound radio broadcast over the facilities of such station by any person speaking as a legally qualified candidate for public office, or on behalf of any such candidate.

History. Enact. Acts 1956, ch. 43, § 1(2), effective May 18, 1956.

Compiler’s Notes.

A comma following the word “however” in the first proviso has been inserted by the Reviser of Statutes.

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Alleging Some Absolute Privilege Defenses, Form 129.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Other Defenses Applicable to Media Defendants, Form 129.08.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Television Station for Libel of Professional, Form 129.04.

411.070. Liability for falsely stating financial condition.

Any person who violates KRS 517.090 shall be personally liable to any person damaged by the violation for the amount of the damage. This section shall not release the principal for whom the person may have acted from any liability, but the person liable and the principal for whom he acted in violating this section shall be jointly and severally liable.

History. 1213b-2: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 406, § 314.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Oral False Representations.

To make one civilly liable for false representations as to credit of himself or another, he must make those representations in writing. Ramsey v. Reynierson, 200 Ky. 624 , 255 S.W. 274, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1923 ), rev’g Vertrees v. Head & Matthews, 138 Ky. 83 , 127 S.W. 523, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 43 ( Ky. 1910 ). See Hill v. Halmhuber, 225 Ky. 394 , 9 S.W.2d 55, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 793 ( Ky. 1928 ).

This section did not repeal the common-law action of deceit where the false representations were not in writing and an oral misrepresentation of financial standing to influence purchase of stock was actionable. Hill v. Halmhuber, 225 Ky. 394 , 9 S.W.2d 55, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 793 ( Ky. 1928 ), rev’g Ramsey v. Reynierson, 200 Ky. 624 , 255 S.W. 274, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1923 ), so far as in conflict.

Cited:

Local Industrial Finance Co. v. McDougale, 404 S.W.2d 789, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 307 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Blue Sky Law, sale in violation voidable, KRS 292.480 .

Issuing false financial statement, Class A misdemeanor, KRS 517.090 .

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.00.

411.080. Wrongful distress or attachment — Reparation.

If property is distrained or attached without good cause the owner may, in an action against the party suing out the distress or attachment, recover damages for the wrongful seizure. If the property is sold he may also recover damages for the sale, and the defendant’s costs in the distress or attachment, including reasonable attorney’s fees. The plaintiff shall not be required to allege or prove malice on the part of the defendant under this section.

History. 7.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section has no reference to attachment bonds; no one other than the party suing out the distress or attachment is liable under it. Martin v. Turpin, 108 Ky. 709 , 57 S.W. 459, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 424 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 88 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Defendant, in action to recover unpaid balance of purchase price of goods sold under conditional sale contract, may not counterclaim for damages suffered by reason of wrongful attachment of goods in action. Patton v. Clay Motor Co., 290 Ky. 84 , 160 S.W.2d 335, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 346 ( Ky. 1942 ).

2.Tenant’s Remedies for Wrongful Distress.

If tenant prefers not to do so or is unable to replevy or to discharge under KRS 383.063 (now repealed) or suspend under KRS 383.068 (now repealed), he may bring an action for recovery of the property under KRS 383.061 (now repealed) or he may proceed under this section or KRS 383.020 or at common law to recover damages for wrongfully procuring the distress warrant. Board v. Luigart, 150 Ky. 791 , 151 S.W. 9, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 998 ( Ky. 1912 ). See Rothenburger v. Dix, 254 Ky. 107 , 71 S.W.2d 30, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1934 ).

3.Attachment by Constructive Possession.

In action for wrongful attachment of well-drilling machinery and equipment, proof that sheriff went to premises on which owners were drilling a well for landowner, levied upon the machine, and took constructive possession was sufficient to establish that an attachment was made as against contention of defendants that there was never any attachment because sheriff did not physically remove the machine from the premises. Osborne v. Durbin, 301 Ky. 412 , 192 S.W.2d 198, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 497 ( Ky. 1946 ).

4.Without Good Cause.

That property was wrongfully attached is concluded by the judgment discharging the attachment, and the property owner’s right to maintain an action directly against those who wrongfully caused the attachment to be issued and levied upon his property, instead of suing upon the attachment bond, is specifically conferred by this section. Crawford v. Staples, 184 Ky. 477 , 212 S.W. 119, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1919 ).

In suit for recovery of damages based upon attachment bond executed to obtain order of attachment, discharge of the attachment on the merits is conclusive that it was issued without probable cause. Watkins v. Carter, 267 Ky. 241 , 101 S.W.2d 932, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 300 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In an action under this section, the fundamental issue is whether or not the property was attached without good cause, and the plaintiff is not required to allege or prove malice. City Lumber Co. v. Barrett, 327 S.W.2d 402, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1959 ).

It has been recognized that an attachment suit is wrongful if the defendant is not indebted to the plaintiff and, if there is some question on this, it is a matter for the jury. City Lumber Co. v. Barrett, 327 S.W.2d 402, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1959 ).

The obvious purpose of agreed order appointing receiver in the original suit was to permit the continuation of timber operations which the company’s attachment had held up and was in no sense an acknowledgment or judicial admission of debtor of his indebtedness and a justification of the attachment. City Lumber Co. v. Barrett, 327 S.W.2d 402, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1959 ).

5.Defenses.

Advice of counsel obtained by company after suit was filed where full and true disclosure was questioned was not a defense to timber operator’s subsequent suit against company for damages for wrongful attachment. City Lumber Co. v. Barrett, 327 S.W.2d 402, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Where malice is not an element of the cause of action, advice of counsel is not a defense as a matter of law. City Lumber Co. v. Barrett, 327 S.W.2d 402, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1959 ).

6.Damages.

A suit to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent creates a lis pendens lien on the property sought to be thus subjected without any attachment, or any indorsement on the summons of the object of the action, and as the attachment in such suit does not cause the damage, no damages can be recovered for its levy. Caldwell v. Deposit Bank, 109 Ky. 197 , 58 S.W. 589, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 684 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1900 ).

As to such property as is owned and held for use, the criterion of damages for the loss of the use is the value of such use, but where the property is not owned and held by the owner for use but for sale, the value of the loss of possession, not being capable of estimation on a basis of its usable value, as it has no such value to the owner, is estimated on the basis of the deterioration or depreciation in its salable value caused by the attachment. Crawford v. Staples, 184 Ky. 477 , 212 S.W. 119, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1919 ).

The measure of damages for the loss of use of property used by owners in their business while held under an attachment unlawfully obtained was the value of the use of property during the time owners were deprived of possession. Watkins v. Carter, 267 Ky. 241 , 101 S.W.2d 932, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 300 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The mere fact that the seller, under a conditional sales contract, retained title to the car certainly was not inconsistent with nor denied the plaintiff, in an action for wrongful attachment, the right to the use and possession of the car which he had acquired under the contract, and he could not recover damages for loss of use and possession prior to the time the car was wrongfully attached without default in payment. Watkins v. Carter, 267 Ky. 241 , 101 S.W.2d 932, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 300 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In action against sureties on attachment bond for damages resulting from loss of use of well-drilling machine during period of alleged wrongful attachment, it was not necessary for plaintiff to show that he could have operated the machine at a profit. Osborne v. Durbin, 301 Ky. 412 , 192 S.W.2d 198, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 497 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In a wrongful garnishment action, attorney fees incurred in establishing the right to the funds in question are recoverable as damages. Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Burton, 922 S.W.2d 385, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 18 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

7.Seizure of Property of Third Persons.

The damages recoverable for the wrongful seizure of the property under an attachment by direction of plaintiff therein, where no attachment was sought against the persons whose property was seized, do not include attorney’s fees but only the actual and direct damages to the property itself. Farmers' & Shippers' Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Gibbons, 107 Ky. 611 , 55 S.W. 2, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1348 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Where no attachment was sought against a person or his property but his name was inserted in the copies of the attachment by error, he could not maintain an action for the wrongful suing out of the attachment; his cause of action was an action for damages for the wrongful seizure of his property by attachment at the direction of the plaintiff in the attachment. Farmers' & Shippers' Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Gibbons, 107 Ky. 611 , 55 S.W. 2, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1348 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Intervening claimants, in an action between the attachment defendant and the plaintiff who were finally on appeal adjudged owners of the property, could sue the attachment plaintiff for damages and they were not concerned with whether he had grounds for the attachment or acted without probable cause but the basis of their action was that the property was seized by the sheriff at the insistence of plaintiff and kept for a period of nine months; the question of ownership rested on the final judgment on appeal and not the judgment in trial court which was reversed on appeal. Eureka Dry Cleaners v. Stone Bros. & Shrout, 261 Ky. 15 , 86 S.W.2d 1032, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 582 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Where property of third person is seized and taken from its true owner by unlawful attachment, there can be no recovery of counsel fees and expenses incurred in establishing ownership of the property; the measure of damages where the property is used by the owners is the value of the use of the property during the time they were deprived of its possession. Eureka Dry Cleaners v. Stone Bros. & Shrout, 261 Ky. 15 , 86 S.W.2d 1032, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 582 ( Ky. 1935 ).

A third party whose property was wrongfully attached may not maintain an action for malicious prosecution based upon attachment issued in action between other parties. H. Eilerman & Sons v. Nestley, 285 Ky. 412 , 148 S.W.2d 287, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1941 ).

The only remedy or cause of action, if any, for wrongful attachment of third party’s automobile is for damage for its wrongful seizure and detention. H. Eilerman & Sons v. Nestley, 285 Ky. 412 , 148 S.W.2d 287, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1941 ).

8.Malicious Prosecution.

If attachment suit terminated in favor of the attachment plaintiff and the judgment was not void, the fact that the attachment suit was brought with malicious intent did not give cause of action for maliciously prosecuting an attachment. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Edwards, 281 Ky. 693 , 137 S.W.2d 344, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1940 ).

To sustain an action for malicious attachment, the plaintiff must show that the attachment action terminated favorably to him, since otherwise it was brought with probable cause. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Edwards, 281 Ky. 693 , 137 S.W.2d 344, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where attachment affidavit did not contain allegation that claim was just, the attachment issued thereon was not void but voidable and could not be attacked collaterally in suit for malicious attachment. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Edwards, 281 Ky. 693 , 137 S.W.2d 344, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where defendant in attachment suit alleged to have been maliciously brought did not in any way directly attack the validity of the proceeding, he could not attack it collaterally in an action for maliciously prosecuting an attachment unless the attachment was void and not merely voidable. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Edwards, 281 Ky. 693 , 137 S.W.2d 344, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In action for malicious prosecution, evidence was not sufficient to establish that as a natural and proximate result of the closing of the store for a ten-day period, there would be continued loss of profits for such period extending into the future as to warrant substantial award of damages based on long-term loss for the wrongful attachment. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

In applying the rule that before a party has a cause of action for malicious prosecution the lawsuit or proceeding must terminate in his favor, defendants had a proper adjudicated basis on which to rest their claim where plaintiff maliciously prosecuted an indemnity proceeding under KRS 425.375 (now repealed) and wrongfully obtained an attachment, which proceeding terminated favorably to defendants when the court discharged the attachment; the fact that plaintiff sued on notes on an action which accrued after the attachment proceedings and recovered judgment on the notes was not an issue. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

In cases for malicious prosecution, some latitude must be allowed jury in assessing damages. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Only such damages were recoverable as were the natural and proximate result of wrongful act of attachment. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Remote, conjectural or speculative damages may not be recovered in counterclaim for malicious prosecution. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Since want of probable cause and actual malice must be shown to recover for malicious prosecution, advice of counsel, given upon full disclosure of facts, constitutes a defense. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

The award of $20,000 for the combined items of damages (loss of profits, loss of reputation and standing, humiliation, embarrassment and mental suffering) resulting from wrongful attachment was so excessive as to have been the result of passion and prejudice and the entire verdict should be set aside and a new trial granted on the question of damages. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

The right of a party to assert a common-law cause of action for malicious prosecution based upon wrongful attachment is specifically recognized and the remedy is available even though the complaining party could have sued on attachment bond or under this section. Blankenship v. Staton, 348 S.W.2d 925, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1961 ).

9.Attorneys’s Fees

Trial court could award the Housing Authority its requested legal fees where a party could recover his attorney’s fees incurred in resisting or attacking a wrongful attachment, and under KRS 411.080 , reasonable attorney’s fees were recoverable in a wrongful garnishment action. Brooks v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Hous. Auth., 332 S.W.3d 85, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 219 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

Cited:

Duo—Therm Div., Motor Wheel Corp. v. Sheergrain, Inc., 504 S.W.2d 689, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1973 ); Riley v. West Kentucky Production Credit Asso., 603 S.W.2d 916, 1980 Ky. App. LEXIS 347 (Ky. Ct. App. 1980).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Grounds and procedure for attachment, KRS 425.301 , 425.302 , 425.306 to 425.309 , 425.316 .

Wrongful distress or attachment for rent, KRS 383.020 .

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Mapother, Attorneys’ Fees Recoverable in Kentucky Litigation, Vol. 44, No. 4, October 1980, Ky. Bench & Bar 28.

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Recover for Wrongful Attachment, Form 150.18.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Verified Complaint in Action on Attachment Bond, Form 150.17.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Abuse of Legal Process, § 27.06.

411.090. Liability of person gaming on premises without permission of owner.

If any person shall, in any house, boat, float or premises, without the permission of the owner, controller or occupier, engage in any hazard or game in which money or property is bet, won or lost, he shall be liable to the owner, controller or occupier for all damages and costs, legal and extraordinary, sustained in consequence thereof.

History. 1976.

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Penalty for permitting gambling on premises, KRS 528.070 .

Permitting gambling, Penal Code, KRS 528.070 .

411.095. Liability for stealing or damaging goods of retailer or wholesaler.

  1. An adult or emancipated minor who damages, destroys, or takes possession of any goods, wares, or merchandise, stored, displayed, or offered for sale by any wholesale or retail store or other mercantile establishment, or who alters the price indicia of the merchandise, in violation of the provisions of KRS Chapters 512 and 514, without having paid the purchase price thereof, shall be civilly liable to the owner for actual damages, if any, and for a penalty to the owner in the amount of the retail value of the merchandise not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500), plus an additional penalty to the owner of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
  2. The custodial parents or legal guardian having custody of an unemancipated minor who damages, destroys, or takes possession of any goods, wares, or merchandise, stored, displayed, or offered for sale by any wholesale or retail store or other mercantile establishment, or who alters the price indicia of the merchandise, which would be a public offense, without having paid the purchase price thereof, shall be civilly liable to the owner for actual damages, if any, and for a penalty to the owner in the amount of the retail value of the merchandise not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500), plus an additional penalty to the owner of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than two hundred fifty dollars ($250). For purposes of this subsection, liability shall not be imposed upon any governmental entity, private agency, or foster parents assigned responsibility for the minor child pursuant to a court order or action of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, or any agency thereunder.
  3. For the purposes of this section, “owner” shall include any agent or employee of the owner.
  4. A conviction of an offense under KRS Chapters 512 or 514 is not a condition precedent to the maintenance of a civil action under this section.
  5. Civil liability under this section shall not be limited by any other law that limits liability of parents of minor children.
  6. An action for recovery of damages, or penalty, or both, and costs under this section may be brought in any court of competent jurisdiction, including the small claims division of District Court, if the total amount sought does not exceed the jurisdictional limit of the respective court.
  7. The fact that an owner has a right to bring an action against any individual as provided in this section shall not limit the right of the owner to demand, in writing, that a person who is liable under this section remit the amount of the claim prior to the commencement of any legal action.
  8. Judgments, but not claims, arising under this section may be assigned.
  9. In addition to any civil damages or penalties, or both, which may be recovered under this section, a judgment for recovery shall also include court costs.
  10. Civil claims under this section shall apply to those claims which arise after July 13, 1990.

History. Enact. Acts 1990, ch. 162, § 1, effective July 13, 1990; 1998, ch. 426, § 598, effective July 15, 1998; 2005, ch. 99, § 646, effective June 20, 2005.

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, 1991 Supp., Minors, § 30.16.

411.100. Liability of city for property damaged by mob.

If, within any city, any church, convent, chapel, dwelling house, house used or designed for the transaction of lawful business, vessel or shipyard, railroad or property of any kind belonging to any street or other railroad company, or any article of personal property is damaged, or if any property is taken away or damaged by any riotous or tumultuous assemblage of people, the full amount of the damage done may be recovered by the person injured by action against the city, if the city authorities themselves, or with the aid of their own citizens, could have prevented the damage. However, no such liability shall be incurred by the city unless the city authorities had notice or good reason to believe that a riot or tumultuous assemblage was about to take place in time to prevent the destruction, either by their own force or by the aid of the citizens of the city. No person may maintain an action under this section if he has unlawfully contributed by word or deed toward exciting or inflaming the tumult or riot, or if he failed to do what he reasonably could toward preventing, allaying or suppressing it.

History. 8.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section does not authorize a recovery against a city for personal injury resulting from the malfeasance or negligence of city officers. Dudley v. Flemingsburg, 115 Ky. 5 , 72 S.W. 327, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1804 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 66 ( Ky. 1903 ). See Board of Park Comm'rs v. Prinz, 127 Ky. 460 , 105 S.W. 948, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 359 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 153 ( Ky. 1907 ).

2.Riotous and Tumultuous Assemblage.

An assemblage of 1,000 people in the main street of a city, obstructing the street and discharging bombs, skyrockets, Roman candles and other missiles, endangering life and preventing use of street for business purposes, was a “riotous and tumultuous assemblage of people,” within this section. Madisonville v. Bishop, 113 Ky. 106 , 67 S.W. 269, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2363 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 25 ( Ky. 1902 ).

3.Notice.

Evidence did not show that the city authorities had notice or good reason to believe that an assault would be made on tobacco warehouses by “night riders” so owner of tobacco warehouses burned by the “night riders” could not recover from the city under this section. Tandy v. Hopkinsville, 160 Ky. 220 , 169 S.W. 703, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 431 ( Ky. 1914 ).

A city did not incur liability under this section where the city had no notice of imminent danger to the specific property involved, although it was aware of riots occurring in the city, and where city, county and state police were left in the area in which the damage occurred but were unable to prevent the destruction. Louisville v. Habeeb, 556 S.W.2d 665, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 522 ( Ky. 1977 ).

4.Liability of City.

The citizen who comes within the shield of this statute has a right to depend on the city for the protection of his property, and under this statute, if the city fails in its duty, its liability is not diminished by the failure of the citizens to have it guarded since the statute, subject to specified conditions, imposes upon the city a liability, and this liability it can escape only by performing its duty as described in the statute. Tandy v. Hopkinsville, 160 Ky. 220 , 169 S.W. 703, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 431 ( Ky. 1914 ).

5.Guards.

The private citizen who owns property in a city may of course employ guards and resort to other lawful methods to protect his property, if he desires to do so, but his failure to do this, although he may have reason to anticipate its destruction by a mob, will not excuse the city from its duty to protect the property of its citizens from injury or destruction. Tandy v. Hopkinsville, 160 Ky. 220 , 169 S.W. 703, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 431 ( Ky. 1914 ).

6.Police Officers.

Statute making a city liable for damages to property by riotous and tumultuous assemblages of people did not apply to personal injuries to persons by police officers but the police officers were personally liable for their malfeasance or nonfeasance in office. Jolly's Adm'x v. Hawesville, 89 Ky. 279 , 12 S.W. 313, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 477 , 1889 Ky. LEXIS 128 ( Ky. 1889 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Criminal conspiracy, KRS 506.040 , 506.050 .

Collateral References.

ALR

Duty and liability of municipality as regards barriers for protection of adult pedestrians who may unintentionally deviate from street or highway into marginal or external hazards. 44 A.L.R.2d 633.

Liability of municipality for failure to erect traffic warnings against entering or using street which is partially barred or obstructed by construction or improvement work. 52 A.L.R.2d 689.

Liability for injury or damage by tree or limb overhanging street or highway. 54 A.L.R.2d 1195.

Liability of state, municipality, or public agency for vehicle accident occurring because of accumulation of water on street or highway. 61 A.L.R.2d 425.

Liability of municipality for injury or death resulting from temporary condition or obstruction in street in connection with holiday, entertainment, parade, or other special event. 84 A.L.R.2d 508.

Existence of actionable defect in street or highway proper question for court or for jury. 1 A.L.R.3d 496.

Municipal liability for personal injury or death under mob violence or antilynching statutes. 26 A.L.R.3d 1142.

Municipal liability for property damaged under mob violence statutes. 26 A.L.R.3d 1198.

Governmental liability for failure to reduce vegetation obscuring view at railroad crossing or at street or highway intersection. 22 A.L.R.4th 624.

411.110. Action against city for injury from defect in thoroughfare — Service of notice.

No action shall be maintained against any city in this state because of any injury growing out of any defect in the condition of any bridge, street, sidewalk, alley or other public thoroughfare, unless notice has been given to the mayor, city clerk or clerk of the board of aldermen in the manner provided for the service of notice in actions in the Rules of Civil Procedure. This notice shall be filed within ninety (90) days of the occurrence for which damage is claimed, stating the time of and place where the injury was received and the character and circumstances of the injury, and that the person injured will claim damages therefor from the city.

History. 2741e-24: amend Acts 1954, ch. 171.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

This section does not purport to prescribe a period of limitation within which suit must be brought but merely requires the giving of notice as a prerequisite to the right to sue and thus does not violate constitutional prohibitions against class or special legislation. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

2.Purpose.

The purposes of the statute are to give the city an opportunity to investigate the scene of an accident and correct any defective condition, if such exists, to enable the city to investigate and evaluate the case so that if liability exists it might have an opportunity to settle it without long and expensive litigation, and to give the city an opportunity to protect its funds against unjust and illegal claims. Louisville v. O'Neill, 440 S.W.2d 265, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1969 ).

3.Construction.

Substantial compliance with this section is not enough. Treitz v. Louisville, 292 Ky. 654 , 167 S.W.2d 860, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1943 ).

The statute must be strictly complied with. Elsemere v. Brown, 297 Ky. 323 , 180 S.W.2d 86, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1944 ). See Louisville v. O'Neill, 440 S.W.2d 265, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1969 ).

This section is not a statute of limitations. Roehrig v. Louisville, 454 S.W.2d 703, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 288 ( Ky. 1970 ).

4.Defect.

Branch of tree overhanging city street, which dislodged body of a passing truck with resulting injury to a pedestrian, was a “defect” in the street within the meaning of this section. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The word “defect,” as used in this section, includes any defect, whether overhead or underfoot, which it is the duty of the city to correct to render the street in a reasonably safe condition for travel by the public. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

5.Notice.

Giving oral notice of accident to mayor was not sufficient, even though mayor caused claimant to be examined by physicians and expressed opinion that claimant should be compensated by the city. Ballinger v. Harlan, 294 Ky. 72 , 170 S.W.2d 912, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1943 ).

The statute, while not expressly saying so, clearly provides for a written notice. Irvine v. Cox, 296 Ky. 680 , 178 S.W.2d 199, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 609 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Failure to give notice as required by this section applies to tort actions against cities. Louisville v. Pirtle, 297 Ky. 553 , 180 S.W.2d 303, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 747 ( Ky. 1944 ), overruled in part, Haney v. Lexington, 386 S.W.2d 738, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 178 ( Ky. 1964 ).

One of the purposes of the notice required by this section is to permit the city to investigate the cause of the accident, and to determine the condition of the defect claimed at the time of the accident. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The requirement of giving the notice required by this section applies to all persons irrespective of age or disability and is not suspended during the infancy of a claimant. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Notice required by this section is jurisdictional and failure to give it is fatal. Broaddus v. Cox, 300 Ky. 501 , 189 S.W.2d 726, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 586 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Giving of notice under this section is not a prerequisite to the bringing of an action for wrongful death by personal representative of person killed as a result of alleged defect in street. Spangler's Adm'r v. Middlesboro, 301 Ky. 237 , 191 S.W.2d 414, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 735 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The city’s actual or constructive notice of defect in thoroughfare is not a substitute for notice. Berry v. Louisville, 249 S.W.2d 818, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 882 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The purpose of notice is “to give the city an opportunity to investigate the cause of the accident and to determine the condition of the defect complained of, at or about the time of the accident, as well as to permit an examination of the injuries alleged to have been sustained by the claimant.” Berry v. Louisville, 249 S.W.2d 818, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 882 ( Ky. 1952 ).

An action could not be maintained against a city for an injury growing out of a condition in a public sidewalk—a loose lid or top on a city-owned water meter box—when notice of the injury was not served on the city within 90 days of the occurrence of the injury in accordance with this section, since the water meter box was located in the sidewalk and the statute specifically covers defects in the sidewalk and does not exclude defects in a sidewalk of any kind whether of proprietary or governmental origin. Hancock v. Anchorage, 299 S.W.2d 794, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 426 ( Ky. 1957 ). See City of Elizabethtown v. Baker, 373 S.W.2d 593, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 165 ( Ky. 1963 ).

The notice required by this section relates to actions against the city and is not required in an action against a municipal water and electric board of a second-class city operated as an independent board under the authority of KRS 96.172 . McIntosh v. Electric & Water Plant Board, 394 S.W.2d 471, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The reason for the requirement of notice is to provide an opportunity for the city to investigate all the circumstances and prepare its defense. Dukes v. Louisville, 415 S.W.2d 110, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 304 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Although one of the primary purposes of the notice is to give the city an opportunity to investigate the cause of the accident and to determine the condition of the defect complained of, another purpose is to enable the city to examine the injuries alleged to have been sustained. Roehrig v. Louisville, 454 S.W.2d 703, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 288 ( Ky. 1970 ).

This section contemplates that the notice is to be given by or at the direction of the injured person. Roehrig v. Louisville, 454 S.W.2d 703, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 288 ( Ky. 1970 ).

KRS 411.110 and CR 5.02, when construed together, mean that the notice required by the statute must be served on the “mayor, city clerk or clerk of the board of aldermen” by delivering or mailing a copy of the notice to one of these enumerated officials. Dreifus v. City of Grayson, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 16 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 16, 2001).

On a matter of first impression, the exterior stairs attached to the police department building were not a public thoroughfare for purposes of the Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.110 notice requirement where the stairs did not merely provide a means of access to the building, but were physically part of the structure, and as such, they were not a public thoroughfare in the same way as were bridges, street, sidewalks, or alleys. Krietemeyer v. City of Madisonville, 576 S.W.3d 157, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 230 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

6.—Condition Precedent to Action.

The giving of the notice required by this section is a condition precedent to the bringing of an action. Whether notice has been given is a question of jurisdiction which can be raised at any time during the action. The fact that the city filed a motion to make the complaint more definite and certain before demurring on ground of failure to give notice would not waive the lack of notice. Treitz v. Louisville, 292 Ky. 654 , 167 S.W.2d 860, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1943 ).

The giving of notice is a condition precedent to bringing suit and is jurisdictional. Elsemere v. Brown, 297 Ky. 323 , 180 S.W.2d 86, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1944 ). See Treitz v. Louisville, 292 Ky. 654 , 167 S.W.2d 860, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1943 ); Dukes v. Louisville, 415 S.W.2d 110, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 304 ( Ky. 1967 ).

The giving of the notice is a condition precedent to maintaining an action against the city. Elsemere v. Brown, 297 Ky. 323 , 180 S.W.2d 86, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The giving of notice under this section is a condition precedent to the maintaining of an action against a city for damages arising from a defect in a sidewalk, regardless of whether the city had actual knowledge of the defect. Reibel v. Woolworth, 301 Ky. 76 , 190 S.W.2d 866, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 693 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Compliance with this section is a prerequisite to the right to invoke the help of the courts. Hancock v. Anchorage, 299 S.W.2d 794, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 426 ( Ky. 1957 ).

The notice required by this section is a mandatory prerequisite to an action and a notice of an accident in which several people were injured which was otherwise sufficient but which omitted the name of one of the injured persons precluded the omitted person from maintaining an action although the city had actual notice. Dawson Springs v. Reddish, 344 S.W.2d 826, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 259 ( Ky. 1961 ).

7.—Persons to Receive.

Acceptance of service of notice from plaintiff’s attorney by city clerk did not constitute waiver of immunity from suit and was a sufficient compliance with this section. Elsemere v. Brown, 297 Ky. 323 , 180 S.W.2d 86, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Service of notice of action as required by this section had to be on the persons named in the statute and service upon the city attorney was held insufficient. Wellman v. Owensboro, 282 S.W.2d 628, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 259 ( Ky. 1955 ).

8.—Sufficiency.

Mere mailing of letter to mayor of city is not sufficient compliance with this section, and the fact that the city attorney replies to the letter and denies the liability of the city does not estop the city to rely on the failure to give notice in the statutory form. Treitz v. Louisville, 292 Ky. 654 , 167 S.W.2d 860, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Commencement of action against city and service of summons on mayor, within 90 days of accident, does not constitute compliance with the requirement that notice be given, even though the pleadings in the action contain all the required information. This section must be literally complied with. Ballinger v. Harlan, 294 Ky. 72 , 170 S.W.2d 912, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1943 ).

The service of a bare summons on the city does not furnish the information required in the notice. Irvine v. Cox, 296 Ky. 680 , 178 S.W.2d 199, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 609 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Notice served on mayor within 90 days of accident setting out that plaintiff suffered “a broken hip and other injuries” on a certain date, that the injuries were due to defective condition of sidewalk at a certain location, and that she intended to claim damages from city was sufficient to satisfy requirements of this section. Louisville v. Verst, 308 Ky. 46 , 213 S.W.2d 517, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Notice stating a named person sustained injuries to his head on a given date and time in front of a street address in a named city and that his automobile was also damaged was inadequate as it clearly did not set out the “character and circumstances” of the injury where from reading the notice one could not tell how the injuries were received and it did not state whether the accident occurred in the street, on the sidewalk, or at the curb and did not set out the alleged defect in the thoroughfare. Berry v. Louisville, 249 S.W.2d 818, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 882 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Notice was held adequate as to the persons named in it although it omitted the name of one of the persons injured in the accident, the time of day the accident occurred, and the exact manhole at which the accident occurred where the street was five (5) blocks long and had at least five (5) manholes in it and gave the cause of the accident as “a manhole protruding upwards above the surface” of a named street in a named city over which street the injured persons were traveling in an automobile. Dawson Springs v. Reddish, 344 S.W.2d 826, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 259 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Notice was not indefinite but it was too specific or specific to the point of being erroneous and thus insufficient where it stated plaintiff slipped and fell on second section of sidewalk when in fact she slipped and fell on section three (3) of sidewalk and city discovered at the onset that the accident could not have happened as specifically stated in the notice because of the newness of section two (2) which lulled it into justifiable belief that there was no need for any further investigation. Dukes v. Louisville, 415 S.W.2d 110, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 304 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where the notice given to the city of the injury did not specify in what way the street was defective nor attempt to describe the personal injuries the plaintiff sustained, the notice was defective. Louisville v. O'Neill, 440 S.W.2d 265, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1969 ).

The plaintiff satisfied the notice requirement by leaving a copy of a notice letter at the mayor’s office with the person in charge thereof and by mailing the notice to the mayor on the 90th day. Dreifus v. City of Grayson, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 16 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 16, 2001).

9.— —Correct Date.

Where timely notice of accident was transmitted to municipality, failure to give correct date of accident was fatal and dismissal of suit was not reversible error, since the correct date of any alleged accident is an essential and mandatory element of a statutory notice. Baldridge v. Ashland, 613 S.W.2d 430, 1981 Ky. App. LEXIS 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 1981).

Where plaintiff fell on a sidewalk outside of a city building and provided pre-suit notice indicating that she sustained injury “on or about January 18” and where plaintiff learned after filing suit that the actual date of her injury was January 20 and she amended her complaint to reflect the accurate date, the trial court erred in granting a judgment on the pleadings in favor of the city based upon its argument that plaintiff failed to strictly comply with the statutory notice requirement regarding the time of her injury because the phrase “on or about,” when used in connection with a definite point of time, did not put the time at large but indicated that it was stated with approximate accuracy. A period of three or four months would not be within the referenced time frame, but “on or about” a certain date could cover a period of several days; clearly, two days was within the span of several days, and thus, notice that an accident occurred “on or about” a particular date included a date two days subsequent thereto. Denton v. City of Florence, 301 S.W.3d 23, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 2009 ).

10.—Third Party Joinder.

Where the executor of an estate was sued and the executor joined the city as a party alleging a claim for contribution, the failure of the executor to give the notice required by this section would not bar the prosecution of a claim for contribution. Roehrig v. Louisville, 454 S.W.2d 703, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 288 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Cited in:

Louisville Water Co. v. Wells, 664 S.W.2d 525, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 464 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984); Schilling v. Schoenle, 782 S.W.2d 630, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 5 ( Ky. 1990 ); Carter v. Cornwell, 983 F.2d 52, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 118 (6th Cir. 1993).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Claim for Injury Caused by Dangerous Condition of Sidewalk, Form 331.16.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Municipal Corporation for Injuries Sustained Because Shrubbery Obscured View of Oncoming Traffic, Form 331.17.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Municipality for Injuries Caused by Dangerous Condition of Roadway and Underpass, Form 135.27.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Municipality for Injuries Caused by Dangerous Condition on Shoulder of Road, Form 130.11.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Injury by Falling on Defective Sidewalk, Form 331.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Notice of Personal Injury under KRS 411.110 , Form 331.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Automobiles/No Fault/Uninsured Motorist, § 135.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Municipal Corporations, § 331.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 331 Municipal Corporations, § 331.syn.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Owners and Occupiers of Real Estate, § 24.42.

411.115. Notice of action against governmental unit for damages from use of airport required — Contents.

No action shall be brought against any governmental unit for damages, noise abatement or otherwise, arising from the operation of aircraft into or out of an airport unless written notice is given to such governmental unit within seven (7) days of the time within which each such operation occurred. Such notice shall state: (1) The location of the property affected; (2) The approximate time such operation occurred; and (3) If known, the type of aircraft and general direction of its flight.

History. Enact. Acts 1964, ch. 134, § 1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section provides for notice prior to litigation, but if the governmental unit is immune from tort actions, then this section has no application; this section is not a waiver of sovereign immunity. Inco, Ltd. v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Bd., 705 S.W.2d 933, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 679 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Municipal Corporations, § 331.00.

411.120. Action to quiet title; court order if title proved.

Any person having both the legal title and possession of land may prosecute suit, by petition in equity, in the circuit court of the county where the land or some part of it lies, against any other person setting up a claim to it. If the plaintiff establishes his title to the land the court shall order the defendant to release his claim to it and to pay the plaintiff his costs, unless the defendant by his answer disclaims all title to the land and offers to give such release to the plaintiff, in which case the plaintiff shall pay the defendant’s costs, unless for special reasons the court decrees otherwise respecting the costs.

History. Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 11.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

Only those who have a clear legal and equitable title to land connected with actual possession may sue in equity to quiet title. Whipple v. Earick, 93 Ky. 121 , 19 S.W. 237, 14 Ky. L. Rptr. 85 , 1892 Ky. LEXIS 62 ( Ky. 1892 ). See Smith v. Lewis, 55 S.W. 551, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1400 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 527 ( Ky. 1900 ); Fox v. Cornett, 124 Ky. 139 , 92 S.W. 959, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 246 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 228 ( Ky. 1906 ); Musick v. Horn, 145 Ky. 639 , 140 S.W. 1014, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 9 01 ( Ky. 1911 ); Nugent v. Mallory, 145 Ky. 824 , 141 S.W. 850, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 9 59 ( Ky. 1911 ); Perry v. Eagle Coal Co., 170 Ky. 824 , 186 S.W. 875, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 1 36 ( Ky. 1916 ); Taylor v. Wilson, 182 Ky. 592 , 206 S.W. 865, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 408 ( Ky. 1918 ), modified, 183 Ky. 695 , 210 S.W. 670, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 571 ( Ky. 1919 ); Southern Oil Co. v. Holman, 196 Ky. 250 , 244 S.W. 762, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1922 ); Boreing v. Garrard, 210 Ky. 135 , 275 S.W. 374, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1925 ); Brown v. Martin, 239 Ky. 146 , 39 S.W.2d 243, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1931 ); Hale v. Horn, 265 Ky. 560 , 97 S.W.2d 402, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 533 ( Ky. 1936 ); Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Danks, 271 Ky. 452 , 112 S.W.2d 674, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 9 ( Ky. 1938 ), overruled, Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Ward, 286 Ky. 73 , 149 S.W.2d 705, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 1 ( Ky. 1940 ).

This section gives to the owner in possession of land a right to maintain an equitable action to quiet his title and the fact that the defendant has an action of forcible entry and detainer pending against the owner involving the naked right of possession only without showing the relationship of landlord and tenant will neither bar nor abate the owner’s right to settle adverse claims as to the title, since the right of possession in one person is not inconsistent with the right of property in another. Engle v. Tennis Coal Co., 125 Ky. 239 , 101 S.W. 309, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 280 ( Ky. 1907 ).

2.Lack of Notice.

Where the defendants argued that this quiet title statute was void due to a lack of a sufficient notice provision, but did not give the Attorney General notice of the action challenging this section, the court properly refused to consider the constitutionality issue. Field v. Evans, 675 S.W.2d 3, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 370 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).

In a dispute involving the ownership and leasehold of oil and gas rights underlying the surface property filed by the owners of the property, because the heirs of the owner of the mineral rights on the property at issue were never made parties to the litigation, as such were necessary and indispensable parties, the court could not address the surface owners’ adverse possession claim. Baker v. Weinberg, 266 S.W.3d 827, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 159 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008), modified, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 303 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 12, 2008).

3.Title of Plaintiff.

Even if the defendant’s claim is faulty, the plaintiff’s right to recover is dependent not upon good faith of his claim but the validity of his title. Phillips v. Alma Coal Co., 7 F.2d 42, 1925 U.S. App. LEXIS 3479 (6th Cir. Ky. 1925 ), cert. denied, 271 U.S. 669, 46 S. Ct. 483, 70 L. Ed. 1142, 1926 U.S. LEXIS 747 (U.S. 1926).

Plaintiff must be the owner of the land. Bowling v. Breathitt Coal, Iron & Lumber Co., 134 Ky. 249 , 120 S.W. 317, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1909 ).

The question of title to land may not be litigated in action by claimants against the secretary of state. Daniel v. New Era Land Co., 137 Ky. 535 , 126 S.W. 108, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 596 ( Ky. 1910 ).

In an action to quiet title, plaintiff must succeed on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of defendant’s title. Slone v. Hall, 145 Ky. 232 , 140 S.W. 188, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 825 ( Ky. 1 911). See Engle v. Bond-Foley Lumber Co., 173 Ky. 35 , 189 S.W. 1146, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 287 ( Ky. 1 916); Bryant v. Hamblin, 183 Ky. 716 , 210 S.W. 786, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 574 ( Ky. 1919 ); Gray-Mellon Oil Co. v. Fairchild, 219 Ky. 143 , 292 S.W. 743, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1927 ); Campbell v. Schorr, 224 Ky. 1, 5 S.W.2d 278, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1927 ); McKeehan v. Moore, 225 Ky. 580 , 9 S.W.2d 711, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 821 ( Ky. 1928 ); Liberty Coal Co. v. Baker, 231 Ky. 761 , 22 S.W.2d 252, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1929 ); Webster County Board of Education v. Gentry, 233 Ky. 35 , 24 S.W.2d 910, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 486 ( Ky. 1930 ); Ratcliff v. Coleman, 241 Ky. 791 , 45 S.W.2d 493, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 166 ( Ky. 1931 ); Alcorn v. Superior Oil Corp., 245 Ky. 343 , 53 S.W.2d 528, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 577 ( Ky. 1932 ); Fugate v. Fugate, 252 Ky. 587 , 67 S.W.2d 952, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 820 ( Ky. 1934 ); Hale v. Horn, 265 Ky. 560 , 97 S.W.2d 402, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 533 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where father had executed deed to son prior to bringing suit under this section which son did not lodge of record but held in his possession until the morning of the day he gave his deposition in the action brought by his father under this section to quiet title, at which time he returned the deed to his father with the understanding that if his father won the quiet title suit the son would “fall owner to the same,” the return of the deed was not in good faith and the father failed to establish in himself title to the land in controversy. Collins v. Adams, 167 Ky. 228 , 180 S.W. 374, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 838 ( Ky. 1915 ).

In a suit to quiet title, plaintiffs must recover on the strength of their title, though a suit to enjoin a trespass can be maintained by proof of possession when the trespass was committed, and when the suit was filed. Combs v. Turner, 193 Ky. 636 , 237 S.W. 37, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Plaintiff must establish ownership of legal title. Burger v. Allen, 211 Ky. 742 , 277 S.W. 1032, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 962 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Where wife intervened in suit against husband asking that her title to land be quieted, she had to recover on the strength of her title and not on the weakness of that of plaintiff. Lawson v. First Nat'l Bank, 225 Ky. 58 , 7 S.W.2d 495, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 693 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Plaintiff in a quiet title suit, who was found by the court to have no interest in the land as he did not own it, had no concern as to who the court determined was the true owner and could not object to a decree adjudging defendant to be the owner of the land. Hopkins v. Slusher, 266 Ky. 300 , 98 S.W.2d 932, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 657 ( Ky. 1936 ).

There are three (3) ways in which the title to land may be shown: (1) paper title deducible from the Commonwealth; (2) adverse possession for the statutory period; and (3) title to a common source. Strunks Lane & Jellico Mountain Coal & Coke Co. v. Anderson, 276 Ky. 576 , 124 S.W.2d 779, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 552 ( Ky. 1939 ). See Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In action to quiet title under this section where both parties claimed under a common grantor who was the father of defendant, defendant who failed to record his deed was estopped from asserting superior title to plaintiff who was an innocent purchaser for value. Chestnut v. Allen, 282 Ky. 703 , 139 S.W.2d 729 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where plaintiffs failed to show title in themselves deducible from the Commonwealth or from a common source and they were not in actual possession of any part of the land, judgment of lower court quieting title in plaintiffs could not be sustained. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Person seeking to have title quieted and to establish ownership and possession by record title or adverse possession must succeed on the strength of his title and not on the weakness of defendant’s title. Aluminum Co. of America v. Frazer, 328 S.W.2d 142, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1958 ). See Letcher County Coal & Improv. Co. v. Marlowe, 398 S.W.2d 870, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 51 ( Ky. 1965 ); Vogler v. Salem Primitive Baptist Church, 415 S.W.2d 72, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where a person under KRS 416.070 (repealed) failed to establish ownership of land condemned by constructive service, that person had no title to quiet under this section. St. Matthews v. Roberts, 490 S.W.2d 750, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 644 ( Ky. 1973 ).

4.—Paper Title.

Where pleadings and testimony in quiet title action claimed plaintiff was owner of land but did not claim legal title to it, although plaintiff was in possession of the land under a title bond from his father in a transfer obviously made to defeat creditors, the court did not err in refusing to quiet title. Brandenburg v. Louisville Tin & Stone Co., 36 S.W. 7, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 297 (1896).

Plaintiff had no title to the land in a quiet title action where the land under his patent was embraced in an older patent issued to another, so he could not be in constructive possession and, being without actual possession, he could not question defendant’s title or right to possession. Nolen v. Hall, 82 S.W. 418, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 773 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 436 (Ky. Ct. App. 1904).

That holder under title bond executed deed by attorney in fact, created before his title was perfected, did not show defect. Stephens v. Perkins, 209 Ky. 651 , 273 S.W. 545, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 569 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Where deed from common grantor to plaintiff’s predecessors exempted mineral rights, plaintiff acquired no title to minerals and could not maintain action to quiet title thereto. Liberty Coal Co. v. Baker, 231 Ky. 761 , 22 S.W.2d 252, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Purchaser from one daughter of deceased owner had not acquired legal title requisite to prosecute statutory suit to quiet title against other daughter claiming interest. Pendley v. Lee, 233 Ky. 372 , 25 S.W.2d 1030, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 571 ( Ky. 1930 ).

The fact that grantor in deed excepted a portion of the conveyed property from the warranty clause did not constitute an admission that grantor did not claim title to such portion. Conyers' Adm'x v. McGee, 294 Ky. 382 , 171 S.W.2d 450, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 436 ( Ky. 1943 ).

5.—Common Source.

It was not necessary for plaintiff in quiet title action to prove title to mineral in a tract of land beyond the common source through which he and defendants both claimed and whether the patent under which the owner of the common source obtained title was valid was not in issue. Stoffler v. Edgewater Coal Co., 198 Ky. 523 , 249 S.W. 753, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 493 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Where title of both plaintiffs and defendants were derived by deeds from common grantor, plaintiffs were not required to trace title back to Commonwealth. Jones v. O'Connell, 237 Ky. 219 , 35 S.W.2d 290, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 582 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Plaintiff need not show title back to a common grantor through whom both parties claim. Brown v. Martin, 239 Ky. 146 , 39 S.W.2d 243, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1931 ). See Stoffler v. Edgewater Coal Co., 198 Ky. 523 , 249 S.W. 753, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 493 ( Ky. 1923 ); Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where both parties claim under a common grantor, it is unnecessary for either party to show title beyond common grantor. Elkhorn Coal Corp. v. Jacks Creek Coal Co., 240 Ky. 769 , 43 S.W.2d 13, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where plaintiff and defendants traced their titles to a common source and defendants traced their titles by inheritance from plaintiff’s grantor or subsequent deed from his heirs, plaintiff’s title was superior to defendants’ so as to entitle plaintiff to judgment except for portion defendants were found to have acquired by adverse possession. Baker v. Brown, 271 Ky. 93 , 111 S.W.2d 1036, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 237 ( Ky. 1937 ).

6.—Adverse Possession.

Legal title for action to quiet title need not necessarily be acquired under a deed but may be acquired by adverse possession. Le Moyne v. Hays, 145 Ky. 415 , 140 S.W. 552, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 858 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Williams v. Lowe, 175 Ky. 369 , 194 S.W. 342, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1917 ); Wilson v. Pioneer Coal Co., 191 Ky. 408 , 231 S.W. 37, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1921 ); Combs v. Combs, 238 Ky. 362 , 38 S.W.2d 243, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 261 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Suit to quiet title to land under this section may be maintained under a title acquired by 15 years’ adverse possession. Williams v. Lowe, 175 Ky. 369 , 194 S.W. 342, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Combs v. Turner, 193 Ky. 636 , 237 S.W. 37, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1922 ); Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

It is not essential that plaintiff have a paper title, but only that he have such title as would give him the right to the possession of the land, which character of title may rest on adverse possession. Turner v. Bowens, 180 Ky. 755 , 203 S.W. 749, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 155 ( Ky. 1918 ). See Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Plaintiffs’ occupancy, use and possession and that of their vendors was such as to give them title by adverse possession, and they could maintain action to enjoin defendant from cutting timber and to quiet title. Combs v. Turner, 193 Ky. 636 , 237 S.W. 37, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1922 ).

One in possession of land may retain and protect his possession against everyone not legally entitled thereto. Leach v. Taylor, 206 Ky. 28 , 266 S.W. 894, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 265 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Occasional entries upon uninclosed land to cut timber is not such an adverse holding as will invest the trespasser with title though his acts continue sporadically over a period of 15 years. Combs v. Jones, 244 Ky. 512 , 51 S.W.2d 672, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 469 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Occasional acts of entering, cutting and removing timber from land do not constitute actual adverse possession. French v. Childers, 280 Ky. 339 , 133 S.W.2d 63, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 117 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A suit to quiet title may be maintained upon a title acquired by 15 years’ adverse possession, and the defendant may, by answer and counterclaim setting up title acquired by 15 years’ adverse holding of the land of the owner, also maintain a defense to the quia timet action brought against him. Whitaker v. Shepherd, 280 Ky. 713 , 134 S.W.2d 604, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 1939 ).

In a suit under this section to quiet title to land held by adverse possession under a tax deed, the champerty statute, KRS 372.070 , was not applicable as an owner in possession does not hold adversely to sovereign’s claim for taxes. Combs v. Combs, 306 Ky. 553 , 208 S.W.2d 732, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 608 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The occasional cutting of timber and payment of taxes by plaintiffs did not constitute an adverse holding sufficient to acquire title by adverse possession even though such acts continued sporadically for the prescription period. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

6.5.— —Indispensable Parties.

Circuit court erred in summarily denying the adjoining owners' motion to alter, amend, or vacate a judgment quieting title in property claimed through adverse possession to the buyers because the court failed to address the issue of indispensable parties where the controversy could not be resolved between the existing parties without prejudicing the rights of the record owners' unknown heirs where they had an interest and the suit would prejudice their rights to the property. Gilland v. Dougherty, 500 S.W.3d 217, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 101 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).

7.—Boundary Lines.

The establishment of an agreed line to settle boundary dispute between landowners as to the correct location of the line had the effect of investing them with such title up to the line as gave them a right of possession and would enable them to bring a suit to quiet title to the same extent as if they had perfect paper title to it. Turner v. Bowens, 180 Ky. 755 , 203 S.W. 749, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 155 ( Ky. 1918 ).

In an action to quiet title, plaintiffs were not bound by prior reports of commissioners or by division deeds executed pursuant to those reports, where neither reports nor deeds definitely established the property line. Calhoun v. Gayhart, 280 Ky. 170 , 132 S.W.2d 760, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1939 ).

It is a rule universally recognized that in an action to recover land the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title and not by weakness of the title of his adversary and, unless he is relying on adverse possession for more than 15 years, he must show paper title back to the Commonwealth or back to a common grantor but this is not necessary where the controversy involves merely the correct location of the boundary line between the parties. Jones v. Wheeldon, 309 Ky. 184 , 217 S.W.2d 221, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 665 ( Ky. 1949 ).

8.Possession.

A person not showing actual possession of land in controversy at the time he instituted an action to quiet his title cannot maintain the action. Harris v. Smith, 32 Ky. 10 , 1834 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1834 ) (decided under prior law).

Where plaintiffs are not in actual possession of the territory in dispute, a bill in equity to quiet title will not lie. Coppage v. Griffith, 40 S.W. 908, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 459 (1897). See Layne v. Ferguson, 68 S.W. 656, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 444 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 313 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902); Hall v. Pratt, 142 Ky. 561 , 134 S.W. 900, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 236 ( Ky. 1911 ), overruled in part, E. W. Ross Co. v. Akers, 192 Ky. 389 , 233 S.W. 786, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 69 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Under this section, a mortgagor in possession may sue the mortgagee asserting legal title to the land. Sheffield v. Day, 90 S.W. 545, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 754 (1906).

Where plaintiff brought suit to have title quieted and defendant by his counterclaim asserted ownership to the land and asked that his title to it be quieted, tendering an issue involving the question of superior title, it was competent for the court to try and determine it; and for the further reason that the quiet title action was an effort on the part of plaintiff to deprive defendant of his title to the property by converting same to his own use, defendant, whose counterclaim was based on wrongful seizure, could maintain his action although not in the actual possession of the property. Fox v. Cornett, 124 Ky. 139 , 92 S.W. 959, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 246 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 228 ( Ky. 1906 ).

A person not showing actual possession of land in controversy at the time he instituted an action to quiet his title cannot maintain the action under this section. Brown v. Ward, 105 S.W. 964, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 261 (1907). See Dupoyster v. Turk, 110 S.W. 260, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 320 (1908); Dupoyster v. Dunn, 113 S.W. 880 ( Ky. 1908 ); Horn v. Bates, 114 S.W. 763 ( Ky. 1908 ); Cockrell v. Colson, 116 S.W. 775 ( Ky. 1909 ); Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Taylor, 138 Ky. 437 , 128 S.W. 325, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1910 ); Le Moyne v. Hays, 145 Ky. 415 , 140 S.W. 552, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 858 ( Ky. 1911 ); Nugent v. Mallory, 145 Ky. 824 , 141 S.W. 850, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 959 ( Ky. 1911 ); Bowling v. Breathitt Coal, Iron & Lumber Co., 134 Ky. 249 , 120 S.W. 317, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1909 ); Reynolds v. Binion, 177 Ky. 189 , 197 S.W. 641, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 563 ( Ky. 1917 ); Blythe v. Warner, 190 Ky. 104 , 226 S.W. 669, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 552 ( Ky. 1920 ).

When a party is in physical possession of any part of body of land to which he has good title, he is in possession of the whole of it, and may quiet title to any part of it. Williams v. Lowe, 175 Ky. 369 , 194 S.W. 342, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Turner v. Bowens, 180 Ky. 755 , 203 S.W. 749, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 155 ( Ky. 1918 ); Osborn v. Roberts, 186 Ky. 160 , 216 S.W. 359, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 181 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Possession of land through tenants will support an action to quiet title. Upchurch v. Sutton Bros., 142 Ky. 420 , 134 S.W. 477, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 211 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Sasseen v. Farmer, 179 Ky. 632 , 201 S.W. 39, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 276 ( Ky. 1918 ); Williams v. Thomas, 285 Ky. 776 , 149 S.W.2d 525, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Ejectment is the proper action against a person who is in actual possession and claims the land as his own and not an action to quiet title. Newsome v. Hamilton, 142 Ky. 5 , 133 S.W. 952, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 117 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Taylor v. Wilson, 182 Ky. 5 92 , 206 S.W. 865, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 408 ( Ky. 1918 ), modified, 183 Ky. 695 , 210 S.W. 670, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 571 ( Ky. 1919 ); Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

If defendant should take possession under invalid patents, plaintiffs would have a complete remedy by ejectment to oust him and recover possession. Childers v. York, 187 Ky. 332 , 218 S.W. 1027, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 123 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Legal title holder and possessor may sue to quiet title without reference to time when possession or title was acquired. Lauderbach v. Lewis, 214 Ky. 521 , 283 S.W. 973, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 385 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Where plaintiff and his servants climbed fences to get onto land, nailed notices on trees that property belonged to plaintiff, and remained on premises about two hours, plaintiff did not have possession sufficient to entitle him to maintain action under this section. Middlesboro Town & Land Co. v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 274 Ky. 756 , 120 S.W.2d 394, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where the defendants in the action claimed the tract under a title different and hostile to the plaintiff’s title and not through or under the title and they made no attack on and did not seek to destroy any link in the plaintiff’s chain of title, merely traversing, it was necessary for the plaintiff to allege and prove possession and on failure to do so the action was properly dismissed. McGiboney v. Newman, 277 Ky. 835 , 127 S.W.2d 860, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1939 ).

One in possession of a tract of land claiming ownership under a deed with intention to possess it all is inconstructive actual possession of the land to the extent of the boundaries described in the deed, except such as may be in the actual possession of another. Calhoun v. Gayhart, 280 Ky. 170 , 132 S.W.2d 760, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A person who fences off property in the possession of another who claims either under paper title or adverse possession merely becomes a trespasser and does not deprive the other of the possession necessary to maintain an action to quiet title. Conyers' Adm'x v. McGee, 294 Ky. 382 , 171 S.W.2d 450, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 436 ( Ky. 1943 ).

9.—Waiver by Defendant.

Although plaintiff in a quiet title action is not in possession, where defendant asserts title in himself and asks for affirmative relief, the question of title may be settled. Vance v. Gray, 142 Ky. 267 , 134 S.W. 181, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 179 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Hall v. Hall, 149 Ky. 817 , 149 S.W. 1128, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1912 ); Clark's Heirs v. Boyd, 152 Ky. 234 , 153 S.W. 227, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 631 ( Ky. 1913 ); Lipps v. Turner, 164 Ky. 626 , 176 S.W. 42, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 435 ( Ky. 1915 ); Sackett v. Jeffries, 182 Ky. 696 , 207 S.W. 454, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 398 ( Ky. 1919 ); Cooper v. Williamson, 191 Ky. 213 , 229 S.W. 707, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1921 ); Taylor v. Arndell, 192 Ky. 249 , 232 S.W. 658, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 49 ( Ky. 1921 ); Burger v. Allen, 211 Ky. 742 , 277 S.W. 1032, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 962 ( Ky. 1925 ); Bennett v. Parsons, 226 Ky. 782 , 11 S.W.2d 935, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 173 ( Ky. 1928 ); Combs v. Jones, 244 Ky. 512 , 51 S.W.2d 672, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 469 ( Ky. 1932 ); Whitaker v. Shepherd, 280 Ky. 713 , 134 S.W.2d 604, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 1939 ); Martt v. McBrayer, 292 Ky. 479 , 166 S.W.2d 823, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1942 ); Hopper v. McBurney, 293 Ky. 31 , 168 S.W.2d 374, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1943 ); Smith v. Williamson, 306 Ky. 467 , 208 S.W.2d 503, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 596 ( Ky. 1948 ); Waller v. Parsley, 312 Ky. 758 , 229 S.W.2d 741, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Where defendants never insisted upon actual possession as a prerequisite to plaintiff’s right to sue and issues were joined on the claim of possession made by each, proof heard and the case submitted, defendants were deemed to have waived any objection to the action on the ground that plaintiff was not in actual possession. Kypadel Coal & Lumber Co. v. Millard, 165 Ky. 432 , 177 S.W. 270, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 554 ( Ky. 1915 ).

Defendants in quiet title suit waived the question of possession when by answer and counterclaim they asserted superior title in themselves and sought to have same quieted. Frasure v. Northern Coal & Coke Co., 189 Ky. 574 , 225 S.W. 479, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 477 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Defendant was held to have waived question of possession. Johnson v. Collins, 209 Ky. 82 , 272 S.W. 47, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 430 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Where defendants asserted title to land by answer and counterclaim and seek affirmative relief, the court will consider the entire evidence and pass on the question of superiority of title, even though plaintiff did not have possession required to maintain action. Strunks Lane & Jellico Mountain Coal & Coke Co. v. Anderson, 276 Ky. 576 , 124 S.W.2d 779, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 552 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Ordinarily, both paper title and possession must be shown by the plaintiff in an action to quiet title, but where defendant asserts title by counterclaim and asks affirmative relief, the courts will pass upon the question of inferiority of title notwithstanding plaintiff’s failure to show actual possession. Justice v. Staton, 291 Ky. 179 , 163 S.W.2d 471, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 1942 ). See Spencer v. Steele, 296 Ky. 3 , 175 S.W.2d 1008, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1943 ).

To maintain successfully an action to quiet title, it is necessary for the plaintiff to allege and prove title and possession, except proof of possession by plaintiff is waived by defendant and the case will be decided on its merits if defendant asserts title by answer and counterclaim and seeks to have his title quieted. Davis v. Daniel, 295 Ky. 717 , 175 S.W.2d 501, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1943 ).

An answer to a complaint seeking relief under this section which consists of a denial, an allegation of title by adverse possession under color of title and a claim of estoppel by agreement as to the disputed line but which does not seek affirmative relief by counterclaim does not waive the requirement that plaintiff have actual possession at the time the complaint is filed. Haws v. Short, 304 S.W.2d 924, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1957 ).

The requisite proof of possession is waived, generally, when defendant asserts ownership by counterclaim; however, the waiver of proof of possession does not waive the required proof of title by plaintiff in quiet title action. Kephart v. Rucker, 379 S.W.2d 244, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 229 ( Ky. 1964 ).

10.—Exceptions.

Plaintiff had a right to maintain an action under this section where neither he nor the defendant had actually occupied or inclosed the disputed strip and it was within the true boundary of plaintiff’s record title. Weaver v. Bates, 33 S.W. 1118, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 1218 (1896).

Remaindermen can maintain an action to quiet title during the life of the original life tenant who conveys the fee although they are out of possession, since the lapse of time would rob them of the sources of evidence by which to establish their disputed claim and in this class of cases the possession of the life tenant is the possession of the remaindermen. Alley v. Alley, 91 S.W. 291, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1073 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 349 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906).

This section did not apply and it was not necessary to show possession of the land where plaintiff’s deed to mineral rights was on record and defendants attempted to convert the mineral rights to their use by conveyances. Eversole v. Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co., 122 Ky. 649 , 92 S.W. 593, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 151 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1906 ).

Where action is to prevent the appropriation and conversion of plaintiff’s own title, it is not necessary to allege or prove possession, but where the defendant is casting a cloud on the plaintiff’s title by claiming the property under a different and hostile title and not through and under the plaintiff’s own title, then it is necessary to allege and prove possession. McGiboney v. Newman, 277 Ky. 835 , 127 S.W.2d 860, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1939 ).

In action to quiet title to uninclosed forest land of which plaintiffs had constructive possession, fact that defendants had fenced off land did not deprive plaintiffs of such possession as was necessary to maintain action to quiet title, defendants being mere trespassers. Calhoun v. Gayhart, 280 Ky. 170 , 132 S.W.2d 760, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where both parties in action to quiet title had possession of their respective farms, and both claimed title to the four (4) acres in dispute, this four acres being uninclosed forest land between the lines, the possession of the land in controversy, not being actually occupied, attached to the better title. Calhoun v. Gayhart, 280 Ky. 170 , 132 S.W.2d 760, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Action to quiet title may be maintained by an owner not in possession when effort is made by defendant to seize and fraudulently appropriate particular title under which plaintiff claims. Williams v. Thomas, 285 Ky. 776 , 149 S.W.2d 525, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Where defendant had seized and fraudulently appropriated particular title under which plaintiff claimed, plaintiff, in that event, could maintain the quiet title action by showing ownership of the land, although he could not show actual possession. Spencer v. Steele, 296 Ky. 3 , 175 S.W.2d 1008, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1943 ).

11.Jurisdiction and Venue.

In quiet title action under this section where defendants’ claim arose by virtue of mortgage executed by them to plaintiff and the only relief sought was for fraud and deceit practiced upon plaintiff by defendants, defendants’ claim was not hostile to plaintiff but was a transitory action which must be brought in the county in which some of the defendants who may be properly joined as such reside or are summoned and not in the county where the land was located. Shouse v. Taylor, 115 Ky. 22 , 72 S.W. 324, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1842 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 65 ( Ky. 1903 ).

An action to quiet title under this section must be brought in the county where the land or some part of it lies. Daniel v. New Era Land Co., 137 Ky. 535 , 126 S.W. 108, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 596 ( Ky. 1910 ).

When a tract of land lies partly in two (2) or more counties, the aggrieved party affecting any part of it may go into the courts of any one of the counties in which any part of that tract may lie, since the action is authorized for injury to the land as an entity. Collins v. Adams, 207 Ky. 42 , 268 S.W. 828, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 9 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Where no action was pending in any court regarding liability for inheritance tax, the circuit court of the county in which property was located had jurisdiction in a quiet title action to quiet title to property against which inheritance tax lien was being asserted by the Commonwealth. Commonwealth v. Van Meter, 301 Ky. 132 , 190 S.W.2d 668, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Pursuant to KRS 452.400 , 411.120 , providing expansive and general jurisdiction over matters involving real property, the circuit court had jurisdiction over an inverse condemnation action seeking to recover damages that resulted from the filing of an invalid lien under KRS 342.770 . A determination had been made in the underlying workers’ compensation matter that the property owner was not the employer, and the circuit court did not invade the province of the administrative agency. Commonwealth v. County of Hardin Planning & Dev. Comm'n, 390 S.W.3d 840, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 240 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

12.Pleadings and Proof.

To prevent a multiplicity of suits and the creation of a cloud upon plaintiff’s title, the court had jurisdiction of a suit to enjoin register of land office from issuing patents to the defendants where the petition stated an equitable action, although it did not state a cause of action under this section, since it did not allege possession. Asher v. Uhl, 122 Ky. 114 , 87 S.W. 307, 93 S.W. 29, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 938 , 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 396 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 1905 ).

Under this section, one suing to quiet title to land must not only allege and prove ownership of the land to which he desires the title to be quieted but he must also allege and prove his possession. Fields v. Couch, 169 Ky. 554 , 184 S.W. 894, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 736 ( Ky. 1916 ). See Leach v. Taylor, 206 Ky. 28 , 266 S.W. 894, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 265 ( Ky. 1924 ); Boreing v. Garrard, 210 Ky. 135 , 275 S.W. 374, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1925 ); Hatton v. Williams' Ex'r, 259 Ky. 548 , 82 S.W.2d 774, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1935 ); Madden v. Bond, 269 Ky. 31 , 106 S.W.2d 95, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 553 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In an action to quiet title, where defendant elects to try title by alleging that he has title, and asking by way of counterclaim that his title be quieted, he only waives the question of possession, and plaintiffs have the burden of proving their title. Southern Oil Co. v. Holman, 196 Ky. 250 , 244 S.W. 762, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1922 ).

In an action to quiet title where no counterclaim is set up, plaintiff must allege and, if denied, prove both title and possession. Southern Oil Co. v. Holman, 196 Ky. 250 , 244 S.W. 762, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1922 ). See Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Action in which plaintiff did not claim any possession of the land in herself but alleged defendant was in possession, though tried in equity, constituted an action in ejectment and not an action to quiet title under this section. Ogle v. Cole's Ex'rs, 221 Ky. 726 , 299 S.W. 566, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 798 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Action and counterclaim were properly dismissed where both parties failed to establish title to land sued for. Nicholson v. Shear, 225 Ky. 53 , 7 S.W.2d 516, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 702 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Plaintiff failed to establish his right to land and, since defendants merely denied the title asserted by plaintiff without seeking any affirmative relief in respect to their title and established adverse possession, court was not authorized to adjudge a superiority of title in the plaintiff under the rule of waiver. Bentley v. Kentland Coal & Coke Co., 242 Ky. 511 , 46 S.W.2d 1077, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 308 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Plaintiff who neither pleaded nor proved any sort of possession and who failed to trace a record title back to the Commonwealth or to a common source was not entitled to quiet title against defendants establishing title by adverse possession. Bentley v. Kentland Coal & Coke Co., 242 Ky. 511 , 46 S.W.2d 1077, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 308 ( Ky. 1932 ).

In quiet title action, if the defendants do not set up any counterclaim asking for affirmative relief, the plaintiff must prove title and actual possession of the land. Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Danks, 271 Ky. 452 , 112 S.W.2d 674, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 9 ( Ky. 1938 ), overruled, Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Ward, 286 Ky. 73 , 149 S.W.2d 705, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 1 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where action was filed as a common-law action in ejectment and defendant asserted title to land in himself, it was proper to transfer action to equity on plaintiff’s motion and proceed with action as to quiet title under this section. Woods v. Garrard, 282 Ky. 233 , 138 S.W.2d 325, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 143 ( Ky. 1940 ).

It is fundamental that in an action to quiet title the plaintiff must allege and prove both title and possession. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

13.—Pleadings.

A complaint seeking relief under this section must allege that the plaintiff had actual possession of the premises at the time the complaint was filed. Haws v. Short, 304 S.W.2d 924, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1957 ).

14.— —Sufficient.

A petition for quieting title stating plaintiffs are the owners and in the possession of a certain described boundary of land in a named county, that defendants are interfering with them in the quiet enjoyment of the use and occupation of the land by threatening to institute vexatious suits of trespass and ejectment for said possession, and by threatening to commit trespasses on the land under a claim of right states a cause of action and demurrer should be overruled. Boyd v. Clarke, 59 S.W. 511, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1018 (1900).

Allegations of petition to quiet title that plaintiff was in actual possession of and owned the land described, that defendant had been setting up claim to said land and was now doing so, that he was giving it out in speeches that he was the owner of said land, that he had entered upon said land and trespassed thereon by cutting and sawing valuable oak trees standing and growing on the land and was continuing to do so and was threatening to cut and destroy and convert to his own use more of said trees and was doing all of said acts unlawfully and without right and that by all of said claims and acts the defendant was clouding plaintiff’s title to the land and injuring him in the quiet possession of same sufficiently stated facts showing defendant was setting up claim of right hostile to the right of plaintiff. Campbell v. Campbell, 64 S.W. 458, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 869 (1901).

Under the general allegation in a quiet title action that plaintiff was the owner and entitled to possession of the land, proof of adverse possession was competent without specific pleading to that effect. Conyers' Adm'x v. McGee, 294 Ky. 382 , 171 S.W.2d 450, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 436 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where plaintiff alleged in its amended and substituted petition to quiet title that it had both the legal title to and possession of the land in litigation and defendant was setting up an adverse claim to the property and the verified copy of the deed on which plaintiff relied was attached as Exhibit A and it confirmed the allegations of the petition, the petition stated a cause of action. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Smith, 251 S.W.2d 855, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 937 ( Ky. 1952 ).

15.— —Insufficient.

Where in suit to quiet title under this section plaintiffs failed to allege that they were in possession of the property, the court should have sustained demurrer but given them leave to amend if they desired. Goff v. Lowe, 80 S.W. 219, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2176 (1904).

Petition which did not allege that defendants were still claiming the land or that plaintiff was in possession of it was insufficient under this section to remove a cloud from the title. Goosling v. Chapman, 147 Ky. 491 , 144 S.W. 380, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 276 ( Ky. 1912 ).

If plaintiff had been content to have averred that he was the owner of the land and in its actual possession, and that the defendant was wrongfully claiming to be the owner of the oil and gases therein which were a portion of the land, and to have designated the nature of the defendant’s claim as nearly as practicable without describing its chain of title but so as to show the claim was hostile and adverse to plaintiff’s title, a sufficient cause of action would have been stated under this section; but when he went further and showed defendant claimed under his grantor without showing his own deed was prior in time and therefore superior, the petition was insufficient to state a cause of action. Arnett v. Elkhorn Coal Corp., 191 Ky. 706 , 231 S.W. 219, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 369 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Petition to quiet title as against heir or original owners was insufficient, as against general demurrer, for not alleging plaintiff obtained title from or through original owners. Pendley v. Lee, 233 Ky. 372 , 25 S.W.2d 1030, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 571 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Petition alleging that plaintiffs “are seized in fee simple” of the land in question was not a sufficient allegation of actual possession, and demurrer was properly sustained. Smith v. Williamson, 306 Ky. 467 , 208 S.W.2d 503, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 596 ( Ky. 1948 ).

16.— —Answers and Counterclaims.

A defendant, in a suit to quiet title, may set up mortgages and other liens, the claims, if valid, being enforceable and, if spurious, being a cloud on the title. Sebree v. Johnson's Committee, 99 S.W. 340, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 681 (1907).

Where defendants seek affirmative relief by their pleading, although it is styled merely an answer, it must be taken to be their answer and counterclaim. Bennett v. Parsons, 226 Ky. 782 , 11 S.W.2d 935, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 173 ( Ky. 1928 ). See Wood's Guardian v. Inter-Southern Life Ins. Co., 224 Ky. 579 , 6 S.W.2d 712, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 643 (Ky. Ct. App. 1928); Crawley v. Mackey, 283 Ky. 717 , 143 S.W.2d 171, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 402 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where defendant in quiet title action stated in his answer that he ought to recover the land from plaintiff because he himself was also the owner of it, and he closed his prayer in the usual way for “all proper relief,” it was sufficient to entitle court to adjudge him the owner of the land if evidence justified it. Hopkins v. Slusher, 266 Ky. 300 , 98 S.W.2d 932, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 657 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where the plaintiff in his quiet title action is not in possession, the case will be decided on its merits if the defendant asserts title by answer and counterclaim and asks that his title be quieted, but this rule has no application where the defendant merely denies plaintiff’s title and possession and asserts his own title but does not ask for affirmative relief. McGiboney v. Newman, 277 Ky. 835 , 127 S.W.2d 860, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1939 ).

17.—Proof.

In action to quiet title, it was immaterial that plaintiff would be inconvenienced by loss of property. Gibson v. Madden, 229 Ky. 273 , 17 S.W.2d 263, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 772 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Where starting point in patent description was described as being same as starting point in earlier patent to another, evidence as to long-continued recognition of certain point as starting point of first patent was of strong evidentiary value in determining starting point in second patent. Smith v. Slusher, 291 Ky. 600 , 165 S.W.2d 38, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 272 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where the original action was a forcible entry action by a lessee against his lessor and the lessor then filed a quiet title action against the lessee and the two (2) actions were consolidated, neither party could achieve title because of the failure of proof on the part of his adversary so, where there was not sufficient evidence to support a judgment quieting title in either party, the lower court properly dismissed the forcible entry action but erred in finding in the quiet title suit that lessor had fee-simple title. Frasure v. Bull, 307 Ky. 726 , 212 S.W.2d 280, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 822 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In determining boundaries natural and permanent objects control courses and distances. Poff v. Richardson, 312 Ky. 237 , 227 S.W.2d 175, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 1111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1950).

18.— —Burden.

Where defendants filed counterclaim to an action in trespass asking that title be quieted in them, the burden was on them to establish title in themselves. Hatton v. Williams' Ex'r, 259 Ky. 548 , 82 S.W.2d 774, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1935 ).

19.— —Title.

In action to quiet title in which defendant’s counterclaim waived proof of possession, plaintiff must nevertheless prove title before he can challenge defendant’s right to cut timber. Moren v. Houston, 222 Ky. 785 , 2 S.W.2d 667, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 260 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where both parties to a quiet title action claimed a common source, it was not necessary for plaintiff to prove title further back than common source. Jones v. Johnson, 223 Ky. 478 , 3 S.W.2d 1064, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 353 ( Ky. 1928 ), limited, Brown v. Harvey Coal Corp., 49 F.2d 434, 1931 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1312 (D. Ky. 1931 ).

Defendant’s rights to land emanated exclusively from description in deed, not from statements in collateral writings. Friel v. Grayson Road Corp., 226 Ky. 794 , 11 S.W.2d 943, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 176 ( Ky. 1928 ).

A judgment relied on by defendant to establish paper title did not bind plaintiffs nor any of their ancestors or predecessors in title where none of them were a party to the suit and it was insufficient to establish paper title. Combs v. Jones, 244 Ky. 512 , 51 S.W.2d 672, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 469 ( Ky. 1932 ).

To maintain an action quia timet, one must show a possessory title to land involved or paper title back to Commonwealth or to a common grantor through whom both parties claim. Hatton v. Williams' Ex'r, 259 Ky. 548 , 82 S.W.2d 774, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1935 ).

One claiming title under an execution sale must ordinarily introduce in evidence the judgment on which the execution was issued; but where the judgment has be replevied, it is sufficient to introduce the replevin bond. Kentucky River Coal Corp. v. Culton, 276 Ky. 418 , 124 S.W.2d 82, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 555 ( Ky. 1938 ).

In order to establish title by adverse possession, plaintiff must show how authority and control was exercised over land, what use was made of it, what portions were fenced, whether timber was cut, whether buildings were erected and what kind, whether any portion was cultivated or rented, and whether any adverse claims were made. Strunks Lane & Jellico Mountain Coal & Coke Co. v. Anderson, 276 Ky. 576 , 124 S.W.2d 779, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 552 ( Ky. 1939 ).

20.—Variance.

Court erred in requiring plaintiffs to elect whether they would prosecute their action for damages for withholding possession of part of land by defendant or whether they would seek to remove the cloud from their title by cancellation of easement conveyed to defendant by owner of homestead interest only. Tudor v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 282 Ky. 277 , 138 S.W.2d 473, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where plaintiff, in action to quiet title, pleaded specifically record title only, and defendant did not enter a specific plea asserting his own title but merely pleaded a traverse, the issue was confined to the one question of plaintiff’s record title and plaintiff could not recover on basis of adverse possession even though he proved adverse possession. Gilreath v. Stephens, 301 Ky. 689 , 192 S.W.2d 966, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 551 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where defendant’s pleading in a quiet title action by mistake set out description of a tract of land not involved in the controversy and in his proof the defendant introduced the correct deed covering the land adjoining the farm of plaintiff, a judgment for defendant quieting title to the land described in the pleading had to be reversed for the sole reason there was a fatal variance between defendant’s pleading and proof. Waller v. Parsley, 312 Ky. 758 , 229 S.W.2d 741, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1950 ).

21.Limitations and Laches.

Where 15 years had not elapsed from date of death of life tenant until action was instituted, the statute of limitations did not bar remaindermen from bringing suit to quiet title against vendees of life tenant who received only a title bond good against only those who signed it, although they had been in actual adverse possession for 17 years prior to the death of the life tenant. Belcher v. Polly, 106 S.W. 818, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 623 (1908).

Where plaintiff sued to quiet title to property purchased more than 18 years previously at a tax sale and the property had been sold subsequently at an auditor’s sale and neither purchaser had possession nor was claiming under the adverse possession statute but were both claiming under record title from a common source, the only question was superiority of title and the five-year statute of limitations did not apply to the suit since a mere claim of title, even of record, will not start the statute. Kypadel Coal & Lumber Co. v. Millard, 165 Ky. 432 , 177 S.W. 270, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 554 ( Ky. 1915 ).

While a remainderman may bring an action to establish title when it is questioned during existence of life estate, he is not required to do so and the limitation does not commence to run against him until the termination of the life estate. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

In a suit by property owner against city to quiet title to property by removing the city’s tax lien therefrom, the plaintiff cannot plead affirmatively the statute of limitations running against the city’s tax claim where defense could be asserted in suits filed by the city to enforce the tax claims. Title Ins. & Trust Co. v. Paducah, 275 Ky. 392 , 121 S.W.2d 932, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 440 ( Ky. 1938 ).

22.Purchaser with Prior Equity.

The better right as between two (2) innocent purchasers for value of the same land must be determined by the application of equitable principles and the one with the prior equity has the better right so, where petition by heirs for sale and division of real estate described the property as tracts three (3) and four (4) but each of the descriptions encompassed the same land, the purchaser of tract three, which was sold first, who took possession and thereafter erected valuable improvements must prevail in a quiet title suit brought by the purchaser of tract four, sold subsequent to tract three, who did not assume possession or expend any money except the purchase price. Childers v. Justice, 313 Ky. 64 , 230 S.W.2d 98, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 805 ( Ky. 1950 ).

23.Jury.

Where an action was brought by petition in equity under this section alleging plaintiff had both the legal title and possession of the land in controversy and that defendants were setting up claim thereto, wherein defendants answered and counterclaimed, denying plaintiff’s title or possession and alleging that the defendants owned the land and also pleading adverse possession for many years and champerty, the action was properly brought in equity, although the issues made by the defendants were essentially the same as they would have been had the action been brought on the ordinary side of the docket to recover the land as in ejectment and the defendant would have been entitled by timely motion to transfer the action to the ordinary docket where they could have demanded a jury trial; but failure to file a motion for two and one-half years was not within a reasonable time and was a waiver of the right to demand a jury trial. Chenault v. Eastern Kentucky Timber & Lumber Co., 119 Ky. 170 , 83 S.W. 552, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 1078 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Where a petition asking for the possession of land and the quieting of plaintiff’s title by an amendment averred that the defendant was in possession, the action was in ejectment and one at law, although the form of the petition was in equity and the defendant could have had the case transferred to the common-law docket by having seasonably moved that it be done; but his failure to do so was a waiver of the right to transfer and a consent for the judge to try the case without intervention of the jury and he could not contend it was error to deprive the defendants of the right of a jury trial. Wilxoc v. Lee, 264 Ky. 65 , 94 S.W.2d 294, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 276 ( Ky. 1936 ).

In a purely equitable action to quiet title, the chancellor may direct an issue of fact to be tried by a jury, and the verdict will not be binding on him but only advisory. Merritt v. Palmer, 289 Ky. 141 , 158 S.W.2d 163, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 514 ( Ky. 1942 ).

The chancellor, after hearing proof, on his own motion transferred case to ordinary docket for a jury to determine location of division line and beginning corners. This amounted to granting an issue out of chancery, which the court had authority to do on his own motion. Merritt v. Palmer, 289 Ky. 141 , 158 S.W.2d 163, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 514 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where there was a failure in plaintiff’s paper title and he did not show title by adverse possession, defendant who counterclaimed, claiming paper title and title by adverse possession and who established title by adverse possession, was entitled to a directed verdict in the quiet title action. Stearns Coal & Lumber Co. v. Douglas, 299 Ky. 314 , 185 S.W.2d 385, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1045 ( Ky. 1944 ).

In an action in equity to quiet title, the verdict of the jury is not binding on the court but is merely advisory and may be wholly disregarded by the court. Poff v. Richardson, 312 Ky. 237 , 227 S.W.2d 175, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 1111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1950).

Since suits to quiet title are and have historically been properly triable in equity before a chancellor, it is within the discretion of the court whether questions of fact will be submitted to the jury and the Rules of Civil Procedure have not changed the method of trial of equitable issues. Gibson v. Central Kentucky Natural Gas Co., 321 S.W.2d 256, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 17 ( Ky. 1958 ).

The adjudication of title to land, such as quieting title, is peculiarly one for a court of equity, and the issues are not triable by a jury. Tarter v. Medley, 356 S.W.2d 255, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1962 ).

24.Judgment.

A judgment in a quiet title action brought in a state court under this section must embrace all claims to the title to the land which could have been asserted by any party thereto and will bind and estop all the parties to the suit. Davis v. Planters' Trust Co., 196 F. 970, 1912 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1610 (D. Ky. 1912 ).

Although judgment quieting title cannot be enforced because of 15-year limitation, it is still effectual as evidence of the facts which it determined. Creech v. Jenkins, 276 Ky. 163 , 123 S.W.2d 267, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Judgment quieting title estops defendant from claiming title by adverse possession so long as judgment remains in effect, although no writ of possession was issued. Creech v. Jenkins, 276 Ky. 163 , 123 S.W.2d 267, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where claims of both parties were somewhat unsatisfactory and plaintiff failed to show possession, court was justified in awarding title to defendant on counterclaim. Justice v. Staton, 291 Ky. 179 , 163 S.W.2d 471, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where defendant, in action of ejectment, counterclaimed, asserting title in himself, judgment against him on the counterclaim was res adjudicata as to sources of title relied upon by defendant in that action but did not preclude defendant, in subsequent action to quiet title, from setting up new source of title acquired since first action. Hopper v. McBurney, 293 Ky. 31 , 168 S.W.2d 374, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Failure to prove possession as required by this section as a condition precedent to the maintenance of an action to quiet title was waived by appellant’s filing of a counterclaim asking that he be adjudged the owner by adverse possession and that his title be quieted and, since both parties were then seeking adjudication of title, it was the duty of the court to decide the controversy by determining merely which had the superior title and when plaintiff alleged and proved a title vested in him by an apparently valid deed and defendant made no attempt to prove title in himself by adverse possession or otherwise, judgment determining plaintiff had superior title was not in error and plaintiff was not required to prove a title deducible from the Commonwealth or a common source. Goins v. Catron, 300 Ky. 583 , 190 S.W.2d 322, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 635 ( Ky. 1945 ).

25.Federal Courts.

A state could regulate and protect individual rights to her soil and declare what would form a cloud over titles and, having so declared, the courts of the United States, by removing such clouds, were only applying an old practice to a new equity created by the Legislature. Clark v. Smith, 38 U.S. 195, 10 L. Ed. 123, 1839 U.S. LEXIS 429 (1839), distinguished and extended in Wickliffe v. Owings, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 47, 15 L. Ed. 44, 1854 U.S. LEXIS 492 (1855) (decided under prior law).

Law that provided that any person who had both legal title and possession of land could institute suit against any other person setting up a claim thereto and, if complainant was able to establish his title, the defendant was decreed to have released his claim and was required to pay the costs or if defendant should have disclaimed all title and have offered to give release the complainant was required to pay all costs, having created a right, and at the same time prescribed the remedy to enforce it, if the remedy prescribed was substantially consistent with the ordinary modes of proceeding on the chancery side of the federal courts, no reasons existed why it should not have been pursued in the same form as in the state courts. Clark v. Smith, 38 U.S. 195, 10 L. Ed. 123, 1839 U.S. LEXIS 429 (1839), distinguished and extended in Wickliffe v. Owings, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 47, 15 L. Ed. 44, 1854 U.S. LEXIS 492 (1855) (decided under prior law).

Where trustee in bankruptcy was made a party defendant to a quiet title action in a state court suit under this section and disclosed his claim to the land by an answer filed in the suit, he could not later file a suit in equity in federal court to determine that conveyance to plaintiff in the state court suit was a mortgage void as a preference, since the state court had jurisdiction to adjudicate his claim to the land because: (1) state courts are given concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts by the bankruptcy act, (2) the claim of the trustee must be heard before the state court can determine whether the title of plaintiff should be quieted as against the trustee in bankruptcy, and (3) comity between courts of concurrent jurisdiction requires that the court in which suit is last commenced shall yield to that in which a suit involving the same subject matter was first brought. Davis v. Planters' Trust Co., 196 F. 970, 1912 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1610 (D. Ky. 1912 ).

Under the federal equity practice, as well as under this section, bill to remove cloud or to quiet title cannot be maintained without proof of possession and legal title nor where the plaintiff is not in possession of premises. Rowe v. Hill, 215 F. 518, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 1261 (6th Cir. Ky. 1914 ). See Morse v. South, 80 F. 206, 1897 U.S. App. LEXIS 2594 (C.C.D. Ky. 1897 ); Rowe v. Kidd, 259 F. 127, 1919 U.S. App. LEXIS 1608 (6th Cir. Ky. 1919 ).

26.Other Actions.

An action for an injunction restraining defendants from committing the acts alleged to be threatened and from continuing the conduct charged is authorized under KRS 381.230 as distinguished from an action under this section. Colony Coal & Coke Corp. v. Napier, 28 F. Supp. 76, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2502 (D. Ky. 1939 ).

In ejectment action involving boundary dispute, it was unnecessary for defendants to pray that their title be quieted, since that consequence would inevitably result if they prevailed in their defense. Bingham v. Mills, 275 Ky. 552 , 122 S.W.2d 133, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 466 ( Ky. 1938 ).

In action for trespass, plaintiff cannot prove his own title by proving that his predecessor in title successfully defended actions brought by third parties to quiet title and to recover value of timber removed, where those actions did not require the defendant therein to prove the validity of his own title. French v. Childers, 280 Ky. 339 , 133 S.W.2d 63, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 117 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where real estate was sold at auction with understanding that purchaser would get clear title, and, after the sale, it was discovered that there were some restrictions as to use in the chain of title constituting a cloud on the title, the seller could not remove such cloud merely by inserting allegations as to adverse possession in his petition to an action against the purchaser to compel specific performance and asking that these clouds be removed by judgment of the court. Cox v. Birchfield, 299 Ky. 250 , 185 S.W.2d 256, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Cited in:

Sanders v. Adams, 278 Ky. 24 , 128 S.W.2d 223, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 386 ( Ky. 1939 ); Sublett v. Hall, 589 S.W.2d 888, 1979 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1979 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Limitation of actions, real estate, KRS 413.010 .

Trespass, liability joint and several, KRS 454.040 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Lee, Working Part of a Mineral Estate as Adverse Possession of the Whole, 46 Ky. L.J. 67 (1957).

Kentucky Law Survey, Garvey and Dorris, Civil Procedure, 67 Ky. L.J. 489 (1978-1979).

Leathers, Rethinking Jurisdiction and Notice in Kentucky, 71 Ky. L.J. 755 (1982-83).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Greenwell, On the Constitutionality of Kentucky’s Mineral Deed Act, 13 N. Ky. L. Rev. 219 (1986).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint in Action to Quiet Title, Form 313.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Quieting Title, § 313.00.

411.130. Action for wrongful death — Personal representative to prosecute — Distribution of amount recovered.

  1. Whenever the death of a person results from an injury inflicted by the negligence or wrongful act of another, damages may be recovered for the death from the person who caused it, or whose agent or servant caused it. If the act was willful or the negligence gross, punitive damages may be recovered. The action shall be prosecuted by the personal representative of the deceased.
  2. The amount recovered, less funeral expenses and the cost of administration and costs of recovery including attorney fees, not included in the recovery from the defendant, shall be for the benefit of and go to the kindred of the deceased in the following order:
    1. If the deceased leaves a widow or husband, and no children or their descendants, then the whole to the widow or husband.
    2. If the deceased leaves a widow and children or a husband and children, then one-half (1/2) to the widow or husband and the other one-half (1/2) to the children of the deceased.
    3. If the deceased leaves a child or children, but no widow or husband, then the whole to the child or children.
    4. If the deceased leaves no widow, husband or child, then the recovery shall pass to the mother and father of the deceased, one (1) moiety each, if both are living; if the mother is dead and the father is living, the whole thereof shall pass to the father; and if the father is dead and the mother living, the whole thereof shall go to the mother. In the event the deceased was an adopted person, “mother” and “father” shall mean the adoptive parents of the deceased.
    5. If the deceased leaves no widow, husband or child, and if both father and mother are dead, then the whole of the recovery shall become a part of the personal estate of the deceased, and after the payment of his debts the remainder, if any, shall pass to his kindred more remote than those above named, according to the law of descent and distribution.

History. 6: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 89, § 1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.In General.

No rule of common law nor any limitation found in the married woman’s act can possibly have the effect of defeating or abridging such an explicit and mandatory provision of Ky. Const., § 241 and a legislative enactment in compliance therewith that an action may be brought in every case of wrongful death. Robinson's Adm'r v. Robinson, 188 Ky. 49 , 220 S.W. 1074, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 229 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Statute providing adoptive parents may inherit from their adopted child only such property as the adopted child owned at death does not repeal this section relating to actions for death resulting from negligence. Jackson's Adm'x v. Alexiou, 223 Ky. 95 , 3 S.W.2d 177, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1928 ).

KRS 397.010 (now repealed) applies only to the title or devolution of property and has no application to the right to bring an action for wrongful death or to the disposition of the proceeds of such an action. McCallum v. Harris, 379 S.W.2d 438, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1964 ).

This section authorizes the personal representative of the deceased to prosecute the wrongful death action and provides for distribution of the amount recovered in such an action. Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

Where a widow, who was not properly acting in the status of the personal representative of her husband’s estate, did not fulfill the requirements of one who is authorized to bring a wrongful death action nor did she take necessary steps to remedy the deficiency, the trial court had no alternative but to direct a verdict against the widow. Everley v. Wright, 872 S.W.2d 95, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

2.Constitutionality.

Kentucky Constitution, § 241, and this section, which give a personal representative the right to bring an action against “person whose wrongful act caused death of his decedent,” do not violate United States Const., Amend. 14, providing that no state may deprive a person of property without due process of law. Owensboro & N. R. Co. v. Barclay's Adm'r, 102 Ky. 16 , 43 S.W. 177, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 997 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1897 ).

3.Purpose.

It is the purpose, policy, and provision of Ky. Const., § 241 and this section that the wrongdoer shall be liable for the whole damage caused by his wrongful act. Whitney Transfer Co. v. McFarland, 283 Ky. 200 , 138 S.W.2d 972, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1940 ).

4.Construction.

A right of action for wrongfully causing death did not exist at common law, but is a right given solely by statute. Smith's Adm'r v. National Coal & Iron Co., 135 Ky. 671 , 117 S.W. 280, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Stewart's Administratrix v. Bacon, 253 Ky. 748 , 70 S.W.2d 522, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 730 (Ky. Ct. App. 1934).

There are two (2) statutes in this state giving the right to maintain an action for wrongful death: this section, authorizing an action by decedent’s personal representative for death through negligence or any other wrongful act, and KRS 411.150 , giving the right of action to a widow and minor children (now children under 18) of a man killed by the use of deadly weapons where such killing was not done in self-defense, and these statutes are supplementary, although they were originally complementary. Sturgeon v. Baker, 312 Ky. 338 , 227 S.W.2d 202, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In the context of the statute as a whole, “prosecute” necessarily means to commence and carry out a legal action, and the statute does not accord any benefit of the recovery to the personal representative; the right to bring an action is not always tantamount to the right to benefit from that action. Pete v. Anderson, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Under the plain language of the statute, the cause of action “belongs” to the beneficiaries of the wrongful death claim. Pete v. Anderson, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

5.Application.

Under this section, there may be a recovery for death by ordinary negligence of the superior servant engaged in the same employment. Southern R. Co. v. Otis' Adm'r, 78 S.W. 480, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1686 (1904).

This section which follows Ky. Const., § 241, is remedial, and should be liberally construed to effectuate its objects, and it applies no less to an injury inflicted by an overt act than to those resulting from the neglect of a legal duty. Randolph's Adm'r v. Snyder, 139 Ky. 159 , 129 S.W. 562, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1910 ).

This section confers a right of action for death from negligence while operating a vessel on high seas. Southern P. Co. v. De Valle Da Costa, 190 F. 689, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3794 (1st Cir. Mass. 1911).

Kentucky Constitution, § 241 and this section were intended to and do confer a right to sue for damages in every case where death results from injury inflicted by negligence or wrongful act except only where, under the very provisions of these enactments, an action is impossible because the responsible party is also the sole beneficiary of any possible recovery. Bays v. Cox' Adm'r, 312 Ky. 827 , 229 S.W.2d 737, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 750 ( Ky. 1950 ).

This section does not authorize an action on behalf of the estate, but on behalf of the individual beneficiaries. Citizens State Bank v. Seaboard S. R., Inc., 803 S.W.2d 585, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 13 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

Punitive damages were recoverable where an employer was not an agent of the city, and thus did not qualify as an entity of local government, and evidence of gross negligence existed, specifically; that the employer misrepresented the situation to the Department of Highways in order to circumvent the permit process, that it changed the original detour route without notifying the proper entities, that no traffic control plan was implemented, that there were no advance warning signs at the work zone, that improper barricades were placed at the ends of the work zone, and that the employer left only 90 feet of buffer zone between the barricades and the trailer, when industry standards required at least two hundred twenty (220) feet. Phelps v. Louisville Water Co., 103 S.W.3d 46, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 2003 ).

6.—Torts.

This section is confined to actions for death caused by torts, and not by reason of breach of contract. Dice's Adm'r v. Zweigart's Adm'r, 161 Ky. 646 , 171 S.W. 195, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 130 ( Ky. 1914 ) ( Ky. 1914 ).

The words “negligence” and “wrongful act” as used in Ky. Const., § 241 and this section giving right to recover damages for wrongful death are sufficiently broad to embrace every degree of tort that can be committed against the person. Ludwig v. Johnson, 243 Ky. 533 , 49 S.W.2d 347, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1932 ). See Van Galder v. Foster, 243 Ky. 543 , 49 S.W.2d 352, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 160 ( Ky. 1932 ).

This section is confined to torts, and does not cover a case of breach of an ordinary contract. Barley's Adm'x v. Clover Splint Coal Co., 286 Ky. 218 , 150 S.W.2d 670, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Son’s filing of a wrongful death action for the death of his mother sufficiently tolled the time period allowed by KRS 413.140 for bringing such actions, even though son had not yet been named personal representative of his mother’s estate; an amended complaint filed after the expiration of the statutory period related back to the original complaint. Richardson v. Dodson, 832 S.W.2d 888, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.130(1) reflects the language of Ky. Const. § 241, and its plain language compels the conclusion that a wrongful death action may be premised upon a bullying-induced suicide when it can be shown that the offensive conduct caused the death. Patton v. Bickford, 529 S.W.3d 717, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 681 ( Ky. 2016 ).

7.—Governmental Functions.

This section did not confer a right of action against a municipal corporation for the death of a person occurring as the result of an act done in the performance of a governmental function in removing and caring for such person, who was suffering from smallpox, at the pesthouse. Twyman's Adm'r v. Board of Councilmen, 117 Ky. 518 , 78 S.W. 446, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1620 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 217 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Kentucky Constitution, § 241, and this section were not intended to give a cause of action against a municipal corporation for the death of a person occurring as a result of an act done in the performance of a duty which the municipality owed to the public and the doing of which was but an exercise of power purely governmental. Smith's Adm'r v. Commissioners of Sewerage, 146 Ky. 562 , 143 S.W. 3, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 118 ( Ky. 1912 ), overruled in part, Haney v. Lexington, 386 S.W.2d 738, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 178 ( Ky. 1964 ).

To recover in a wrongful death action against a sheriff and his deputies for the death of his wife while he was being served with a peace warrant by two (2) of the sheriff’s deputies, a plaintiff must prove that excessive force was used in the performance of an official duty as distinguished from a personal act. Lawson v. Burnett, 471 S.W.2d 726, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 259 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Supreme Court of Kentucky overruled Chambers v. Ideal Pure Milk Co., 245 S.W.2d 589 ( Ky. 1952 ) insofar as it held there was a per se no proximate cause rule where there was no contact with the pursuing vehicle, but injury or damage occurred, due to an allegedly negligent pursuit, and found that the factual allegations in the case at issue were sufficient to create a disputed issue of material fact as to whether a deputy sheriff negligently conducted his pursuit of a suspect because the duty of care owed to the public at large by pursuing officers was that of due regard. Gonzalez v. Johnson, 581 S.W.3d 529, 2019 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 2019 ).

8.—Master and Servant.

The doctrine that where two servants are in the same field of labor and the same grade of employment, the one not superior or subordinate to the other, neither can recover from the master for an injury caused by the ordinary or gross neglect of his fellow servant applies as well to an action under this section for death caused by willful neglect. Edmonson v. Kentucky C. R. Co., 105 Ky. 479 , 49 S.W. 200, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1296 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 228 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Where two servants of the same master are equal and neither superior to the other, no recovery can be had as against the master by one servant for the negligence of the other under this section or Ky. Const., § 241. Linck's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 107 Ky. 370 , 54 S.W. 184, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1097 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 1899 ).

An action for the death of a servant due to a breach of contract by the master will not lie under Ky. Const., § 241, or this section. Lewis' Adm'r v. Taylor Coal Co., 112 Ky. 845 , 66 S.W. 1044, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2218 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Where death does not result, there can be no recovery by one in the service of the company for only the gross negligence of his superior who was engaged with him in the same service; but where death results, and the action is under this section, it controls, and there may be a recovery for ordinary negligence of the superior servants engaged in the same employment. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Cook's Adm'r, 113 Ky. 161 , 67 S.W. 383, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2410 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Ky. Const. § 241 and KRS 411.130 authorize imposing punitive damages on an employer via vicarious liability or respondeat superior for the gross negligence of employees. In re Air Crash at Lexington, Kentucky, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44888 (E.D. Ky. June 6, 2008).

Specific wrongful death statute, KRS 411.130 , prevailed over the general punitive damages statute, KRS 411.184(3). Under KRS 411.130 (1), punitive damages could be imposed on an employer for the gross negligence of an employee. In re Air Crash at Lexington, Kentucky, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44888 (E.D. Ky. June 6, 2008).

9.—Sale of Intoxicating Liquors.

In action for damages for death of one caused by use of intoxicating liquors alleged to have been illegally sold, in absence of allegation that sale was made for purpose of injuring him or that seller had reasonable grounds to believe deceased could not be safely trusted with whiskey, it cannot be said act of making sale was wrongful under statute. Britton's Adm'r v. Samuels, 143 Ky. 129 , 136 S.W. 143, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 351 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Nally v. Blandford, 291 S.W.2d 832, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1956 ).

A merchant who, contrary to law, sells intoxicating liquors to one who while intoxicated thereby kills another is not liable in damages for the latter’s death. Waller's Adm'r v. Collinsworth, 144 Ky. 3 , 137 S.W. 766, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 535 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Nally v. Blandford, 291 S.W.2d 832, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Recovery was allowed for death by drinking whiskey where seller sold the whiskey to decedent who was intoxicated with intention of injuring him. Nally v. Blandford, 291 S.W.2d 832, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1956 ).

10.When Action Accrues.

The cause of action for wrongful death accrues as of the date of death and not as of the date of injury. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Simrall's Adm'r, 127 Ky. 55 , 104 S.W. 1011, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The statute of limitations for wrongful death actions runs from the death of the decedent, even where there is no viable underlying action for personal injury or medical negligence or malpractice at the time of death. Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Rice, 674 S.W.2d 510, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 1984 ).

11.Persons Entitled to Sue.

If part of the cause of action is for the loss of services of a son from the date of his wrongful death until he would have attained his majority, then it is, in effect, an effort to recover for the death of the son and the father has no right to recover as the right of the father to the services of his son ceases and determines at his death. Harris v. Kentucky Lumber Co., 45 S.W. 94, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1732 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 257 (Ky. Ct. App. 1898).

The Legislature is empowered to direct what persons may bring actions for negligent or wrongful death. Louisville v. Hart's Adm'r, 143 Ky. 171 , 136 S.W. 212, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 377 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The words “father” and “mother” used in this section refer to the natural mother and father and, where the mother was dead, the father was entitled to recovery for the negligent death of child, as against adoptive parents. Jackson's Adm'x v. Alexiou, 223 Ky. 95 , 3 S.W.2d 177, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The common-law disability of one spouse to sue the other or of a parent to sue a child or of a child to sue a parent for tort was inapplicable to suits brought for wrongful death under this section and Ky. Const., § 241, by the administrator of deceased child and the administrator of deceased parent. Hale v. Hale, 312 Ky. 867 , 230 S.W.2d 610, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Administrator of a childless wife cannot maintain action against her widower for her wrongful death to recover funeral expenses, since there is, in effect, no real plaintiff, the husband being both plaintiff and defendant and liable for wife’s funeral expenses. Moore v. Citizens Bank of Pikeville, 420 S.W.2d 669, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1967 ).

KRS 381.280 , creating a forfeiture of the right to inherit property by one who is convicted of a felony for killing the decedent and expressly providing the property interest so forfeited descends to decedent’s other heirs at law, is in the nature of a statutory exception to the law of descent and distribution and has no application in an action for wrongful death under Ky. Const., § 241, or this section and does not give the administrator of childless wife who died of wound inflicted by her husband a right to bring an action where the husband would be the sole beneficiary of his wife’s estate and, in effect, both plaintiff and defendant in the action. Moore v. Citizens Bank of Pikeville, 420 S.W.2d 669, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1967 ).

All actions for wrongful death must be maintained by the personal representative of the deceased, although if the personal representative refuses to bring an action, the beneficiary may do so in his or her own name. Wheeler v. Hartford Acci. & Indem. Co., 560 S.W.2d 816, 1978 Ky. LEXIS 312 ( Ky. 1978 ).

Where a mother was not the personal representative of her deceased son and where the representative had entered a settlement agreement with the insurer on behalf of the estate and executed a general release, the mother was not entitled to bring a wrongful death action on her own behalf. Wheeler v. Hartford Acci. & Indem. Co., 560 S.W.2d 816, 1978 Ky. LEXIS 312 ( Ky. 1978 ).

An illegitimate father has standing to sue for a wrongful death claim pursuant to this section and KRS 411.135 as well as to inherit from his illegitimate child. Cummins v. Cox, 799 S.W.2d 5, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1990 ), modified, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 148 (Ky. Dec. 27, 1990).

Unadopted stepchild of a decedent was not entitled to share of settlement of the decedent’s wrongful death action as the stepchild was not the decedent’s “child” within meaning of KRS 411.130 . The legislature’s express inclusion of stepchildren in other statutes strongly suggested that stepchildren were intentionally excluded from KRS 411.130 . Davis v. Johnson, 295 S.W.3d 841, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 30 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

Because appellee signed the arbitration agreement with appellant’s facility in his individual capacity in addition to signing as his father’s authorized representative, the arbitration agreement was valid and enforceable as to appellee’s individual wrongful death action. 2020 Ky. LEXIS 280 .

12.—Personal Representative.

Where foreign executor filed an action for wrongful death and joined as party plaintiff an ancillary administrator who was a resident of this state and defendant was a citizen of this state, diversity of citizenship, if any, was destroyed. Seymour v. Johnson, 235 F.2d 181, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3841 (6th Cir. Ky. 1956 ).

A Kentucky administrator cannot sue as an ordinary personal representative for the use and benefit of the general estate of its decedent in a Tennessee court but there is an exception to the rule when the personal representative is suing, not for the benefit of the general estate but under the Kentucky wrongful death statute, to recover for sole use and benefit of statutory beneficiary, and he can maintain such an action in Tennessee without obtaining ancillary letters of qualification in Tennessee as he sues as a “trustee” or “medium” for the benefit of the persons entitled to the proceeds and, as the recovery passes directly to the named beneficiaries, it is not an asset of the estate and the rights of local creditors are not involved. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co. v. Baese, 136 F. Supp. 683, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2475 (D. Tenn. 1955).

Under this section, commonly known as the Kentucky wrongful death statute, where deceased is survived by one of the specified beneficiaries, the administrator sues for the beneficiary’s use and benefit alone as in the nature of a trustee. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co. v. Baese, 136 F. Supp. 683, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2475 (D. Tenn. 1955).

Under Ky. Const., § 241, providing right of action for death by wrongful act and that it shall be prosecuted in all cases by the personal representative of the deceased, such personal representative may maintain an action for wrongful death of a man who leaves neither widow nor child. Lexington & C. C. Min. Co. v. Huffman's Adm'r, 32 S.W. 611, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 775 (1895).

The administrator of an alien without an estate or relatives in this country, under Ky. Const., § 241, and this section, may bring an action for wrongful death whether or not the person’s own government would have given any redress for wrongful death. Trotta's Adm'r v. Johnson, Briggs, & Pitts, 121 Ky. 827 , 90 S.W. 540, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 851 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 260 ( Ky. 1906 ).

If the deceased, who is killed by the use of any of the weapons mentioned in KRS 411.150 , leaves a widow and minor child, or either, then the action may be maintained by them under KRS 411.150 ; but, if he leaves neither, then his personal representative may sue under this section. Howard's Adm'r v. Hunter, 126 Ky. 685 , 104 S.W. 723, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1092 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1907 ).

An action to recover for the pain and suffering of a child before he died may be brought by his administrator. Randolph's Adm'r v. Snyder, 139 Ky. 159 , 129 S.W. 562, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1910 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

An action to recover for the wrongful death of a child may be brought by the child’s administrator. Randolph's Adm'r v. Snyder, 139 Ky. 159 , 129 S.W. 562, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1910 ).

An administrator who has no greater or broader powers with respect to his decedent’s rights than she had is in no better position to maintain an action than she was in and cannot therefore maintain an action to recover for the death of his intestate even though it be alleged and proven that her injury was more serious than thought at the time of institution and trial of actions wherein she recovered a judgment for such injuries before her death and even though she left surviving her a husband and minor child. Perry's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 199 Ky. 396 , 251 S.W. 202, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 856 ( Ky. 1923 ).

The personal representative acts for, on behalf of and in stead of the deceased person only, and, if the deceased would have had no cause of action had she lived, none could pass to the administrator. Perry's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 199 Ky. 396 , 251 S.W. 202, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 856 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Personal representative of bystander, killed by sheriff shooting at another, may bring action under this section where widow and children failed to do so under KRS 411.150 . Wells' Adm'r v. Lewis, 213 Ky. 846 , 281 S.W. 996, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Father cannot sue and recover for the burial expenses of a child for, under this section, the administrator must pay the burial expenses out of the recovery for the death of intestate and distribute the remainder to the heirs at law. General Refractories Co. v. Mozier, 235 Ky. 252 , 30 S.W.2d 952, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Where proof showed that five-year-old child died within three (3) hours after injury and no loss of service of any value in that three hours or any expense by the father in that time, the entire cause of action for death vested in the administrator at the time the child died. General Refractories Co. v. Mozier, 235 Ky. 252 , 30 S.W.2d 952, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1930 ). (See KRS 411.133 .).

This statute gives a cause of action to a personal representative for the sole benefit of named beneficiaries. The administrator is merely a nominal plaintiff. Vaughn's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 297 Ky. 309 , 179 S.W.2d 441, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 696 ( Ky. 1944 ).

When a personal representative has been regularly appointed, his authority to bring the action for wrongful death is exclusive. Spangler's Adm'r v. Middlesboro, 301 Ky. 237 , 191 S.W.2d 414, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 735 ( Ky. 1945 ). See Louisville v. Hart's Adm'r, 143 Ky. 171 , 136 S.W. 212, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 377 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where the deceased’s alleged widow had nominated another for appointment as administrator of the deceased’s estate, which consisted solely of a claim for damages arising from the accident in which he was killed, the court did not abuse its discretion in appointing the deceased’s father who could be expected to claim the proceeds of such claim as the only heir of the deceased on the ground that the alleged widow was never validly married to the decedent. Yeary v. Yeary, 351 S.W.2d 515, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1961 ).

In a wrongful death action, upon a showing that previously granted letters of administration are still in force, a second grant of letters of administration will be held void but, in order for a party to make such a showing, he must have pleaded the illegality of the second grant. Lawrence v. Marks, 355 S.W.2d 162, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 17 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Under this section, the cause of action is in the personal representative for the benefit of the next of kin who share the recovery, if any. The next of kin are the real parties in interest in that they share the recovery but they are not necessary parties to the action. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where wife, who was covered by basic reparations benefits provision of her husband’s insurance, and her husband were killed in automobile accident and were survived by three adult children, nonrelated administrator appointed by court was not “survivor,” as defined in subsection (14) of KRS 304.39-020 , entitled as kindred party to benefits under this section nor possessed of right to be enforced under KRS 304.39-030 ; thus, administrator was not proper party to bring action to recover basic reparations benefits. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McEnroe, 610 S.W.2d 593, 1980 Ky. LEXIS 280 ( Ky. 1980 ).

Ky. Const., § 241 and this section mandate that all actions for wrongful death be maintained by the personal representative of the deceased. Where there had never been a valid personal representative of the deceased, the district court did not err in finding wrongful death actions barred by the statute of limitations. Drake v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 782 F.2d 638, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 21993 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

Because there was no evidence that the administrator had any knowledge of the will and the record was void of any facts that would have led the administrator to expect that the deceased had a will, the administrator’s appointment was effective with the signing of an order by the district judge under KRS 395.105 ; his administration would not cease until the putative will was produced and proved pursuant to KRS 395.040(4); thus, the trial court erred in dismissing the administrator’s wrongful death claim on the grounds the administrator was not the proper party. Bennett v. Nicholas, 250 S.W.3d 673, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 330 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Circuit court properly denied the nursing center's motion to compel arbitration of the wrongful death claim brought by an estate on behalf of the decedent's beneficiaries where nothing in judicial precedent overturned Kentucky case law concluding that wrongful death beneficiaries were not bound by agreements executed by a decedent. Preferred Care Partners Mgmt. Grp., L.P. v. Alexander, 530 S.W.3d 919, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 532 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Administrator was entitled to summary judgment as to the claims of a decedent’s beneficiaries because the administrator (1) diligently pursued a wrongful death claim, and (2) had no duty to reduce the administrator’s statutory share of a recovery to lessen the beneficiaries’ lesser recoveries. Reynolds v. Randolph, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 257 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 975 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2018).

13.— —For Children.

Child or her natural tutrix could not maintain action for wrongful death of mother since such action can only be maintained by the personal representative of decedent. Lewis v. Harper, 371 F.2d 555, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7788 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

The fact a husband is entitled to one half of the recovery for his wife’s death cannot defeat the right of her administrator to maintain an action on behalf of her children, entitled to the other half of any sum that might be recovered, against the husband causing her wrongful death. Robinson's Adm'r v. Robinson, 188 Ky. 49 , 220 S.W. 1074, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 229 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Where a wife is survived by children who are entitled to one half the recovery for wrongful death under Ky. Const., § 241, and this section, the wife’s personal representative can maintain an action against the husband who caused his wife’s wrongful death for the benefit of his decedent’s children to the extent they are entitled to any possible recovery. Robinson's Adm'r v. Robinson, 188 Ky. 49 , 220 S.W. 1074, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 229 ( Ky. 1920 ).

14.— —Exceptions.

There are two (2) exceptions under Kentucky law to the requirement that an action for wrongful death must be brought by the personal representative. The beneficiaries under the statute may bring the action in their own names (1) when the personal representative refuses to bring the action and (2) where there is fraud and collusion on the part of the personal representative and the person sought to be made liable for the death. Lewis v. Harper, 371 F.2d 555, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7788 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

Widow and children of deceased may bring suit for wrongful death from fall in mine shaft where representative of deceased’s estate and mine owner conspired to prevent suit against owner and representative has refused demand of widow to bring such suit. McLemore v. Sebree Coal & Mining Co., 121 Ky. 53 , 88 S.W. 1062, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 25 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 177 ( Ky. 1905 ).

The widow had a right to sue for wrongful death of her husband on the refusal of administrator to sue, although the right of action was, under this section, originally in the administrator. Harris v. Rex Coal Co., 177 Ky. 630 , 197 S.W. 1075, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1917 ).

This action may be brought only by the representative, except (1) when the representative refuses to bring suit, or (2) when there is collusion between the representative and the defendant. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Turner, 290 Ky. 602 , 162 S.W.2d 219, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1942 ).

15.—Nonresident Decedents.

Since statute did not authorize a suit in the courts of Kentucky by a foreign administrator for the wrongful death of his decedent, the federal courts could not obtain jurisdiction through diversity of citizenship. Maysville Street R. & Transfer Co. v. Marvin, 59 F. 91, 1893 U.S. App. LEXIS 2335 (6th Cir. Ky. 1893 ). See Marvin v. Maysville Street R. & Transfer Co., 49 F. 436, 1892 U.S. App. LEXIS 1626 (C.C.D. Ky. 1892 ) (decided under prior law).

The authority to bring an action for wrongful death under this section is vested solely upon the resident administrator, so an administrator of an Ohio citizen appointed by an Ohio probate court could not bring a diversity action in federal court against a Kentucky citizen for wrongful death of the Ohio citizen when he was struck by a truck and killed in Kentucky. Siebenhar v. Wise, 16 F.R.D. 479, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3634 (D. Ky. 1951 ).

An administrator may be appointed in this state on the estate of decedent who was a nonresident of the state at the time of his death and who had no personal estate in this state at the time of appointment of the administrator other than a claim, demand, or right of action given by the law of this state to the administrator of a decedent who has been killed by the gross negligence of a railroad company in this state. Brown's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 97 Ky. 228 , 30 S.W. 639, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 145 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Before adoption of this section and Ky. Const., § 241, a personal representative could not be appointed for a nonresident decedent unless it appeared that decedent left property in Kentucky to be administered. Young's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 121 Ky. 483 , 89 S.W. 475, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 451 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 228 ( Ky. 1905 ).

Nonresident administrator of nonresident decedent had no authority to maintain action in Kentucky for wrongful death, at least without complying with KRS 395.170 . Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

No provisions of the federal constitution nor rights conferred by it were denied a foreign representative in whose fiduciary capacity an action for damages for death was brought by requiring him to give bond under KRS. 395.170 . Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where nonresident administrator of nonresident decedent instituted action for wrongful death without complying with KRS 395.170 , attempted substitution of ancillary administrator, subsequently appointed in Kentucky, as plaintiff in the action was not sufficient to toll statute of limitations which had run before appointment of ancillary administrator. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

16.—Employer Corporation.

Where Ohio resident who worked in Ohio for national business firm was killed in an airplane crash in Kentucky, employer which paid claims under Ohio Worker’s Compensation Act to employee’s survivors and was precluded by that act from recovering from third-party tort-feasor, could not bring wrongful death action under Ky. Const., § 241 and this section against the same third-party tort-feasor, since this section gives the sole right to make a claim to the injured person and his spouse if he survives and to the survivors named in the section in the event of death. Harris Corp., Data Communications Div. v. Comair, Inc., 510 F. Supp. 1168, 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11561 (E.D. Ky. 1981 ), aff'd, 712 F.2d 1069, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 25666 (6th Cir. Ky. 1983 ).

17.Real Parties in Interest.

It is the character of the suit on the basis of presently existing conditions which is controlling and, where there is a beneficiary in existence, the fact that if he were not in existence the general estate would benefit is immaterial. Cooper v. American Airlines, Inc., 149 F.2d 355, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2596 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1945). See Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co. v. Baese, 136 F. Supp. 683, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2475 (D. Tenn. 1955).

By express provisions of this section, the widow and children are the real parties in interest and share equally any recovery by the administrator who is merely a nominal plaintiff and there is no legal principle requiring the identity of the real parties in interest to be kept a secret from the jury. McCoy v. Carter, 323 S.W.2d 210, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1959 ). See Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Widow’s waiver in the separation agreement of any additional claim against the decedent had no effect upon the wrongful death proceeds recovered because neither the decedent nor his estate ever had an interest in the proceeds. Rhodes v. Rhodes, 764 S.W.2d 641, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 171 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

When the administratrix of a decedent’s estate sought to prosecute a wrongful death action on behalf of the decedent’s child, whom the administratrix had adopted, such an action was precluded because the administratrix’s adoption of the child severed the child’s legal ties to the decedent, and the child was no longer “the kindred of the deceased,” as contemplated in KRS 411.130(2), defining those on whose behalf a wrongful death action could be maintained. Sluder v. Marple, 134 S.W.3d 15, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 131 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

18.Action Against Parent for Death of Infant.

Under Ky. Const., § 241, and this section, the administrator of a deceased infant’s estate has a cause of action against its parent for wrongful death caused by the latter’s negligence. Harlan Nat’l Bank v. Gross, 346 S.W.2d 482, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1961 ) overruling Harralson v. Thomas, 269 S.W.2d 276, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 996 ( Ky. 1954 ), overruled, Harlan Nat’l Bank v. Gross, 346 S.W.2d 482, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1961 ), overruled in part, Harlan Nat’l Bank v. Gross, 346 S.W.2d 482, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 309 (Ky. 1961)( to the extent of conflict).

An action may be maintained for the wrongful death of an unemancipated child against the estate of its father where both died in a common disaster. McCallum v. Harris, 379 S.W.2d 438, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1964 ).

The fact that a wife was a beneficiary of settlement of a claim for the wrongful death of a husband between the husband’s administrator and a third party did not bar her suit as administratrix for her child for the child’s wrongful death in the same accident against the administrator of her husband. McCallum v. Harris, 379 S.W.2d 438, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1964 ).

19.Viable Infant.

If, while in the womb, it (the unborn child) reaches that prenatal age of viability when the destruction of the life of the mother does not necessarily end its existence also, and when, if separated prematurely and by artificial means from the mother, it would be so far a natural human being that it would live and grow, mentally and physically, as other children generally, it is but to deny a palpable fact to agree there is but one life, and that is the life of the mother. Mitchell v. Couch, 285 S.W.2d 901, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1955 ).

When a pregnant woman is injured through negligence and the child, if it be a viable infant, suffers death as a consequence, a right of recovery exists to the personal representative provided the causal relation between the negligence and the damage to the child is established by competent evidence. Mitchell v. Couch, 285 S.W.2d 901, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where mother, in the last stages of pregnancy, who was injured in automobile accident while returning from hospital after having been informed she was not ready to be confined, was admitted to the hospital immediately after the accident and doctor testified she had been seriously injured and was in a state of shock when admitted and that he had listened and could hear no heartbeat of her child, and the child was stillborn two days later at which time the mother died, the child was “viable” and a “person” under Ky. Const., § 241 and this section, and an action could be maintained by a personal representative for its wrongful death allegedly caused solely by prenatal injury. Mitchell v. Couch, 285 S.W.2d 901, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1955 ).

A “viable” unborn child is an entity in the meaning of the general word “person” within the wrongful death statute. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ). See Mitchell v. Couch, 285 S.W.2d 901, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1955 ).

A viable fetus is a “person” within the meaning of this section. Rice v. Rizk, 453 S.W.2d 732, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Patient’s child’s estate could not bring wrongful death action, KRS 411.130 , as the child was never viable. Baxter v. AHS Samaritan Hosp., LLC, 328 S.W.3d 687, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

20.Governing Law.

Where the statute in the state where the injury is inflicted gives a right of action for death, that right may be enforced in another state having a similar statute. Bruce's Adm'r v. Cincinnati R. R. Co., 83 Ky. 174 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 469 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 59 , 1885 Ky. LEXIS 52 (Ky. Ct. App. 1885). See Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Shivell's Adm'r, 18 S.W. 944, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 902 (1892); Wintuska's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 20 S.W. 819, 14 Ky. L. Rptr. 579 (1892) (decided under prior law).

Under New York law, Pennsylvania executrix could maintain action for wrongful death of Pennsylvania resident against Delaware corporation in New York federal district court, where death occurred in Kentucky and the law would be determined by the law of the state in which the district court is held or the state of New York. Cooper v. American Airlines, Inc., 149 F.2d 355, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2596 (2d Cir. N.Y. 1945).

In an action brought under this section in a federal court by reason of diversity of citizenship for wrongful death of a five-year-old boy who was struck and killed by a motor vehicle as he was crossing the road, the court was required to follow the state law. Hopper v. Reed, 320 F.2d 433, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4497 (6th Cir. Ky. 1963 ).

The deceased having been killed in Illinois by the willful negligence of the Illinois Central Railroad, and damages therefor recovered in this state in a county into which the road ran, the recovery should go the widow according to the law of Illinois, which provides that in such recoveries the whole shall go to the widow, in case there are no children. McDonald v. McDonald, 96 Ky. 209 , 28 S.W. 482, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 412 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1894 ).

As the injuries of decedent were received and death occurred in a sister state, although the suit was brought in this state where the administrator qualified, the right of action was conferred by the statutes of the sister state and the statutes of the sister state were controlling. Cason's Adm'r v. Covington & C. E. R. & T. & B. Co., 93 S.W. 19, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 352 (1906).

This section has no extraterritorial effect and, although it is presumed that the common law prevails in a sister state, it is not presumed that the statutes of a sister state are the same as the statutes of this state; therefore, no action can be maintained in this state to recover for death in a sister state without proof of what the law in the sister state is. Murray's Adm'x v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 132 Ky. 336 , 110 S.W. 334, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 545 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1908 ).

Where death of the decedent occurred in this state and the cause of action arose therein, the remedy offered by its law must control as to the recovery of damages for his death under Ky. Const., § 241, and this section, relating to and providing remedies for wrongful death, and the action is in the resident administrator alone. Compton's Adm'r v. Borderland Coal Co., 179 Ky. 695 , 201 S.W. 20, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1918 ) ( Ky. 1918 ).

Administrator’s right of action for death is not based on the death of his decedent but on the wrongful causing of the death by the defendant, so the cause of action is governed by the laws of the state where the injury or accident occurs, although he may not have a cause of action until the death which may occur elsewhere. Melton's Adm'r v. Southern R. Co., 236 Ky. 629 , 33 S.W.2d 690, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 829 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Action for damages for death is a “transitory action,” and the law of the place where the injury occurs governs in respect to the right of action. Stewart's Administratrix v. Bacon, 253 Ky. 748 , 70 S.W.2d 522, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 730 (Ky. Ct. App. 1934). See Cottengim's Adm'r v. Adams' Adm'x, 255 S.W.2d 637, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1953 ).

The court did not err in directing verdict for defendants in action for damages for death of plaintiff in Canada caused by alleged negligence of defendant in Canada where there was no allegation or proof as to what the Canada law was regarding the right to maintain an action for damages for death, since the common law of Kentucky would not permit recovery for death and, on failure to plead and prove laws of foreign state or country, only one presumption arises and that is that the common law of the foreign state or country is the same as the common law of Kentucky and there is no presumption without pleading and proof as to what is the statute of any other state or foreign country. Stewart's Administratrix v. Bacon, 253 Ky. 748 , 70 S.W.2d 522, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 730 (Ky. Ct. App. 1934).

The substantive law of the place where a tortious wrong was committed determines the right of action and the distribution or apportionment of damages recovered for the wrongful death is considered part of the action and inseparable therefrom, the beneficiaries being named by the statutes of the state where the wrong occurred. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

An action may be maintained under this section for a death occurring on a navigable stream within the territorial limits of Kentucky in which event the law of Kentucky applies and not the rules of federal admiralty law. Gregory v. Paducah Midstream Service, 401 S.W.2d 40, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 391 ( Ky. 1966 ).

21.Venue.

In an action for wrongful death, where plaintiff’s decedent was killed in an automobile accident in Mason County, Kentucky, and defendant was a nonresident of Kentucky, plaintiff had right to bring action in Kenton County, Kentucky, where defendant was actually served with process, considering the action as transitory. Harrison v. Steffen, 51 F. Supp. 225, 1943 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2368 (D. Ky. 1943 ). See Cottengim's Adm'r v. Adams' Adm'x, 255 S.W.2d 637, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In action for wrongful death by common carrier, the decedent is considered the plaintiff within the meaning of the provision of KRS 452.455 that the action may be brought in the county “in which the plaintiff or his property is injured.” Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Moore's Adm'r, 292 Ky. 223 , 166 S.W.2d 68, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 57 ( Ky. 1942 ).

An action for wrongful death is not transitory but is limited by KRS 452.460 to the county in which the defendant resides or in which the injury is done. Cottengim's Adm'r v. Adams' Adm'x, 255 S.W.2d 637, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In a wrongful death action, although appellant claimed that the injury occurred when the decedent passed away in Muhlenberg County, venue under KRS 452.460(1) was not where the damage was suffered; the negligence or injury occurred when the doctor allegedly breached his duty as part of his treatment of the decedent in Ohio County. O'Bannon v. Allen, 337 S.W.3d 662, 2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 59 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).

22.Jurisdiction.

Where death results from a maritime tort committed on navigable waters within a state whose statutes give a right of action on account of death by wrongful act, the admiralty courts will entertain a libel in personam for the damages sustained by those to whom such right is given. Hess v. United States, 361 U.S. 314, 80 S. Ct. 341, 4 L. Ed. 2d 305, 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1883 (U.S. 1960).

Liability created by this section against a corporation of this state will be enforced in courts of another jurisdiction having similar statute if there is no violation of public policy there. Southern P. Co. v. De Valle Da Costa, 190 F. 689, 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 3794 (1st Cir. Mass. 1911).

An action filed in circuit court for wrongful death of plaintiff’s decedent because of alleged failure of defendant railroad to furnish to decedent a reasonably safe place to work and safe tools and appliances with which to work based on several causes of action — under employers’ liability act, KRS 342.001 (now repealed) and quoting KRS 277.310 , Ky. Const., § 241, and this section and alleging decedent was engaged in intrastate commerce, another based on federal employers’ liability act and alleging decedent was engaged in interstate commerce, and a third based on the common law for negligence — was not removable to the federal court for diversity of citizenship for, while the measure of recovery is different, the recovery in each is conditioned upon the proof of negligence which is the same in each cause of action and the federal statute prohibits removal bottomed upon the federal employers’ liability act on the theory there is but a single wrongful invasion of a single right of decedent. Hall v. Illinois C. R. Co., 152 F. Supp. 549, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3438 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

Where railroad and its servants are joined in action for death, and servants are residents of Kentucky, action is not removable to federal court on ground of nonresidence of railroad. Illinois C. R. Co. v. Leisure's Adm'r, 90 S.W. 269, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 768 (1906). See Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Dixon's Adm'x, 104 Ky. 608 , 47 S.W. 615, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 792 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 204 ( Ky. 1898 ), aff'd, 179 U.S. 131, 21 S. Ct. 67, 45 L. Ed. 121, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1856 (U.S. 1900); Pierce's Adm'r v. Illinois C. R. Co., 86 S.W. 703, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 801 (1905).

The state court unquestionably had jurisdiction to try an action for wrongful death occurring on federal property since the action is transitory and the court had jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties. Henry Bickel Co. v. Wright's Adm'x, 180 Ky. 181 , 202 S.W. 672, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 61 ( Ky. 1918 ). See Cottengim's Adm'r v. Adams' Adm'x, 255 S.W.2d 637, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Notwithstanding decedent was a nonresident of the state and his death occurred in another state, and he left no property nor indebtedness due him in this state other than his right of action, the county court of the place where he received the injury resulting in his death had jurisdiction to appoint an administrator of decedent to bring action for wrongful death. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Ryan's Adm'r, 183 Ky. 428 , 209 S.W. 538, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Where infant was domiciled in county where he was shot, the county court of that county had jurisdiction to appoint the administrator to sue for wrongful death and the place where he died, although it was in another state, was immaterial. Phillips' Committee v. Ward's Adm'r, 241 Ky. 25 , 43 S.W.2d 331, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The damage provisions of the federal death on the high seas act, 46 U. S. C. § 761, were found applicable, rather than this section, in a wrongful death action resulting from an accident involving the collision on the Ohio River of a pleasure cruiser and a tow of 15 barges. In re American Commercial Lines, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 134, 1973 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11164 (E.D. Ky. 1973 ).

For purposes of analyzing diversity of citizenship jurisdiction pursuant to 28 USCS § 1332, the executrix of the deceased’s estate was considered to be a citizen of the same state as the deceased at the time of the fatal accident. Pegourie v. Werner Enters., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20235 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 14, 2005).

23.Joint Liability.

Although the master may be a nonresident of state in which action was brought and the servant a resident defendant, an action to recover damages for wrongful death may be prosecuted jointly against the master and the servant guilty of the negligence complained of. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Bohon, 200 U.S. 221, 26 S. Ct. 166, 50 L. Ed. 448, 1906 U.S. LEXIS 1470 (U.S. 1906).

Under this section the plaintiff has a right to proceed severally or jointly against those who are liable for the injury inflicted resulting in death; therefore, where administrator, under this section, alleged a joint cause of action against a resident engineer and fireman and a nonresident railroad corporation to recover damages for the wrongful death of his intestate due to the operation of a train at an unusually rapid rate of speed, the railroad corporation had no right to say that the action should be several and it was not entitled to removal to federal court by reason of diverse citizenship. Winston v. Illinois C. R. Co., 111 Ky. 954 , 65 S.W. 13, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1283 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 276 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

Plaintiff has a right to proceed severally or jointly against those who are liable for the injury inflicted resulting in death, including a corporation and its servants, for negligence of the servants. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Cook's Adm'r, 113 Ky. 161 , 67 S.W. 383, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2410 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1902 ).

An action to recover damages for wrongful death may be prosecuted jointly against the master and the servants guilty of the negligence complained of. Carter Coal Co. v. Prichard's Adm'r, 166 Ky. 776 , 179 S.W. 1038, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 781 ( Ky. 1915 ).

24.Joinder of Actions.

The cause of action created by this section is independent of any action deceased might have had if he had survived. Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Co. v. Frescoln, 245 F. 301, 1917 U.S. App. LEXIS 1485 (9th Cir. Wash. 1917). See Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Dixon, 179 U.S. 131, 21 S. Ct. 67, 45 L. Ed. 121, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1856 (U.S. 1900); Northern P. R. Co. v. Adams, 116 F. 324, 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4340 (9th Cir. Wash. 1902), rev'd, 192 U.S. 440, 24 S. Ct. 408, 48 L. Ed. 513, 1904 U.S. LEXIS 963 (U.S. 1904) (see KRS 411.133 ).

Where certain acts cause death, they cannot be divided so as to make two actions — one to recover the suffering caused and the other to recover for death — but the party must elect and he cannot amend a petition alleging that “gross and willful neglect” caused death to allege gross negligence caused the injury resulting in 15 days’ suffering, as the complaint would as amended make one count for killing caused by willful neglect and another for suffering caused by gross neglect. Hackett v. Louisville, S. L. & T. P. R. Co., 95 Ky. 236 , 24 S.W. 871, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 612 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1894 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

The benefit which this section secures is in lieu of those possessed at common law so, where a personal representative has recovered for death through negligence, a husband is barred from recovering damages for loss of his wife’s society from the time of her injury until her death. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. McElwain, 98 Ky. 700 , 34 S.W. 236, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 379 , 1896 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 1896 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

It was proper to require plaintiff to elect whether he would prosecute statutory action for death of his intestate or common-law action for the suffering. Thomas' Adm'r v. Maysville Gas Co., 108 Ky. 224 , 56 S.W. 153, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1690 (1900) (see KRS 411.133 ).

Where the wrongful acts of one person cause the death of another, the right of recovery for the wrong done cannot be severed by the representatives of the deceased so as to maintain one action for the suffering endured by the deceased after the wrong and before his death and another action for the death itself. Those entitled to maintain the action must elect to seek damages either for the death or suffering prior to the death. Louisville R. Co. v. Raymond's Adm'r, 135 Ky. 738 , 123 S.W. 281, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1909 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

25.Negligence.

The word “negligence,” as used in this section and in Ky. Const., § 241, which will authorize a recovery when death results, is the actionable negligence which would authorize a recovery if death had not ensued. Singleton v. Felton, 101 F. 526, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4429 (6th Cir. Ohio 1900). See Harlan Nat'l Bank v. Gross, 346 S.W.2d 482, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Instructions were more favorable to the defendant than it was entitled to receive where under them inferior servant could only recover compensatory damages by showing gross negligence of superior servant. Illinois C. R. Co. v. Josey's Adm'x, 110 Ky. 342 , 61 S.W. 703, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1795 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 93 ( Ky. 1901 ).

Under this section, gross negligence need not be shown. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Evans's Adm'r, 129 Ky. 152 , 110 S.W. 844, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 596 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 149 ( Ky. 1908 ).

In an action for wrongful death under this section, proof of ordinary negligence is sufficient. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Stewart's Adm'x, 131 Ky. 665 , 115 S.W. 775, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 55 ( Ky. 1909 ).

If the death of a person results from injury inflicted as a result of the negligence of others, the deceased’s estate may recover damages. However, where decedent pointed an unloaded pistol at a SWAT officer serving a search warrant, the shooting of decedent was an act of self-defense, and decedent’s estate could not recover. Whitlow v. City of Louisville, 39 Fed. Appx. 297, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 13357 (6th Cir. Ky. 2002 ).

Punitive damages were recoverable where an employer was not an agent of the city, and thus did not qualify as an entity of local government, and evidence of gross negligence existed, specifically: that the employer misrepresented the situation to the Department of Highways in order to circumvent the permit process, that it changed the original detour route without notifying the proper entities, that no traffic control plan was implemented, that there were no advance warning signs at the work zone, that improper barricades were placed at the ends of the work zone, and that the employer left only 90 feet of buffer zone between the barricades and the trailer, when industry standards required at least two hundred twenty (220) feet. Phelps v. Louisville Water Co., 103 S.W.3d 46, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 2003 ).

26.Pleading.

Kentucky Constitution, § 241 gave a right of recovery to the personal representative regardless of whether the decedent left a widow or child and a petition for death of the plaintiff’s intestate caused by the “willful, gross, and reckless negligence” of a telephone company which showed it was brought under Ky. Const., § 241, was sufficient against demurrer. East Tennessee Tel. Co. v. Simms' Adm'r, 99 Ky. 404 , 36 S.W. 171, 1896 Ky. LEXIS 102 ( Ky. 1896 ).

The rule that plaintiff must aver and show that decedent was not aware of the danger of risk which applies in common-law actions for injuries to servants which do not result in immediate death does not apply in actions under Ky. Const., § 241, and this section, and contributory negligence is a matter of defense in these actions. Lexington & Carter County Min. Co. v. Stephens' Adm'r, 104 Ky. 502 , 47 S.W. 321, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 696 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 179 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Where the petition shows a contributory negligence that, if pleaded as a defense, would defeat a recovery, the question may be reached by a demurrer to the petition. Stillwell's Adm'r v. South Louisville Land Co., 58 S.W. 696, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 785 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 310 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

Under petition charging gross neglect, plaintiff may recover for any lesser degree of negligence. Pendly v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co., 92 S.W. 1, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1324 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 286 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906).

In action to recover for death under this section, it is unnecessary to allege decedent did not know of danger or defect; knowledge on decedent’s part is matter of defense. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Greenwell's Adm'r, 155 Ky. 799 , 160 S.W. 479, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1913 ). See Brown's Adm'r v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 92 S.W. 583, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 146 (1906).

Since accident occurred within state limits, the burden was on the defendant to plead and prove that the place of the accident was upon federal territory excluded from state jurisdiction making state laws inapplicable. Henry Bickel Co. v. Wright's Adm'x, 180 Ky. 181 , 202 S.W. 672, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 61 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Petition in action by administratrix for intestate’s wrongful death by gunshot wound by coal company clerk and alleging a conspiracy of the company and its employees to shoot striking union members who entered the company store was sufficient for an action for wrongful death, as there was a charge that a conspiracy was formed between the company and its employees to commit a wrongful act and that pursuant to and in furtherance of that act plaintiff’s intestate, who was an invitee in the store and an innocent party, was killed. Davenport's Adm'x v. Crummies Creek Coal Co., 299 Ky. 79 , 184 S.W.2d 887, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 386 ( Ky. 1945 ).

27.— Amendment of Petition.

Where original complaint which alleged that the death of intestate resulted from willful neglect of engineer in charge of and operating the engine attached to and drawing the train which killed him was amended to withdraw allegation of “willful neglect” and substituting “negligence,” the amendment merely alleged a different degree of neglect and not a new cause of action. Roseberry's Adm'r v. Newport News & M. V. R. Co., 39 S.W. 407, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 194 (1897).

An amendment charging for the first time that there was a statute of Virginia allowing a recovery for the death of one produced by the negligence of another was germane to the original cause of action sued on, therefore relating back to the time of the filing of the original petition so as to save the running of the statute, since it did not change the parties, the nature of the action, or the cause of it but merely perfected that which was imperfect. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Pointer's Adm'r, 113 Ky. 952 , 69 S.W. 1108, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 772 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Where original petition brought by father individually sought damages for refusing to treat child resulting in its death and the petition was amended to seek damages for negligently treating child resulting in its death and to bring the action by administrator, the amended petition stated an entirely new cause of action and should not have been filed. Randolph's Adm'r v. Snyder, 139 Ky. 159 , 129 S.W. 562, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1910 ).

If case is brought under state law and, during trial, it develops by undisputed evidence that it is one exclusively within provisions of federal act, plaintiff must amend his pleadings to conform. Hines v. Burns' Adm'x, 189 Ky. 761 , 226 S.W. 109, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 511 ( Ky. 1920 ).

A father who brought a wrongful death action for the death of his seven-year-old son when struck by an automobile could, if he had not secured a valid appointment as administrator of his son’s estate and if the judgment were set aside for that reason, still remedy the omission and proceed by amendment, although the statute of limitations had run, as the amendment would relate back to the filing of the original complaint and the case of Totten v. Loventhal (1963), 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 , would be inapplicable, since in that case the attempted amendment asserted “a new and different cause of action.” Modern Bakery, Inc. v. Brashear, 405 S.W.2d 742, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1966 ).

28.Defenses.

In wrongful death action, defense that accident occurred upon federal property and was within its jurisdiction and that state law did not apply was a separate and distinct defense from that of contributory negligence made in original answer and, where it was not offered until after the case had gone to trial and after plaintiff had introduced her evidence, it was within the sound discretion of the trial court to give or withhold permission to file the amended answer. Henry Bickel Co. v. Wright's Adm'x, 180 Ky. 181 , 202 S.W. 672, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 61 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Where the two persons had been on good terms and had previously hunted together and the victim ceased his teasing when the defendant became agitated, recovery would not be barred by the victim’s own conduct because the evidence was not sufficient to support a finding that the tragic consequence was reasonably foreseeable. Bolen v. Howard, 452 S.W.2d 401, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Summary judgment for a tortfeasor was reversed as under the public policy of Kentucky, KRS 413.140 did not bar a decedent’s administrator from bringing a wrongful death suit against a tortfeasor convicted of murdering the decedent more than one-year after discovering, when the tortfeasor’s preliminary criminal hearing was held, that the tortfeasor might have been responsible for the crime; the public policy was furthered by allowing the family of a murder victim to wait until a tortfeasor’s conviction before filing suit. DiGiuro v. Ragland, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 188 (Ky. Ct. App. June 25, 2004), overruled, Flick v. Estate of Wittich, 2015 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 859 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015).

29.—Workers’ Compensation Act.

The personal representative of an employee, who accepted provisions of workers’ compensation act, although his death was caused by negligence of employer, could not maintain action to recover damages for death under Ky. Const., § 241. Grannison's Adm'r v. Bates & Rogers Const. Co., 187 Ky. 538 , 219 S.W. 806, Ky. LEXIS 161 (Ky.), writ of error dismissed, 254 U.S. 613, 41 S. Ct. 62, 65 L. Ed. 438, 1920 U.S. LEXIS 1133 (U.S. 1920).

By his acceptance of the workers’ compensation act, the employee elected that the loss resulting from his death should be compensated for in the manner provided by the act and foreclosed the assertion by the personal representative of the constitutional right under Ky. Const., § 241, and the statutory right under this section. Davis v. Solomon, 276 S.W.2d 674, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 441 ( Ky. 1955 ).

In an action brought against an employer under this section by administrator of 16-year-old boy who was drowned when a soft-drink truck on which he was employed as a helper ran off the road into a river, the workers’ compensation act was a defense to the action since the action under this section did not come under the saving feature of the workers’ compensation law (KRS 342.170 (now repealed)) which makes the workers’ compensation act inapplicable where employer employed minor in willful and known violation of any law of Kentucky regulating the employment of minors. Campbell v. East Kentucky Beverage Co., 355 S.W.2d 291, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 62 ( Ky. 1962 ).

An administrator was precluded from bringing a wrongful death action against a fellow employee of his decedent where he was barred by the workers’ compensation act from maintaining an action against his decedent’s employer because the death of the employee was not through the deliberate intention of his employer which would bring the action within the exception of subsection (2) of KRS 342.015 (now repealed). McCray v. Davis H. Elliott Co., 419 S.W.2d 542, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1967 ).

30.—Contributory Negligence.

In Kentucky, contributory negligence may be pleaded as a defense to action to recover damages for wrongful death. Feige v. Hurley, 89 F.2d 575, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 3529 (6th Cir. Ky. 1937 ).

Kentucky Constitution, § 241, giving a personal representative the right to sue for death by negligence or wrongful act, was not designed to deprive a defendant of the right as then existed to plead and prove contributory negligence as a defense. Passamaneck v. Louisville R. Co., 98 Ky. 195 , 32 S.W. 620, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 763 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Kentucky Constitution, § 241 is not intended to deprive a defendant of the right to rely on contributory negligence as a defense and it is available as a defense in an action by a personal representative. Clark's v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 101 Ky. 34 , 39 S.W. 840 ( Ky. 1897 ).

Contributory negligence is a defense to an action under this section, giving a right to sue for death by wrongful act for death of an infant while employed in a mine in violation of KRS 339.220 prohibiting employment of infants under 14 years of age. Smith's Adm'r v. National Coal & Iron Co., 135 Ky. 671 , 117 S.W. 280, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1909 ).

The rule is that if the injury or loss complained of by a person seeking recovery was caused by his own negligence, it will defeat a recovery, although the person committing the injury may also have been negligent, and the fact that the action is brought under this section for the destruction of life does not change the rule; the only difference is that in such case the burden is upon the defendant to show the contributory negligence that is relied upon to defeat a recovery. Cincinnati v. Yocum's Admr, 137 Ky. 117 , 123 S.W. 247, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 485 ( Ky. 1909 ).

Contributory negligence is a good defense to an action to recover damages for death caused by negligent or wrongful act if it is of such a character that death would not have occurred except for the contributory negligence. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Lovell's Adm'r, 141 Ky. 249 , 132 S.W. 569, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1 910), modified, 142 Ky. 1 , 133 S.W. 788, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1911 ).

When a child is employed in a prohibited occupation, and is injured while so employed, employer cannot defeat a recovery on ground of assumption of risk, contributory negligence, or act of fellow servant. Louisville, H. & St. L. R. Co. v. Lyons, 155 Ky. 396 , 159 S.W. 971, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 277 ( Ky. 1913 ).

If one’s death is caused solely by his own negligence, there cannot be a recovery under either the state law or federal employers’ liability act. Ellis' Adm'r v. Louisville, H. & S. L. R. Co., 155 Ky. 745 , 160 S.W. 512, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 355 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Contributory negligence on the part of the deceased infant is available to defendant as a defense in an action based on violation of child labor law. Armstrong's Adm'r v. Sumne & Ratterman Co., 211 Ky. 750 , 278 S.W. 111, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 963 ( Ky. 1925 ).

It was a reciprocal duty of decedents to take such care for their own safety as a reasonably prudent person would have exercised under circumstances similar to those proven in this case, considering the character of the crossing and the obstruction, if any, and if they failed to do this, their personal representative would be precluded from a recovery under this section. Cox's Adm'r v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co., 238 Ky. 312 , 37 S.W.2d 859, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 232 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where complaint in action for wrongful death alleged that vendor knew when he sold the liquor to intoxicated person that such person intended to drink all of it without ceasing and that the vendee could not be safely trusted with it, the vendor could reasonably foresee that death might result and the defense of contributory negligence was not available because the act of the vendor was alleged to be intentionally wrongful. Nally v. Blandford, 291 S.W.2d 832, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 405 ( Ky. 1956 ).

An action brought under this section for wrongful death of decedent while he was standing in the highway beside his parked automobile in which a verdict for $21,197, including funeral expenses and damages to decedent’s automobile, was awarded was reversed for jury determination of whether recovery was due under the last clear chance doctrine, since decedent was clearly contributorily negligent for standing in the highway. Mullins v. Bullens, 383 S.W.2d 130, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 15 ( Ky. 1964 ).

Contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery under this section. Gregory v. Paducah Midstream Service, 401 S.W.2d 40, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 391 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Pregnant woman who fell on a public sidewalk because her attention was diverted toward a bus stop across the street was contributorily negligent in walking into the sidewalk defect. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ).

Court properly based its allowance of attorney fees on the actual recovery, rather than the damages found by the jury, where the jury apportioned 50 percent of the damages to plaintiff’s negligence. Cox v. Cooper, 510 S.W.2d 530, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 553 ( Ky. 1974 ).

Where an 18-year-old boy was killed while riding as the passenger of a deputy sheriff, when the deputy sheriff lost control of his police cruiser while chasing some speeders, the issue of the passenger’s contributory negligence was a fact question for the jury and the trial court did not err in refusing to enter a directed verdict on the issue in favor of the defendant deputy sheriff. Prater v. Arnett, 648 S.W.2d 82, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 278 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).

31.— —By Parents of Infant.

Contributory negligence of mother was imputed to the father in an action by the father as administrator for the wrongful death of his four-year-old son. Toner's Adm'r v. South C. & C. S. R. Co., 109 Ky. 41 , 58 S.W. 439, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 564 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 165 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Instruction that recovery for death of boy under 16, employed contrary to statute, would be defeated by father’s violation of statute was erroneous where mother was also beneficiary, though she died before trial. Kentucky Utilities Co. v. McCarty's Adm'r, 169 Ky. 38 , 183 S.W. 237, Ky. LEXIS 645 (Ky.), modified, 170 Ky. 543 , 186 S.W. 150, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Parent’s violation of the child labor law did not defeat recovery for death for benefit of the other innocent parent. Kentucky Utilities Co. v. McCarty's Adm'r, 169 Ky. 38 , 183 S.W. 237, Ky. LEXIS 645 (Ky.), modified, 170 Ky. 543 , 186 S.W. 150, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1916 ).

In a suit against the employer by a father for wrongful death of child under 16, employer may aver in answer that father consented to employment of boy. Carter Coal Co. v. Love, 173 Ky. 49 , 190 S.W. 481, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 412 ( Ky. 1917 ).

The recovery in the wrongful death action is solely for the benefit of the father and not for the estate of the deceased son, though the action under the statute authorizing it is prosecuted in the name of the personal representative of the deceased son and a recovery for his benefit is not allowed if the father knew of and suffered the unlawful employment. Cincinnati Times Star Co. v. Clay's Adm'r, 195 Ky. 465 , 243 S.W. 16, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 371 ( Ky. 1922 ).

In action for wrongful death of three-year-old child, where father was not at home and the mother was at work in the back part of the house and had directed the child to go into the house and dry his feet, but he disobeyed and escaped out the front door into the road without her knowledge and was struck and killed by a truck the mother was not contributorily negligent. Brown McClain Transfer Co. v. Major's Adm'r, 251 Ky. 741 , 65 S.W.2d 992, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 945 ( Ky. 1933 ).

The test of parent’s negligence is always whether under the circumstances they or either of them exercised that degree of care which an ordinarily prudent person would have exercised under like circumstances. Brown McClain Transfer Co. v. Major's Adm'r, 251 Ky. 741 , 65 S.W.2d 992, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 945 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Negligence of the parents directly and proximately contributing to the death of a child non sui juris will preclude recovery on their part, and the question of the parents’ negligence is usually for the jury. Burton v. Spurlock's Adm'r, 294 Ky. 336 , 171 S.W.2d 1012, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 459 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where six-year-old child, delivering newspapers for mother with father’s consent, ran into road in front of defendant’s car, it was proper, in action for wrongful death, to give instruction on parent’s contributory negligence. Burton v. Spurlock's Adm'r, 294 Ky. 336 , 171 S.W.2d 1012, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 459 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Recovery in action by administrator of the estate of two-year-old child for his wrongful death when he was struck by an automobile while crossing the highway alone was barred by the contributory negligence of his mother in placing the child in the care of his nine-year-old sister, which contributory negligence was imputed to the father. Wheat's Adm'r v. Gray, 309 Ky. 593 , 218 S.W.2d 400, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1949 ). See Kentucky Utilities Co. v. McCarty's Adm'r, 169 Ky. 38 , 183 S.W. 237, Ky. LEXIS 645 (Ky.), modified, 170 Ky. 543 , 186 S.W. 150, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1916 ); Brown McClain Transfer Co. v. Major's Adm'r, 251 Ky. 741 , 65 S.W.2d 992, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 945 ( Ky. 1933 ); Caldwell v. Jarvis, 299 Ky. 439 , 185 S.W.2d 552, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 432 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Unless there is something more shown than the marital relation or a parent-child relation, negligence should not be imputed, so the negligence of the father will not bar recovery for the benefit of the mother in an action by administrator of a child’s estate for damages for its wrongful death. Hale v. Hale, 312 Ky. 867 , 230 S.W.2d 610, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Court of Appeals is definitely committed to the doctrine that a father may not recover where his wife’s negligence contributed to the death of a child, since the wife-mother is considered the father’s agent as to the custody of the child and since the recovery sought is for their joint benefit. Emerine v. Ford, 254 S.W.2d 938, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 625 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Paragraph (d) of subsection (2) of this section precludes negligent parents from obtaining a recovery for a tortious act to the child, but the failure of parent to remove disabled vehicle to a narrow shoulder was not negligent as a matter of law nor was the failure to remove three babies in the night to a narrow shoulder of a road grown up in weeds in close proximity to heavy traffic passing by at high speed and the administrator for two of the infants who were killed when the automobile was struck in the rear by a truck could recover for their wrongful death. Service Lines, Inc. v. Mitchell, 419 S.W.2d 525, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1967 ).

To the extent that any parent may be found guilty of contributory negligence or of imputed contributory negligence, the rule is that such parent is barred from recovery under this section, known as the wrongful death act, and this is true in cases involving violations of the child labor act. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where the statutory beneficiary under this section is guilty of wrongdoing or negligence that proximately causes or contributes to the wrongful death, he is barred from recovery of his share and he cannot remove the bar by an assignment to the beneficiary or beneficiaries next in the line of succession, any such assignments being considered ineffectual efforts to circumvent the defense of contributory negligence. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

The contributory negligence of a pregnant woman in walking into a sidewalk defect while looking at a bus stop in a wrongful death action brought by the administrator of her “viable” child could not be imputed to the father of the child and bar him from recovery for his share. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ). See Hale v. Hale, 312 Ky. 867 , 230 S.W.2d 610, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1950 ).

32.Presumptions and Burden of Proof.

In an action brought under this section, which was enacted in pursuance of Ky. Const., § 241, to recover for death, it was not necessary that the plaintiff should prove that the deceased exercised ordinary care for his own safety or did not know of the danger, but the defendant may show, to establish contributory negligence, that the deceased was not exercising ordinary care and that he did know of the unsafe appliance or place. Warren's Adm'r v. Jeunesse, 122 S.W. 862 ( Ky. 1909 ).

In cases where one person is killed by the negligent or wrongful act of another, the plaintiff is not required to prove that the defendant was exercising ordinary care for his own safety at the time of his death. Johnson v. Westerfield's Adm'r, 143 Ky. 10 , 135 S.W. 425, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 330 ( Ky. 1911 ).

In action for death of employee, defendant has the burden of showing parent’s violation of child labor law. Kentucky Utilities Co. v. McCarty's Adm'r, 169 Ky. 38 , 183 S.W. 237, Ky. LEXIS 645 (Ky.), modified, 170 Ky. 543 , 186 S.W. 150, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Although no punitive damages could be awarded against a lunatic for wrongful death, it was nevertheless necessary for the plaintiff to prove the facts showing commission and consequence of the tort and that the lunatic did not act in self-defense as was claimed where defendant tendered the issues made by a traverse and a plea of self-defense. Phillips' Committee v. Ward's Adm'r, 241 Ky. 25 , 43 S.W.2d 331, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where there was neither verbal nor circumstantial evidence tending to show that the conduct of defendants in any manner or to any extent contributed to the loss of their lives, there was a presumption of due care on their part. Owen Motor Freight Lines v. Russell's Adm'r, 260 Ky. 795 , 86 S.W.2d 708, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 556 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Where petition in action for assault expressly averred that the attempted arrest of decedent by deputy was lawful because he committed a misdemeanor in the presence of the deputy and the deputy committed the acts complained of, if at all, in the exercise of his authority and discharge of his duty as an arresting officer, the burden was on defendant to show excess authority on the part of the deputy. West v. Nantz' Adm'r, 267 Ky. 113 , 101 S.W.2d 673, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In action by wife’s mother as administratrix of her daughter’s estate against husband’s estate for wrongful death of wife in automobile accident in Ohio, the burden was on plaintiff to prove the contractual relationship, express or implied, to establish the relationship of the wife as a paying passenger rather than as a social guest. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

33.Evidence.

In an action for wrongful death, the failure to introduce evidence of earning capacity is not fatal to a recovery. Keys v. Nash's Adm'x, 264 Ky. 398 , 94 S.W.2d 1006, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1936 ).

An instruction to the jury in a wrongful death action which denied the right of self-defense to defendants if they provoked the encounter was erroneous where there was no evidence whatever that the defendants brought on the encounter which resulted in death of plaintiff’s decedent. Flanary's Adm'x v. Griffin, 239 S.W.2d 248, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 870 ( Ky. 1951 ).

A showing of decedent’s potential capacity or power to earn money is not required in the case of a four-day-old child born prematurely, since it is impossible to furnish any direct evidence of it and to require it would deny recovery entirely. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ).

The defendant in a malpractice suit was not entitled to a directed verdict where the medical testimony was such as to properly present a jury issue under the instructions of the trial court. Rice v. Rizk, 453 S.W.2d 732, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1970 ).

The testimony of an economic expert is an acceptable way of proving damages to an estate in wrongful death. Prater v. Arnett, 648 S.W.2d 82, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 278 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).

34.—Admissibility.

In an action for wrongful death, it was not proper that evidence of the suffering of deceased between the hour of his injury and that of his death should go to the jury. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Banks' Adm'r, 142 Ky. 746 , 135 S.W. 285, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1911 ). (See KRS 411.133 ).

Evidence describing acts of defendant two or three days preceding shooting and killing plaintiff’s decedent which were similar to his conduct at the time of the shooting had a bearing and was admissible on the issue of self-defense, although defendant was insane. Phillips' Committee v. Ward's Adm'r, 241 Ky. 25 , 43 S.W.2d 331, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1931 ).

In an action brought under this section for the benefit of the estate, court did not err in refusing to permit the infant children to be made parties to the action and in refusing to allow testimony to be introduced concerning them. Flanary's Adm'x v. Griffin, 239 S.W.2d 248, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 870 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Ordinarily, evidence concerning the character and habits of the decedent is relevant because they have a bearing on his earning capacity, but evidence reflecting adversely on the moral character of the decedent should be permitted only in the clearest of cases in which its probative value distinctly outweighs its prejudicial effect. Empire Metal Corp. v. Wohlwender, 445 S.W.2d 685, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Under the Kentucky statute, the character of the husband of the deceased and the relations existing between him and the wife and child were not pertinent to the measure of recovery. Empire Metal Corp. v. Wohlwender, 445 S.W.2d 685, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Where evidence that the deceased wife was living in the adultery had little more than speculative bearing on her capacity to earn the minimum wage of a waitress or clerk-typist, the evidence was properly excluded. Empire Metal Corp. v. Wohlwender, 445 S.W.2d 685, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Where widow received benefits under Ohio worker’s compensation statute due to death of her husband, in course of his employment for an Ohio Corporation, KRS 411.188 does not consider such payments to be payments from a collateral source, paid to, or for, the benefit of the estate of the husband, and as such, evidence of the worker’s compensation payments was not admissible at trial in a wrongful death action. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 889 S.W.2d 804, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 143 ( Ky. 1994 ).

35.—Insufficient.

When the question is one of negligence or no negligence, it is well-settled law that where the evidence is equally consistent with either view, the court should not submit the case to the jury for the party affirming the negligence has failed to prove it; therefore, where evidence taken as a whole tended as much to show that the death of a patient was due to the delay in performing a mastoid operation as any other cause, and it was wholly a matter of conjecture that if the operation had been performed on the day the patient went to see the doctor, the patient’s life could have been saved, the court properly refused to submit the case to the jury. Cochran's Adm'x v. Krause, 144 Ky. 202 , 137 S.W. 1053, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 581 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where no competent evidence was introduced to show that driver of defendant’s automobile was defendant’s agent or acting in the course of defendant’s business, verdict for plaintiff in action for wrongful death was flagrantly against the weight of the evidence. Davis v. Bennett's Adm'r, 279 Ky. 799 , 132 S.W.2d 334, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Testimony that a negligently inflicted injury merely hastened a death resulting solely from a previously contracted fatal disease is not equivalent to proof that the injury was a proximate cause thereof when neither the extent of the “hastening” nor the manner in which the injury operated to produce it is shown and hence such testimony is insufficient to sustain a recovery in an action instituted by the personal representative under the authority of Ky. Const., § 241, to recover the damages sustained by the estate through the loss of life. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Newell, 299 Ky. 65 , 184 S.W.2d 214, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1013 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where girl suffering from acute tuberculosis was subjected to exposure to rain due to alleged negligence of ambulance operator and died 51 days later from tuberculosis, and the only evidence that the exposure hastened her death was testimony of a physician in answer to a hypothetical question in which the circumstances were prejudicially exaggerated, while other physicians testified positively that the exposure developed no other disease or complication, defendant ambulance operator was entitled to a directed verdict in action for wrongful death under the authority of Ky. Const., § 241. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Newell, 299 Ky. 65 , 184 S.W.2d 214, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1013 ( Ky. 1944 ).

In wrongful death action, where fire destroyed home outside of which the deceased’s burned body was found, and the record did not disclose any evidence of substance upon which a verdict could be based, the cause of death and the origin of the fire which destroyed the home was a matter of conjecture and speculation. Cole's Adm'r v. Cole's Adm'r, 314 Ky. 672 , 236 S.W.2d 927, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 724 ( Ky. 1951 ).

In an action by decedent’s administrator brought in behalf of decedent’s widow and infant child for wrongful death, evidence failed to prove cause of death or any negligent act which could be determined to have been the cause of death where only proof was decedent died from lack of oxygen, and doctor performing autopsy testified that had he been poisoned by gas the result of the autopsy would have been the same and there was no testimony that the conversion to natural gas was done in an unworkmanlike manner or that the furnace had caused any trouble, but the testimony disclosed the cabin was small, four people were present that day, the thermostat controlling the furnace was set high and the heat was excessive, which three factors could have caused the lack of oxygen. James v. England, 349 S.W.2d 359, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 55 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Summary judgment was properly granted to the defendant employer in a wrongful death action where an expert witness for the plaintiff opined that the decedent was delirious or insane when he committed suicide and that ethnic scapegoating, name calling, and verbal hostility at his place of employment were a substantial contributing factor in his psychotic depression and eventual suicide, but did not suggest that the decedent was delirious or insane and either incapable of realizing the nature of his act or unable to resist an impulse to commit it. Epelbaum v. Elf Atochem N. Am., Inc., 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 17581 (6th Cir. Ky. July 19, 2000).

36.—Sufficient.

Considering testimony improperly rejected by the lower court, there was evidence of a contractual relationship between the wife and the husband under Ohio law and evidence that husband collided head-on with another car while he was trying to pass one or two other cars on a curve was prima facie sufficient to take to the jury the question of his failure to exercise ordinary care, which is the measure of duty to a passenger who is not a guest under the Ohio law. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

In an action for the wrongful death of a 14-year-old boy who was standing in the highway, the fact that the driver, blinded by the rays of the sun, continued to proceed ahead causing injury to another in the highway justified or required a finding of actionable negligence. Bell v. Cooksey, 419 S.W.2d 548, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 160 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Testimony of doctor, who delivered baby three days after a fall by its mother on a defective sidewalk, that the fall caused premature labor and birth which resulted in the death of the child was sufficient to establish the necessary causal relationship between the fall and the death where doctor had examined pregnant mother the afternoon prior to the fall and her pregnancy had been proceeding normally. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ).

37.—Competency of Witnesses.

In an action for wrongful death brought under this section by a mother who was administratrix of her daughter’s estate against her daughter’s husband arising out of an automobile accident in Ohio, the competency of the mother as a witness and of her proposed testimony would involve the ascertainment of whether she had a pecuniary interest as a matter of fact under the Ohio law, but other factors which might be considered, such as a disclaimer or extinguishment of any interest by the witness and her qualification to testify on behalf of her decedent’s minor child, although not for herself as a beneficiary, if it would be found that she would be such beneficiary, would be determinable under Kentucky law where the action was brought. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Testimony of mother that her deceased daughter told her over the telephone that she and her husband had spent $300 on an automobile trip was self-serving, but her testimony that the deceased husband confirmed the statement in his conversation may be regarded as an admission against his interests in that it recognized contractual relationship giving wife the status of a paying passenger rather than as a social guest. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

The mother of deceased is only potentially a beneficiary of a recovery for wrongful death of her daughter who was survived by a young child and her interest does not disqualify her as a witness. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Under this section, mother of deceased whose estate is seeking to recover damages would not be disqualified as witness on ground of being beneficiary, since the deceased was survived by a child, nor would she be disqualified as a personal representative. Workman v. Hargadon, 345 S.W.2d 644, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1960 ).

38.Damages.

In estimating compensatory damages in wrongful death actions, the jury may receive evidence concerning the habits, character, physical condition, earning capacity, and probably duration of life of deceased. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Lovell's Adm'r, 141 Ky. 249 , 132 S.W. 569, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1 910), modified, 142 Ky. 1 , 133 S.W. 788, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Damages for wrongful death must be left to the sound discretion of a jury and the court will not interfere with the discretion of the jury unless the amount of damages allowed is so large and disproportional to the probable loss as to strike the mind at first blush as necessarily the result of passion and prejudice on the part of the jury or the consequence of a mistake in the application of the law. West Kentucky Coal Co. v. Shoulders' Adm'r, 234 Ky. 427 , 28 S.W.2d 479, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 200 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Kentucky Constitution, § 54, prohibiting limitation of amount recoverable for injuries, inhibits the Legislature from abolishing rights of action for damages for death or injuries caused by negligence. Ludwig v. Johnson, 243 Ky. 533 , 49 S.W.2d 347, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1932 ). See Van Galder v. Foster, 243 Ky. 543 , 49 S.W.2d 352, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 160 ( Ky. 1932 ).

The quantum of damages recoverable under the federal employers’ liability act is substantially different from the measure of damages for wrongful death under this section. Roland v. Beckham, 408 S.W.2d 628, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1966 ).

In action by plaintiffs to recover damages (1) for destruction of their son’s earning power, (2) for the pain and suffering of their son prior to his death and (3) for loss of affection and companionship of their son, defendants were entitled to credit for any amount previously collected by son’s estate from the Department of Transportation, Bureau of Highways for damages for his death, only against the amount plaintiffs recovered for destruction of earning capacity of decedent, since the Board of Claims has no authority to award damages for pain and suffering or for loss of affection and companionship. Blankenship v. Watson, 672 S.W.2d 941, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 535 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984), overruled, Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

Measure of damages for wrongful death under this section is the value of the destruction of the power of the decedent to earn money and the action is properly brought by the personal representative of the deceased. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 889 S.W.2d 804, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 143 ( Ky. 1994 ).

In a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action brought by the administrator of a decedent’s estate arising out of the decedent’s death, the decedent’s Social Security disability payments could be considered by the jury in determining compensatory damages under KRS 411.130(1) because the decedent likely would have continued to receive disability benefits but for his death, and thus, the disability payments were a substitute for earning power and were recoverable. Meinhart v. Campbell, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111511 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 30, 2009).

Partial summary judgment was properly granted for physicians in a wrongful death action filed by parents for the loss of their son’s future earning capacity against the physicians under KRS 411.130 . The decedent who was five years old experienced no destruction of his power to labor at the hands of the physicians, so no recovery was available. Aull v. Houston, 345 S.W.3d 232, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 8 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010), limited, Savage v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2021 Ky. App. LEXIS 8 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 15, 2021).

Although the decedent was in poor health and without work experience for 15 years, the administrator of her estate averred that the decedent was capable of daily housework and caring for her parents, services that were roughly valued at $25,000. The factual dispute between the healthcare provider and the administrator of the estate concerning what the decedent was physically capable of doing and what value to put on the services she provided (i.e., her ability to earn money) was enough to demonstrate that summary judgment was inappropriate; thus, a decision regarding the sufficiency of the administrator’s damages claims under KRS 411.130 was best left in the sound discretion of the jury. Radford v. DVA Renal Healthcare, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121114 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 16, 2010).

39.—Nature.

As used in Ky. Const., § 241, the word “damages” is used in its broadest sense and includes both compensatory and exemplary damages for injuries resulting in death. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Kelly's Adm'x, 100 Ky. 421 , 38 S.W. 852, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 69 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 20 ( Ky. 1897 ).

In an action arising under Ky. Const., § 241, prior to the enactment of this section, punitive damages were recoverable for death by gross negligence. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Kelly's Adm'x, 100 Ky. 421 , 38 S.W. 852, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 69 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 20 ( Ky. 1897 ).

The court properly instructed the jury that they might allow compensatory damages if there was ordinary negligence, and punitive damages if there was gross negligence. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Cook's Adm'r, 113 Ky. 161 , 67 S.W. 383, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2410 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1902 ).

There was no error in the court giving an instruction on punitive damages, since it was gross negligence for a railroad to direct or suffer its trains to be run from 20 to 30 miles an hour over a roadbed it knew to be weak, rotten, defective and without cattle guards. Illinois C. R. Co. v. Sheegog's Adm'r, 126 Ky. 252 , 103 S.W. 323, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 691 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1907 ), aff'd, 215 U.S. 308, 30 S. Ct. 101, 54 L. Ed. 208, 1909 U.S. LEXIS 1760 (U.S. 1909).

The failure of those in charge of a train to give the usual signals of its approach to a crossing at the usual rate of speed at which freight trains travel was not gross, but ordinary, negligence and a punitive damage instruction was not authorized under the evidence. Illinois C. R. Co. v. Moss' Adm'r, 142 Ky. 658 , 134 S.W. 1122, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1911 ).

In an action under this section for wrongful death while passing over a public railroad crossing, there may be a recovery of compensatory damages for ordinary negligence; and, if the circumstances are such as to bring the case within the purview of KRS 277.060 , there may be recovery of punitive damages. Schmid's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 155 Ky. 237 , 159 S.W. 786, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 236 ( Ky. 1913 ). See Illinois C. R. Co. v. Moss' Adm'r, 142 Ky. 658 , 134 S.W. 1122, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The failure of employees of railroad in charge of the engine to give the signals required by the law on approaching a crossing in a thinly populated locality was not gross negligence which under this section would entitle plaintiff to recover punitive damages. Schmid's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 155 Ky. 237 , 159 S.W. 786, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 236 ( Ky. 1913 ). See Illinois C. R. Co. v. Moss' Adm'r, 142 Ky. 658 , 134 S.W. 1122, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where the services which were compensated for by the basic reparations benefits (BRB’s) were but the ordinary and necessary services that come with day-to-day family life and not services producing economic benefit, these services are clearly not an element of damages for wrongful death, thus the survivor’s replacement services loss benefits should not be credited against a wrongful death award. Luttrell v. Wood, 902 S.W.2d 817, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 64 ( Ky. 1995 ).

To extend the damages for loss of consortium beyond the date of death would result in a double recovery for the surviving spouse beyond that which the wrongful death statute affords which was never available under the common law. Clark v. Hauck Mfg. Co., 910 S.W.2d 247, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1995 ), overruled in part, Martin v. Ohio County Hosp. Corp., 295 S.W.3d 104, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 234 ( Ky. 2009 ).

In seeking the value of room, board, and other essentials provided to the decedent, i.e., approximately $25,000, which the decedent received as payment for the daily care she provided to her parents, her father, as the administrator of the estate, was not seeking compensation for the lost benefit of having the decedent work in his house, but instead was attempting to articulate the basis for the destruction of the decedent’s earnings claims under KRS 411.130 . Radford v. DVA Renal Healthcare, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121114 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 16, 2010).

Future Social Security disability payments to the decedent could not be included in calculating the administrator of the estate’s damages claim under KRS 411.130 because the decedent did not labor for or earn her Social Security disability benefits; instead, she received these payments because she was disabled within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.S. § 423(d)(1)(A), which defines “disability” under the Social Security Act. Radford v. DVA Renal Healthcare, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121114 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 16, 2010).

40.—Measure.

In an action for wrongful death, it is the duty of the jury to fix the actual sum of money which would fairly compensate the estate of decedent for the destruction of decedent’s power to earn money and the affliction which has overtaken the family by reason of the death or the number of children can have no legitimate bearing on the question. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Eakins' Adm'r, 103 Ky. 465 , 45 S.W. 529, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 736 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1898 ).

If the administrator sues to recover for the death of his intestate caused by the negligence of another, there can be no recovery for the physical or mental suffering of his intestate or the mere impairment of his power to earn money, but recovery is for the death of the intestate alone and is limited to such a sum as will compensate his estate for the destruction of his power to earn money. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Simrall's Adm'r, 127 Ky. 55 , 104 S.W. 1011, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The wages being earned is merely evidence for the jury to consider, and the damages recoverable under this section do not depend solely upon the earnings but are an important circumstance constituting one element that must be considered in connection with many other pertinent facts. West Kentucky Coal Co. v. Shoulders' Adm'r, 234 Ky. 427 , 28 S.W.2d 479, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 200 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Hospital and physician’s bills are not recoverable in an action brought under this section, since the only recovery that can be had is for the destruction of decedent’s power to earn money, which confines the right of recovery to damages for the death of the decedent and does not allow for any financial loss sustained by him prior to his death. West v. Nantz' Adm'r, 267 Ky. 113 , 101 S.W.2d 673, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1937 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

The measure of damages for death in this state is the permanent reduction of decedent’s power to earn money and not the loss sustained by any particular claimant or claimants. Bessire & Co. v. Day's Adm'x, 268 Ky. 87 , 103 S.W.2d 644, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 404 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The jury, of course, had the right without any evidence of earning power to exercise their own judgment in the matter and determine to what extent the decedent’s earning power had been reduced. Madisonville v. Nisbet's Adm'r, 270 Ky. 248 , 109 S.W.2d 593, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Jury could consider fact that deceased was eligible to receive pension from his employer in determining damages. Wilkins v. Hopkins, 278 Ky. 280 , 128 S.W.2d 772, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 437 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Measure of damages in action for wrongful death is amount of loss to the estate of deceased because of the permanent reduction of his power to earn money. Wilkins v. Hopkins, 278 Ky. 280 , 128 S.W.2d 772, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 437 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Damages for death is such sum as fairly and reasonably compensates decedent’s estate for the destruction of his power to earn money, and the nature of the injuries has no bearing on the amount of damages. Cuniffe's Ex'x v. Johnson, 279 Ky. 663 , 132 S.W.2d 47, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 341 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Necessarily, damages for death are speculative and depend on many unpredictable factors such as the length of time the decedent would have lived but for the accident, the probable condition of his health thereafter and his ability to work, retention of his employment, amount of his earnings, and amount saved out of his earnings. Cuniffe's Ex'x v. Johnson, 279 Ky. 663 , 132 S.W.2d 47, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 341 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Failure to furnish jury with proof as to decedent’s earning power will not prevent them from exercising their own judgment in the matter and determining the amount of damages the estate has suffered. Heskamp v. Bradshaw's Adm'r, 294 Ky. 618 , 172 S.W.2d 447, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 507 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Since a pension is a substitute for earning power, a pension, especially one that will continue until the death of the recipient, is a proper element to be considered by the jury in arriving at a verdict in an action brought for damages for the death of a person by tortious act pursuant to this section. Heskamp v. Bradshaw's Adm'r, 294 Ky. 618 , 172 S.W.2d 447, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 507 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Cause of action for wrongful death accrues to the estate of the deceased and the measure of damages is the destruction of the deceased’s power to earn money. Spangler's Adm'r v. Middlesboro, 301 Ky. 237 , 191 S.W.2d 414, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 735 ( Ky. 1945 ). See Roland v. Beckham, 408 S.W.2d 628, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Funeral expenses of a deceased are an element of damages for wrongful death and should be considered in arriving at amount of recovery in an action by the personal representative of deceased against wrongdoer. Square Deal Cartage Co. v. Smith's Adm'r, 307 Ky. 135 , 210 S.W.2d 340, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 702 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where decedent was killed in automobile collision caused by concurrent negligence of her husband and another defendant, in an action by decedent’s personal representative against the two defendants the husband was not entitled to share in the recovery; however, the decedent’s two surviving children were entitled to one half the amount of the verdict less funeral expenses and costs of administration, and judgment should have been entered for such amount, plus expenses and cost, with the amounts to be assessed against the defendants in proportion to amount of verdict against each. Bays v. Cox' Adm'r, 312 Ky. 827 , 229 S.W.2d 737, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 750 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In wrongful death actions by administrator of estates of defendant’s deceased mother and his deceased minor child, the recovery must be reduced by the father’s distributive share after the payment of deceaseds’ funeral expenses and administrative costs. Hale v. Hale, 312 Ky. 867 , 230 S.W.2d 610, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1950 ).

The measure of damages in a wrongful death action is the destruction of the deceased’s power to earn money and not the destruction of decedent’s income from the particular work in which he was engaged at the time of the wrongful death and decedent’s potential for earning money is a proper consideration. Roland v. Beckham, 408 S.W.2d 628, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1966 ).

The measure of damages in the destruction of the decedent’s power to earn money. Empire Metal Corp. v. Wohlwender, 445 S.W.2d 685, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1969 ).

The statute has been construed to measure damages by loss to the decedent’s estate, although the damages, once recovered, are distributed directly to the statutory beneficiaries. Empire Metal Corp. v. Wohlwender, 445 S.W.2d 685, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1969 ).

The measure of recovery under the wrongful death act is the loss to the decedent’s estate caused by the destruction of his earning power. Humble v. Mountain State Constr. Co., 441 F.2d 816, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10566 (6th Cir. Ky. 1971 ).

Court properly based its allowance of attorney fees on the actual recovery, rather than the damages found by the jury, where the jury apportioned 50 percent of the damages to plaintiff’s negligence. Cox v. Cooper, 510 S.W.2d 530, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 553 ( Ky. 1974 ).

The damages recoverable in a wrongful death action are such sums as will fairly and reasonably compensate the decedent’s estate for the destruction of the decedent’s earning power and do not include the affliction which has overcome the family by reason of the wrongful death. Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

The measure of damages for a wrongful death under this statute is the value of the destruction of the power of the decedent to earn money; the existence and status of survivors has no bearing on the calculation of this value. Luttrell v. Wood, 902 S.W.2d 817, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 64 ( Ky. 1995 ).

Punitive damages were recoverable where an employer was not an agent of the city, and thus did not qualify as an entity of local government, and evidence of gross negligence existed, specifically: that the employer misrepresented the situation to the Department of Highways in order to circumvent the permit process, that it changed the original detour route without notifying the proper entities, that no traffic control plan was implemented, that there were no advance warning signs at the work zone, that improper barricades were placed at the ends of the work zone, and that the employer left only 90 feet of buffer zone between the barricades and the trailer, when industry standards required at least two hundred twenty (220) feet. Phelps v. Louisville Water Co., 103 S.W.3d 46, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 2003 ).

41.— —Infant.

No recovery can be had for the sorrowing or suffering of the parents of a four-year-old child. The measure of damages is the fair compensation to the estate of the child for the destruction of his capacity to earn money and a verdict of $10,500 should not stand. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Creighton, 106 Ky. 42 , 50 S.W. 227, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1691 , 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1898 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1899 ) (see KRS 411.135 ).

In an action for death of boy employed in violation of statute, if either parent knowingly permitted the employment, the measure of damages was one half the amount which would compensate the estate. Kentucky Utilities Co. v. McCarty's Adm'r, 170 Ky. 543 , 186 S.W. 150, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1916 ).

The father was only entitled to the services of his child while he lived. General Refractories Co. v. Mozier, 235 Ky. 252 , 30 S.W.2d 952, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1930 ) (see KRS 411.135 ).

Where a child is killed, the father cannot sue and recover for loss of services of his child between the time the child died and the time he would have become 21. General Refractories Co. v. Mozier, 235 Ky. 252 , 30 S.W.2d 952, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1930 ) (see KRS 411.135 ).

In cases of wrongful death of infant, the whole damage is to estate, and the measure of it is fair compensation for the total destruction of the power to earn money, and there is no cause of action in favor of the parents of the infant for loss of his services during the period of minority. Phillips' Committee v. Ward's Adm'r, 241 Ky. 25 , 43 S.W.2d 331, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1931 ) (see KRS 411.135 ).

Where an infant child dies in a common disaster with its father, leaving neither a spouse nor a child and without proof as to which survived the other, the mother is entitled to recover only one half of the loss occasioned by the child’s death on a successful wrongful death action against the administrator of the child’s father. McCallum v. Harris, 379 S.W.2d 438, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1964 ).

A pregnant woman who was found guilty of contributory negligence in walking into a sidewalk defect while looking at a bus stop was barred from recovery for her share by the administrator of the estate of her “viable” child under this section. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ).

Lack of proof of the decedent infant’s power to earn money will not preclude recovery for the wrongful, negligent destruction of the infant’s power to earn money. Rice v. Rizk, 453 S.W.2d 732, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1970 ).

There is an inference that the infant would have had some earning power and this inference is the basis for recovery. Rice v. Rizk, 453 S.W.2d 732, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1970 ).

42.—Instructions to Jury.

The earning power of the deceased extended to the probable duration of his life is the measure of damages in an action by personal representative to recover for wrongful death and an instruction to the jury that they should award such sum as “will reasonably and fairly compensate the estate of decedent for the destruction of the power of decedent to earn money” with the entire question, without any other specific instruction on the subject of the power to earn money, left to the jury was sufficient. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Kelly's Adm'x, 100 Ky. 421 , 38 S.W. 852, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 69 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 20 ( Ky. 1897 ).

An instruction to the jury that if they found for the plaintiff, they should assess such damages for the death of plaintiff’s intestate “as will, in the opinion of the jury, reasonably compensate plaintiff for the loss sustained by the death of plaintiff’s intestate” and “in fixing the amount of such compensation, the jury may take into consideration the power of the deceased to earn money” was not erroneous. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Dixon's Adm'x, 104 Ky. 608 , 47 S.W. 615, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 792 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 204 ( Ky. 1898 ), aff'd, 179 U.S. 131, 21 S. Ct. 67, 45 L. Ed. 121, 1900 U.S. LEXIS 1856 (U.S. 1900).

Instruction “If the jury should find for the plaintiff, it should be in such a sum as you may believe from the evidence will reasonably and fairly compensate the estate of intestate for the destruction of the power of intestate to earn money, not exceeding $40,000, the amount claimed in the petition; and you can consider the age of the intestate, his capacity to earn money, and the probable duration of his life” was not erroneous for failure to contain after the words “to earn money” the further words “caused by his death.” Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Simrall's Adm'r, 127 Ky. 55 , 104 S.W. 1011, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1907 ).

An instruction on the measure of damages “If your finding be for the plaintiff, then you will find such a sum in damages as you may believe from the evidence will reasonably compensate the estate of deceased, for the destruction of his power to earn money, not exceeding, however, the amount of $30,000, the sum claimed in the petition” has been frequently and uniformly approved. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Lovell's Adm'r, 141 Ky. 249 , 132 S.W. 569, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1 910), modified, 142 Ky. 1 , 133 S.W. 788, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The court erred in instructing the jury to credit its verdict by an amount paid by an electric company, in settlement of a suit by plaintiff as administrator of decedent’s estate, though such sum was more than sufficient to compensate plaintiff for his pecuniary loss, decedent’s estate, not plaintiff as administrator thereof, being the beneficiary of such payment, and the pecuniary resources of plaintiff as dependent not being a subject of inquiry. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Maggard's Adm'r, 193 Ky. 259 , 235 S.W. 736, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 220 ( Ky. 1921 ).

The jury should be instructed only to the effect that the measure of damages in a death case is such sum as will reasonably compensate the estate of the decedent for the destruction of his power to earn money and the jury should not be told that the loss is the amount which would probably be made and saved but for the intervening death. West Kentucky Coal Co. v. Shoulders' Adm'r, 234 Ky. 427 , 28 S.W.2d 479, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 200 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Where the jury failed to follow the court’s instructions to award some sum on all elements of proven damages, a new trial had to be awarded because the verdict was contrary to the law. Rice v. Rizk, 453 S.W.2d 732, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Punitive damages awarded to an injured party in a wrongful death action violated the Due Process Clause as the jury considered a manufacturer’s conduct on a nationwide scale in awarding the punitive damages and as the jury instructions did not provide a safeguard from extraterritorial punishment. Sand Hill Energy, Inc. v. Smith, 142 S.W.3d 153, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 2004 ).

43.—Not Excessive.

In an action under this section against airline by decedent’s widow as administratrix for wrongful death of her husband resulting from an airplane crash in Kentucky, airline was found guilty of negligence in allowing insufficiently trained pilot to land aircraft and judgment for $175,000 and funeral expenses was affirmed. American Airlines, Inc. v. United States, 418 F.2d 180, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10660 (5th Cir. Tex. 1969).

A verdict of $6,909, as the actual pecuniary value of decedent’s life to his children, was not excessive, where testimony showed that deceased earned $630 per annum, that the probable duration of his life was 26.72 years, that he spent $15.00 to $20.00 per month upon himself when he lived away from his children and had more than ordinary health and vigor. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Graham's Adm'r, 98 Ky. 688 , 34 S.W. 229, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 1229 , 1896 Ky. LEXIS 26 ( Ky. 1896 ).

Although a verdict of $15,000 for damages for wrongful death of a railroad employee was unusually large, it was not so excessive as to indicate that the jury was influenced by passion or prejudice in awarding it, where the employee was 27 years of age, a strong, vigorous man of good character and habits who had been promoted and who had before him in the ordinary course of events a long and useful life. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. R. Co. v. Lovell's Adm'r, 141 Ky. 249 , 132 S.W. 569, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1 910), modified, 142 Ky. 1 , 133 S.W. 788, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where decedent was 31 when he met his death and had at that time a life expectancy of 391/2 years and his annual earnings (not considering outside jobs such as the one he was working on when killed) aggregated at least $3,600 and his prospective life earnings was $142,000, the jury’s verdict of $40,000 was not excessive. McCoy v. Carter, 323 S.W.2d 210, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1959 ).

A verdict of $15,500 for the wrongful death of an 18-month-old child was not so excessive as to reflect at first blush that it resulted from passion or prejudice. McCallum v. Harris, 379 S.W.2d 438, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1964 ).

The life expectancy of a seven-year-old child killed when struck by a truck was 63 years and an award of $37,200 in an action for wrongful death was not excessive. Modern Bakery, Inc. v. Brashear, 405 S.W.2d 742, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1966 ).

A verdict for $20,000 for the wrongful death of a 56-year-old man with a life expectancy of 12.38 years earning $850 a year working 20 hours a week was not excessive where he devoted virtually all his nonworking time caring for an invalid wife for whom he had a legal and moral duty to provide care, and it was immaterial whether he worked out and earned the money to hire it done or stayed at home and performed it himself. Roland v. Beckham, 408 S.W.2d 628, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1966 ).

A verdict of $25,000 for the wrongful death of a “viable” child born prematurely three (3) days after its mother fell on a defective sidewalk and who died four (4) days later was not excessive as the child had a life expectancy of 72.03 years. Louisville v. Stuckenborg, 438 S.W.2d 94, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1968 ).

In an action for recovery for wrongful death, since under Kentucky law jury, in determining the loss to the decedent’s estate by reason of destruction of his earning power, was not limited to a consideration of the decedent’s average annual earnings, nor his highest yearly earnings, verdict of $100,000 being well within the limits of decedent’s reasonable potential lifetime earnings, district court’s denial of a new trial on the ground that the award of $100,000 for compensatory damages was excessive did not constitute an abuse of discretion. Humble v. Mountain State Constr. Co., 441 F.2d 816, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10566 (6th Cir. Ky. 1971 ).

44.—Inadequate.

The trial judge, in a wrongful death action brought on behalf of an 18-year-old passenger of a deputy sheriff who died when the deputy sheriff lost control of his cruiser while chasing speeders, did not abuse his discretion in setting aside the first jury verdict for the plaintiff as inadequate and assigning the case for a new trial upon the damage issue. Prater v. Arnett, 648 S.W.2d 82, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 278 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).

In a wrongful death action, a limited retrial was required because a jury verdict of zero awarded for a child’s power to earn money was inadequate. On retrial, the jury should also be informed of such sums as were previously awarded to the decedent’s estate for loss of affection and companionship, for pain and suffering from the time of the child’s injury until the child’s death, and for medical and funeral expenses. Turfway Park Racing Ass'n v. Griffin, 834 S.W.2d 667, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1992 ).

45.Distribution of Amount Recovered.

An action may be maintained in one (1) state for the negligent destruction of life in another state pursuant to a statute of the latter and in such event the sum received should be distributed according to the laws of the state where the cause of action accrued and not where it was brought. McDonald v. McDonald, 96 Ky. 209 , 28 S.W. 482, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 412 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1894 ).

Before distribution to the kindred of the deceased, there should have been paid out of the fund recovered under this section the cost of administering that particular fund recovered under this section the cost of administering that particular fund, including attorney’s fees, and costs incurred in connection with prosecution of the suit in which the recovery was made, and funeral expenses and all other expenses incurred in the administration of the intestate’s estate should have been paid out of his general estate. O'Malley's Adm'r v. McLean, 113 Ky. 1 , 67 S.W. 11, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2258 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1 902).

The general assembly’s provision in this section pursuant to the authority contained in Ky. Const., § 241, that “the amount recovered, less funeral expenses and the cost of administration and costs of recovery including attorney’s fees, not included in the recovery from the defendant, shall be for the benefit of and go to the kindred of the deceased” intended that the recovery was to go directly to the widow and children to compensate for the loss of earnings of the husband and father and was not intended as a protection for the general creditors of the deceased. O'Malley's Adm'r v. McLean, 113 Ky. 1 , 67 S.W. 11, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2258 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1 902).

Damages recovered by an administrator for decedent’s wrongful death do not pass under will of decedent. Sturges v. Sturges, 126 Ky. 80 , 102 S.W. 884, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 537 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1907 ).

Where decedent leaves no wife, parents or children, recovery for wrongful death is properly applied to discharge of lien debts against devised property. Sturges v. Sturges, 126 Ky. 80 , 102 S.W. 884, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 537 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1907 ).

If fund held by administratrix represented settlement of action for wrongful death, decedent’s debts were not payable therefrom without beneficiaries’ consent. Rose v. Rose, 287 Ky. 224 , 152 S.W.2d 603, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Declaratory judgment action, brought by administrator to determine whether funds received from settlement of claim for wrongful death of decedent were subject to payment of common-law judgment against administrator secured by attorneys who had performed service for decedent, prior to her death, in effort to recover for personal injuries sustained in the accident out of which the wrongful death claim arose, was proper, and was not a collateral attack on the common-law judgment; and the trial court should have held that the wrongful death funds were not subject to payment of the common-law judgment, but that other funds of the estate were so subject. Emmerke's Adm'r v. Denunzio, 302 Ky. 832 , 196 S.W.2d 599, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 760 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In an action for wrongful death, when the decedent is survived by a spouse, child, or parent, the sum recovered does not become part of decedent’s estate and is not subject to the payment of debts. Emmerke's Adm'r v. Denunzio, 302 Ky. 832 , 196 S.W.2d 599, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 760 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Though defendant was still the wife of decedent at the time of his death, in all likelihood, if husband had lived just a while longer, his marriage would have been dissolved, his death intervened and this section makes no exception for a different distribution eliminating a widow or a widower from the distribution scheme if a marriage dissolution action is pending at the time of the deceased spouse’s death. Rhodes v. Rhodes, 764 S.W.2d 641, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 171 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Where wife was a passenger in a car driven by her husband, where the car collided with a train, causing her death, where husband and railroad were both deemed 50% liable, and where the jury awarded the administrator of wife’s estate $500,000, the portion of the award to which husband was entitled by this section, $250,000, was reduced by 50% to the sum of $125,000 and the total amount of the award, $375,000 — $250,000 representing their daughter’s share, and $125,000 representing husband’s share — were to be paid in equal amounts of $187,500 each. Citizens State Bank v. Seaboard S. R., Inc., 803 S.W.2d 585, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 13 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

Where a father was behind in child support, was questionable in visitation, and lacked involvement in a child’s life, the father willfully abandoned the child and was precluded from sharing in a wrongful death settlement by Mandy Jo’s Law, KRS 411.137 , 391.033 . Kimbler v. Arms, 102 S.W.3d 517, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 58 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Trial court could not distribute any portion of the proceeds of a federal court settlement to the first sister in the first sister’s action against the second sister to recover some of the proceeds after the second sister sued the nursing home following the death of their mother. The first sister failed to show that the federal court settlement allocated any proceeds to a wrongful death action and, thus, no such proceeds could be distributed pursuant to KRS 411.130(2). Smith v. McCurdy, 269 S.W.3d 876, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

46.—Funeral Expenses.

The widow was not entitled to be reimbursed out of the general estate for funeral expenses paid out of the fund recovered under this section. O'Malley's Adm'r v. McLean, 113 Ky. 1 , 67 S.W. 11, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2258 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1 902).

Regardless of whether fund held by administratrix represented settlement of wrongful death action, bill for funeral expenses was enforceable claim against estate if properly presented and in absence of agreement that it should be paid out of other funds. Rose v. Rose, 287 Ky. 224 , 152 S.W.2d 603, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Since subsection (2) of this section recognizes that funeral expenses are payable from the amount recovered in a wrongful death action, the amount recovered constitutes a fund available for the payment of burial expenses and would prevent recovery of union burial benefits when the union bylaws disqualified persons with “other” funds for burial. Burial Fund v. Wyatt, 333 S.W.2d 253, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1960 ).

47.—Beneficiaries.

Wrongful death claimants would not be bound by a decedent’s arbitration agreement with a nursing home, even if one existed, because their statutorily distinct claim under KRS 411.130(2) did not derive from any claim on behalf of the decedent, and they therefore did not succeed to the decedent’s dispute resolution. Donna Ping v. Beverly Enters., 376 S.W.3d 581, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 108 ( Ky. 2012 ), cert. denied, 569 U.S. 954, 133 S. Ct. 1996, 185 L. Ed. 2d 879, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 3242 (U.S. 2013).

Decedent's beneficiaries did not have to arbitrate wrongful death claims against a nursing home because the decedent's arbitration agreement, when admitted to the nursing home, did not bind the beneficiaries, as the beneficiaries' claims accrued independently, so no such agreement could encompass the claims. HQM of Pikeville, LLC v. Collins, 2014 Ky. App. LEXIS 127 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2014 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1049 (Ky. Ct. App. July 18, 2014).

Trial court properly denied the nursing homes' motions for relief from judgments because, while arbitration was not only sanctioned, but indeed promoted, by the Kentucky Constitution, the arbitration agreements at issue were never validly formed where the powers vested in the attorneys-in-fact did not encompass the power to enter into an arbitration agreements regarding the claims of their decedents, the authority to waive the decedents' constitutional rights of access to the courts by court or jury and to appeal to a higher court were not explicitly set out in the power-of-attorney document, and the attorneys-in-fact were not authorized to enter into arbitration agreements on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries. Extendicare Homes, Inc. v. Whisman, 478 S.W.3d 306, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 1867 ( Ky. 2015 ), rev'd, in part, vacated, 137 S. Ct. 1421, 197 L. Ed. 2d 806, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2948 (U.S. 2017).

Administrator of wife, deserting husband and living in adultery, was entitled to damages for death of husband. Napier's Adm'r v. Napier's Adm'r, 210 Ky. 163 , 275 S.W. 379, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 642 ( Ky. 1925 ).

The person entitled to benefits under this section is to be determined at the time of the death of the person wrongfully killed and the personal representative of the person negligently killed acts as a representative of the surviving designated relative or relatives and, if the survivor or survivors subsequently die, recovery goes to the relative’s estate or estates and descends as other personal property. Sharp's Adm'r v. Sharp's Adm'r, 284 S.W.2d 673, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1955 ).

In the event of recovery, the parent held liable cannot receive the benefits of such recovery as a designated beneficiary under this section. Harlan Nat'l Bank v. Gross, 346 S.W.2d 482, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1961 ). See Hale v. Hale, 312 Ky. 867 , 230 S.W.2d 610, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Anyone claiming as a beneficiary under the statute of descent and distribution which is embodied in this section must show that the persons ahead of him in the order of taking are dead. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Brothers and sisters of a deceased are entitled to a recovery only upon a showing that the deceased left no surviving spouse, child, or parent. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

The persons entitled to benefits under this section are specifically set forth and are to be determined as of the time of death of the person negligently or wrongfully killed. Totten v. Parker, 428 S.W.2d 231, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1967 ).

The amount recovered under this section does not inure to the decedent or his estate but goes directly to the kindred of the deceased in the order provided in this section. Rhodes v. Rhodes, 764 S.W.2d 641, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 171 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Proceeds of uninsured motorist coverage from decedent’s insurance policy were distributed to the administrator in wrongful death action for the decedent’s intestate heirs rather than to the executrix who was the sole beneficiary of the decedent’s will. Robertson v. Vinson, 58 S.W.3d 432, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 2001 ).

Brothers had standing to bring a legal malpractice claim because they were the intended beneficiaries of the claim and were entitled to one-half of the proceeds of any recovery and the one-year statute of limitations period, and thus, the attorneys’ actions in litigating the claim were undertaken for the brothers; the one-year statute of limitations period was tolled until the brothers reached the age of majority. Pete v. Anderson, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

48.Abatement or Survival on Death of Party Beneficiary.

Mother’s death does not abate suit for damages for negligent killing of son, and administrator may continue suit for recovery of her loss up to time of her death. Van Beeck v. Sabine Towing Co., 300 U.S. 342, 57 S. Ct. 452, 81 L. Ed. 685, 1937 U.S. LEXIS 1138 (U.S. 1937).

Action by a father, as administrator, to recover damages for the death of child did not abate upon death of the father, but action should have been revived in name of his successor as administrator, the recovery, after payment of funeral expenses, costs of administration, and cost of recovery, being for the benefit of the father’s estate, plaintiff’s intestate having left no widow, child, or mother. Thomas' Adm'r v. Maysville Gas Co., 112 Ky. 569 , 66 S.W. 398, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1879 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1902 ).

49.Notice to City.

The notice to a city required by KRS 411.110 to be given within 90 days of the accident does not apply to an action for wrongful death. Spangler's Adm'r v. Middlesboro, 301 Ky. 237 , 191 S.W.2d 414, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 735 ( Ky. 1945 ).

50.Settlement of Action.

In an action against a city and a street railway company for negligent death caused by their concurrent negligence, the administrator’s right to recover against the city is not affected by the sole heir’s settlement with the railway company. Louisville v. Hart's Adm'r, 143 Ky. 171 , 136 S.W. 212, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 377 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The Legislature is empowered to direct what person may settle actions for negligent or wrongful death. Louisville v. Hart's Adm'r, 143 Ky. 171 , 136 S.W. 212, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 377 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The recovery under this section not being that character of property never having been owned by an adopted child is not susceptible of being inherited from it by its adoptive parents, but goes directly to those named in this section as beneficiaries of the recovery and settlement with personal representative for wrongful death of adopted child was bar to adoptive parent’s action for negligence causing adoptive child’s death. Jackson's Adm'x v. Alexiou, 223 Ky. 95 , 3 S.W.2d 177, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 289 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Settlement with the alleged tortfeasor by the administrator of deceased employee for damages for causing death concluded in advance of application for compensation by the defendants under the state workers’ compensation law did not release employer from duty to pay the compensation. Napier v. John P. Gorman Coal Co., 242 Ky. 127 , 45 S.W.2d 1064, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 714 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A settlement of an action under this section made by a representative is binding upon the beneficiaries. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Turner, 290 Ky. 602 , 162 S.W.2d 219, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1942 ).

51.Statute of Limitations.

The question of whether a libel in admiralty for the death of a boat passenger in a collision on a navigable river, based on this section and timely filed by an ancillary administrator appointed by a state court without jurisdiction over the subject matter of the death action, could be amended, at a time when a new suit would be barred by state statute of limitations, so as to allege a subsequent effective appointment of the same person as ancillary administrator by a state court having jurisdiction must be determined by federal admiralty practice rather than state law and, under such practice, the amendment should be permitted. Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

The limitation of one (1) year governs an action based on this section, although brought in a foreign jurisdiction. De Valle Da Costa v. Southern P. Co., 167 F. 654, 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 5362 (C.C.D. Mass. 1909).

The limitation of one (1) year (KRS 413.140 ) for injuries to the person applies to action for wrongful death. Salyer v. Consolidation Coal Co., 246 F. 794, 1918 U.S. App. LEXIS 1784 (6th Cir. 1918), cert. denied, 246 U.S. 669, 38 S. Ct. 345, 62 L. Ed. 931, 1918 U.S. LEXIS 2039 (1918). See Irwin v. Smith, 150 Ky. 147 , 150 S.W. 22, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 850 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section contains no limitation period and the Kentucky one-year general statute of limitations (KRS 413.140 ) is procedural only and cannot be treated as a part of the right under state law so, where in libel for wrongful death of boat passenger in collision on navigable river based on this section, amendment was made under admiralty law, it did relate back and was not barred by the one-year general statute of limitations. Deupree v. Levinson, 186 F.2d 297, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753 (6th Cir. 1950), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 915, 71 S. Ct. 736, 95 L. Ed. 1351, 1951 U.S. LEXIS 1969 (1951). See Hess v. United States, 361 U.S. 314, 80 S. Ct. 341, 4 L. Ed. 2d 305, 1960 U.S. LEXIS 1883 (U.S. 1960).

Under the laws of this state, a foreign executor is not permitted to maintain an action for wrongful death and filing of complaint by foreign executors did not suspend the running of the statute of limitations and, where the foreign executors, after the statutory period for commencing the action had elapsed, filed a motion to amend their complaint and join as party plaintiff and ancillary administrator who was a citizen of this state, the court properly overruled the motion and dismissed the case. Seymour v. Johnson, 235 F.2d 181, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3841 (6th Cir. Ky. 1956 ).

The cause of action to recover for the death of a person from an injury inflicted by negligence is, by this section, vested in his personal representative, and infancy of persons who were not entitled to bring the action can have no effect upon the running of the statute of limitations requiring such an action to be commenced within one (1) year from the time of death of the person injured. Van Vactor's Adm'x v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 112 Ky. 445 , 66 S.W. 4, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1743 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Administrator’s cause of action for death of his intestate under this section and under statute of limitations requiring action to be commenced “within one year next after the cause of action accrued” is barred one (1) year from death of intestate, and does not run until one (1) year from qualification of administrator, in view of legislative history of latter statute. Faulkner's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 184 Ky. 533 , 212 S.W. 130, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1919 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Where the defendant in a wrongful death action delayed until after the expiration of the statute of limitations to raise, by amended answer, the question of the capacity of the plaintiff, who had been appointed ancillary administrator after the deceased’s widow had been appointed ancillary administratrix by another county court, to sue without any explanation of the delay — evidence indicated by the defendant’s attorney knew of the question when the suit was commenced, and the estate would lose its cause of action, if the amendment were allowed — the trial court erred in granting the defendant leave to amend his answer. Lawrence v. Marks, 355 S.W.2d 162, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 17 ( Ky. 1961 ).

An action for wrongful death is barred one (1) year after the date of injury by the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of KRS 413.140 and does not come under the provisions of subsection (1) of KRS 413.180 which, if the appointment of a personal representative is made within one (1) year following death, bars an action after one (1) year from the appointment of the personal representative. Totten v. Loventhal, 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1963 ), overruled, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

52.Common-law Action.

In an action by the administrator of an infant’s estate to recover damages for the wrongful death of the infant, contributory negligence of the infant may be relied on as a defense. Caldwell v. Jarvis, 299 Ky. 439 , 185 S.W.2d 552, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 432 ( Ky. 1945 ).

In common-law action by administrator of deceased infant employee against employer to recover damages for wrongful death of employee, in which action recovery could be had only on proof that employer had employed the infant in wilful and known violation of child labor laws, knowledge of such illegal employment on the part of the parents of the infant would bar them from sharing in the recovery, and knowledge by one parent would bar the other parent from receiving more than half of the amount sued for. Caldwell v. Jarvis, 299 Ky. 439 , 185 S.W.2d 552, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 432 ( Ky. 1945 ).

53.Federal Employers’ Liability Act.

Where interstate carrier was liable for death of servant under federal employer’s liability act, it could not also be made liable under state statute for wrongful death, the federal act, where it applies, being exclusive. Kelly's Adm'x v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 201 F. 602, 1912 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1058 (D. Ky. 1912 ).

Action provided by federal employers’ liability act is exclusive of one for same cause under state laws and when coming within provisions of federal act must be brought thereunder though prosecuted in state court. Hines v. Burns' Adm'x, 189 Ky. 761 , 226 S.W. 109, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 511 ( Ky. 1920 ).

The law applicable to an action for death of a young brakeman killed in a collision while engaged in interstate commerce is the federal employers’ liability act and the interpretations thereof given by the Supreme Court of the United States which are to be regarded as an integral part of it. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Noble's Adm'x, 246 Ky. 86 , 54 S.W.2d 636, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1932 ).

54.Federal Tort Claims Act.

Where recovery was sought under this section by personal representative of estate in federal court under the federal tort claims act by reason of the death of his decedent who was an engineer on a train and the United States as defendant impleaded the railroad company charging its negligence was the sole or contributory cause of the accident resulting in the death, evidence was sufficient to support judgment in favor of the administrator for $25,000 for destruction of his decedent’s earning power and the United States was entitled to recover 50 percent of that amount from the railroad company. Anderson v. United States, 118 F. Supp. 498, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4189 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

Cited in:

Casey v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 278 Ky. 426 , 128 S.W.2d 939, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 449 ( Ky. 1939 ); Bryant v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 431 F.2d 1385, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 7109 (6th Cir. 1970); Cooper v. Barth, 464 S.W.2d 233, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 474 ( Ky. 1971 ); Brown v. YWCA, 729 S.W.2d 190, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 479 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987); Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ); Sparks v. Craft, 75 F.3d 257, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 1604 (6th Cir. 1996); Daley v. Reed, 87 S.W.3d 247, 2002 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 2002 ); Estate of Adams v. Trover, 547 S.W.3d 545, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018); Simms v. Estate of Blake, 615 S.W.3d 14, 2021 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 2021 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Beneficiaries.

Unpublished decision: District court erred by granting summary judgment in a professional negligence suit brought against defendant attorney who filed a wrongful death action on behalf of an estate; because plaintiffs, decedent’s children, were statutory beneficiaries of the estate under KRS 411.130(2), the attorney could be held liable to them for negligence. The attorney’s actions in filing the wrongful death suit were intended for their benefit, irrespective of any lack of privity. Anderson v. Pete, 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 989 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2011), aff'd, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

2.Persons Entitled to Sue.

Unpublished decision: In a widow’s wrongful death suit, the motion to intervene filed by decedent’s sister, mother, and father was properly denied because, inter alia, Kentucky law applied to the wrongful death claim, and the Kentucky wrongful death statute would not allocate any damages to them. Boggess v. Price, 2005 FED App. 0497N, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 11281 (6th Cir. Ky. June 10, 2005).

33.Evidence.;
35.— Insufficient.

Unpublished decision: In a tort action for negligence, products liability, loss of consortium and wrongful death arising from a collision between a tractor trailer and a car driven by decedent, the trial court properly ruled for defendants because plaintiffs were unable show that any of the defendants committed a wrongful or negligent act. There was no evidence that the underride guard design was defective or that it was in a state of disrepair. Richardson v. Rose Transp., Inc., 617 Fed. Appx. 480, 2015 FED App. 0484N, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11756 (6th Cir. Ky. 2015 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action for negligence causing death survives, Ky. Const., § 241.

Bonds having effect of judgments, death of obligor or obligee, KRS 426.610 .

Death of execution defendant, procedure in case of, KRS 426.555 .

Descent and distribution, KRS ch. 391.

General Assembly not to limit recovery, Ky. Const., § 54.

Right of contribution survives, KRS 412.010 .

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Savage, Humpty Dumpty in the Street, Vol. 39, No. 2, April 1975 Ky. Bench & B. 9.

Turley, The “New” Doctrine of Comparative Negligence in Kentucky, Volume 49, No. 1, January, 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 8.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Oberst, Recent Developments in Torts: Decisions of the Court of Appeals at the 1956-57 Terms, 46 Ky. L.J. 193 (1958).

Sedler, Babcock v. Jackson in Kentucky: Judicial Method and the Policy-Centered Conflict of Laws, 56 Ky. L.J. 27 (1967).

Germain, Remedies, 63 Ky. L.J. 777 (1974-1975).

Note, Kentucky No-Fault: An Analysis and Interpretation, 65 Ky. L.J. 466 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey, Underwood, Insurance, 70 Ky. L.J. 255 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Grise, Torts, 71 Ky. L.J. 307 (1982-83).

Kentucky Law Survey, Catron, Wills, Probate and Real Property Law, 71 Ky. L.J. 333 (1982-83).

Render, On Unpublished Opinions, 73 Ky. L.J. 145 (1984-85).

Bratt, A Primer on Kentucky Intestacy Laws, 82 Ky. L.J. 29 (1993-94).

Notes, Gehle, Loss of Consortium: Kentucky Should No Longer Prohibit a Child’s Claim for Loss of Parental Consortium Due to the Negligent Act of a Third Party, 84 Ky. L.J. 173 (1995-96).

A Post-Impact Fear of Pre-Impact Fright, 99 Ky. L.J. 401 (2010/2011).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Note — Criminal Law — Murder — Intentional Killing of Viable Fetus Not Murder, 11 N. Ky. L. Rev. 213 (1984).

Notes, After Hilen v. Hays — Kentucky’s New Comparative Negligence, 13 N. Ky. L. Rev. 129 (1986).

Note, Jones v. Commonwealth, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 831 (1993).

Calvert, Probate Law, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 367 (1994).

Article: Recovery of Nonpecuniary Damages in Mass Tort Actions in Kentucky: A Defense Perspective, 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 197 (2008).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Action by Parents for Loss of Consortium of Child under KRS 411.135 , Form 141.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Child, Form 256.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Parent—Child’s Loss of Consortium, Form 256.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Recover for Damages Suffered Prior to Death and for Wrongful Death Caused by Automobile Accident under KRS 411.130 and KRS 411.133 , Form 141.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Motion for Declaratory Judgment Asserting “Mandy Jo’s Law”, Form 141.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 141 Wrongful Death, § 141.syn.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Damages, § 39.01.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Actions, § 17.6.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Minors, § 30.29; 1991 Supp., § 30.29.

411.133. Joinder of wrongful death and personal injury actions.

It shall be lawful for the personal representative of a decedent who was injured by reason of the tortious acts of another, and later dies from such injuries, to recover in the same action for both the wrongful death of the decedent and for the personal injuries from which the decedent suffered prior to death, including a recovery for all elements of damages in both a wrongful death action and a personal injury action.

History. Enact. Acts 1968, ch. 30, § 1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Damages.

In action by plaintiffs to recover damages (1) for destruction of their son’s earning power, (2) for the pain and suffering of their son prior to his death and (3) for loss of affection and companionship of their son, defendants were entitled to credit for any amount previously collected by son’s estate from the Department of Transportation, Bureau of Highways for damages for his death, only against the amount plaintiffs recovered for destruction of earning capacity of decedent, since the Board of Claims has no authority to award damages for pain and suffering or for loss of affection and companionship. Blankenship v. Watson, 672 S.W.2d 941, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 535 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984), overruled, Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

While the second sister pled a cause of action for wrongful death against the nursing home following the death of the mother, the first sister did not show that a factual basis for a recovery under a wrongful death theory pursuant to existing Kentucky law. Thus, the first sister’s argument about how the federal court settlement proceeds in the matter should be distributed, nothwithstanding the fact that KRS 411.133 did not provide a distribution scheme, was academic at best because no such recovery was involved. Smith v. McCurdy, 269 S.W.3d 876, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

2.Time Limit.

Personal injury and wrongful death claims may be prosecuted by the personal representative in one action as was done in this case. It is reasonable to conclude the General Assembly intended for the personal representative to have the same amount of time to prosecute all claims resulting from injury to the decedent including injuries resulting in death. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

A Post-Impact Fear of Pre-Impact Fright, 99 Ky. L.J. 401 (2010/2011).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Article: Recovery of Nonpecuniary Damages in Mass Tort Actions in Kentucky: A Defense Perspective, 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 197 (2008).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Recover for Damages Suffered Prior to Death and for Wrongful Death Caused by Automobile Accident under KRS 411.130 and KRS 411.133 , Form 141.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 141 Wrongful Death, § 141.syn.

411.135. Damages in action for wrongful death of minor.

In a wrongful death action in which the decedent was a minor child, the surviving parent, or parents, may recover for loss of affection and companionship that would have been derived from such child during its minority, in addition to all other elements of the damage usually recoverable in a wrongful death action.

History. Enact. Acts 1968, ch. 30, § 2.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

The damage provisions of the federal death on the high seas act, 46 USCS § 761, rather than this section, were found applicable in a wrongful death action resulting from an accident involving the collision on the Ohio River of a pleasure cruiser and a tow of 15 barges. In re American Commercial Lines, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 134, 1973 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11164 (E.D. Ky. 1973 ).

Because Kentucky law did not recognize a claim by an adult parent for the loss of a minor’s consortium, or a claim by a minor child for the loss of a parent’s consortium, and limited both types of consortium claims to wrongful death actions, pursuant to KRS 411.135 , the parent and child’s consortium claims were dismissed. Ferguson v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc., 444 F. Supp. 2d 755, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14425 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

In an action arising from an airplane crash, the airline company was entitled to dismissal of the survivors’ claims for an award of loss of consortium to the parents of adult children; the plain language of KRS 411.135 restricted such claims to parents of minor children. Combs v. Comair, Inc. (In re Air Crash at Lexington, KY), 556 F. Supp. 2d 665, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1216 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

In an action arising from an airplane crash, the airline company was entitled to dismissal of the survivors’ claims for an award of loss of consortium to adult children for the loss of their parents; in light of KRS 2.015 , the federal court was not convinced that the Kentucky Supreme Court would recognize an adult child’s claim for loss of consortium of a parent under KRS 411.135 . Combs v. Comair, Inc. (In re Air Crash at Lexington, KY), 556 F. Supp. 2d 665, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1216 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

1.5.Construction.

By authorizing damages to the parents of a “minor” child for loss of affection and companionship that would have been derived from such child “during its minority,” the Kentucky legislature excluded an award of loss of consortium to the parents of an adult child; any other interpretation of KRS 411.135 renders the modifier “minor” and the words “during its minority” meaningless. Combs v. Comair, Inc. (In re Air Crash at Lexington, KY), 556 F. Supp. 2d 665, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1216 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

2.Nature of Claim.

The parents of a deceased child have a claim under this section for loss of affection and companionship without regard to whether the personal representative of the decedent ever asserts a claim for wrongful death under KRS 411.130 , and, indeed, without regard to whether a personal representative is ever appointed; therefore, the parents’ claim is separate and apart from that of the personal representative. Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

As the legislature recognized the individuality of children in this section by providing a loss of consortium claim to parents who lose a child, children have a common-law claim for loss of parental consortium. There is no legal distinction between the two (2) causes of action as both seek to redress wrongs which destroy the parent-child relationship. Giuliani v. Guiler, 951 S.W.2d 318, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1997 ).

3.Sovereign Immunity.

The waiver of sovereign immunity granted by the Board of Claims Act, KRS 44.070 to 44.160 , does not exclude a parent’s claim for loss of affection and companionship of a minor child as created by this section. Department of Education v. Blevins, 707 S.W.2d 782, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 1986 ).

KRS 411.145(2) which sets out the right of a spouse to recover damages for loss of consortium, is similar in wording to KRS 411.135 , which sets out the right of a parent to recover damages for loss of affection and companionship resulting from the wrongful death of their child, and it follows that the two (2) statutes should be interpreted consistently; a wife’s loss of spousal consortium claim in the Kentucky Board of Claims arising from an injury to her husband caused by a malfunctioning pedestrian control device was barred by KRS 44.070(1), which precluded liability for collateral or dependent claims. City of Danville v. Goode, 122 S.W.3d 591, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 314 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

4.Father of Illegitimate Child.

The father of an illegitimate child has standing to sue for a wrongful death claim pursuant to KRS 411.130 and this section as well as to inherit from his illegitimate child. Cummins v. Cox, 799 S.W.2d 5, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1990 ), modified, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 148 (Ky. Dec. 27, 1990).

5.Lost Earning Power.

In a wrongful death action, a limited retrial was required because a jury verdict of zero awarded for a child’s power to earn money was inadequate. On retrial, the jury should also be informed of such sums as were previously awarded to the decedent’s estate for loss of affection and companionship, for pain and suffering from the time of the child’s injury until the child’s death, and for medical and funeral expenses. Turfway Park Racing Ass'n v. Griffin, 834 S.W.2d 667, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The Supreme Court recognizes that there is measurable value to one’s life other than his or her earning capacity; however, this value is already recoverable in the recognized category of mental suffering, and there is no need to allow for the recoupment of hedonic damages as a separate category of loss. Adams v. Miller, 908 S.W.2d 112, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1995 ), overruled, Giuliani v. Guiler, 951 S.W.2d 318, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1997 ).

Tractor-trailer owner, independent trucking operator, and a truck driver were not entitled to a new trial or, in the alternative, remittitur as to the compensatory damages awarded by a jury in an action under KRS 411.135 arising out of an automobile-truck collision; the $1.83 million award to the estate of an infant for the loss of his earning power was not grossly excessive as a matter of law. Estate of Embry v. Geo Transp. of Ind., Inc., 478 F. Supp. 2d 914, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51250 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ).

6.Loss of Consortium.

Tractor-trailer owner, independent trucking operator, and a truck driver were not entitled to a new trial or, in the alternative, remittitur as to the compensatory damages awarded by a jury in an action under KRS 411.135 arising out of an automobile-truck collision; the $2.7 million loss-of-parental-consortium verdicts and the $1.475 million loss-of-child consortium verdict were not grossly excessive as a matter of law or otherwise influenced by passion or prejudice. Estate of Embry v. Geo Transp. of Ind., Inc., 478 F. Supp. 2d 914, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51250 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ).

A mentally handicapped adult child of woman who was killed in an airplane crash was not entitled pursue a claim for loss of parental consortium; the language of KRS 411.135 , in conjunction with KRS 2.015 setting the age of majority, was plain in restricting claims for loss of consortium to minor children. In re Air Crash at Lexington, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18374 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 10, 2008).

Children’s claims for loss of parental consortium were dismissed because Kentucky law prohibited recovery for a minor’s loss of consortium claim if it was not accompanied by a wrongful death claim. Since KRS 411.135 provided a parent with a loss of consortium claim for the loss of a minor child only in wrongful death actions; the “reciprocal” of KRS 411.135 was also limited to wrongful death cases. Brown v. Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42062 (W.D. Ky. May 23, 2008).

Summary judgment for an employer and the driver of a work vehicle that struck a deceased grandchild just prior to her death was proper in an action by her grandparent guardian, seeking to recover for loss of consortium, as the clear language of KRS 411.135 included only certain particular classes of persons and excluded other unmentioned classes such as grandparents. Willis v. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro. Sewer Dist., 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 198 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 22, 2010), review denied, ordered not published, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 257 (Ky. Oct. 19, 2011).

While the court did not expressly restrict a child’s claim for loss of parental consortium, the court did say that it was creating a reciprocal claim to the statute; however, there was no reciprocity interest in this case because Kentucky statutes do not recognize a parent’s claim for loss of consortium with their adult children. Pauly v. Chang, 498 S.W.3d 394, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).

Zero award of damages to parents of a minor child who drowned in a hotel pool required a new trial for the award of some amount for the parents’ loss as the parents testified regarding memories with the child, the emotional pain endured while the child lingered on life support following the drowning, and the loss suffered after the child’s death. While one parent shared fault with the hotel for the child’s drowning, that fault did not preclude recovery, but only required that any award be apportioned based on the percentage of fault. Louisville SW Hotel v. Lindsey, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 91 (Ky. Ct. App. May 17, 2019).

Cited in:

Southeastern Kentucky Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. Gaylor, 756 S.W.2d 467, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1988 ); Charash v. Johnson, 43 S.W.3d 274, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 42 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000); Reed v. Daley, — S.W.3d —, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 50 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000), rev’d, 87 S.W.3d 247, 2002 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 2002 ); Smith v. Vilvarajah, 57 S.W.3d 839, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 136 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000); Daley v. Reed, 87 S.W.3d 247, 2002 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 2002 ); Hyman & Armstrong, P.S.C. v. Gunderson, 279 S.W.3d 93, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 2008 ); Davis v. Johnson, 295 S.W.3d 841, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 30 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Savage, Humpty Dumpty in the Street, Vol. 39, No. 2, April 1975, Ky. Bench & Bar 9.

Toner & Asseff, Do Appellate Court Decisions Affect Health Care Costs?, Volume 75, No. 3, May 2011, Ky. Bench & Bar 23.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Notes, Gehle, Loss of Consortium: Kentucky Should No Longer Prohibit a Child’s Claim for Loss of Parental Consortium Due to the Negligent Act of a Third Party, 84 Ky. L.J. 173 (1995-96).

Note: Loss of Parental Consortium: Why Kentucky Should Re-Recognize the Claim Outside the Wrongful Death Context, 98 Ky. L.J. 919 (2009/2010).

A Post-Impact Fear of Pre-Impact Fright, 99 Ky. L.J. 401 (2010/2011).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Cetrulo, A Practitioner’s Analysis of the Loss of Parental Consortium in Kentucky, 26 N. Ky. L. Rev. 1 (1999).

Article: Recovery of Nonpecuniary Damages in Mass Tort Actions in Kentucky: A Defense Perspective, 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 197 (2008).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Action by Parents for Loss of Consortium of Child under KRS 411.135 , Form 141.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Child, Form 256.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context Parent and Child, § 256.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 141 Wrongful Death, § 141.syn.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Minors, § 30.29; 1991 Supp., § 30.29.

411.137. Limitation on right to recover for wrongful death of child if parent has abandoned care and maintenance.

  1. A parent who has willfully abandoned the care and maintenance of his or her child shall not have a right to maintain a wrongful death action for that child and shall not have a right otherwise to recover for the wrongful death of that child, unless:
    1. The abandoning parent had resumed the care and maintenance at least one (1) year prior to the death of the child and had continued the care and maintenance until the child’s death; or
    2. The parent had been deprived of the custody of his or her child under an order of a court of competent jurisdiction and the parent had substantially complied with all orders of the court requiring contribution to the support of the child.
  2. This section may be cited as Mandy Jo’s Law.

History. Enact. Acts 2000, ch. 414, §§ 2, 4, effective July 14, 2000.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Evidence of Abandonment.

Where a father was behind in child support, was questionable in visitation, and lacked involvement in a child’s life, the father willfully abandoned the child and was precluded from sharing in a wrongful death settlement by Mandy Jo’s Law, KRS 411.137 , 391.033 . Kimbler v. Arms, 102 S.W.3d 517, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 58 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

For the purposes of applying Mandy Jo’s law, KRS 411.137 , 391.033 , “abandon” means neglect and refusal to perform natural and legal obligations to care and support, withholding of parental care, presence, opportunity to display voluntary affection and neglect to lend support and maintenance; it means also the failure to fulfill responsibility of care, training and guidance during the child’s formative years. Kimbler v. Arms, 102 S.W.3d 517, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 58 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

When determining if a father forfeited a share of his child’s wrongful death proceeds by abandoning the child, the lack of a visitation order did not bar holding the father’s lack of contact with the child against the father because the father was not relieved of parental obligations. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 132 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 961 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2018).

When determining if a father forfeited a share of his child’s wrongful death proceeds by abandoning the child, the father’s payment of court-ordered child support was not determinative because the father’s obligation of “care and maintenance” required more. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 132 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 961 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2018).

A father was precluded from recovering the father’s intestate share of the settlement proceeds connected with the wrongful death of the father’s adult child because the father willfully abandoned the child. While the father maintained support payments, the father had not seen the child, nor had significant interaction within 15 years of the child’s death, at no time did the father seek visitation, formally or informally, with the child, and the doctrine of equitable estoppel did not bar the mother from claiming abandonment. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 615 S.W.3d 14, 2021 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 2021 ).

Trial court did not err in finding appellant had abandoned his stillborn infant daughter and was consequently not entitled to any settlement proceeds or distribution from her estate under Mandy Jo’s Law, because the trial court found clear intent on his part to abandon the child as evidenced by his fleeing after the mother informed him she was pregnant. Miller v. Bunch, 2021 Ky. App. LEXIS 16 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 5, 2021).

2.Burden of Proof.

When determining if a father forfeited a share of his child’s wrongful death proceeds by abandoning the child, the applicable burden of proof was a preponderance of the evidence because the issue involved the receipt of money. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 132 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 961 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2018).

When determining if a father forfeited a share of his child’s wrongful death proceeds by abandoning the child, the child’s estate had no burden of proof as to distribution of the proceeds because (1) the proceeds were not part of the estate, and (2) the estate’s administrator had no interest in the proceeds’ distribution, once the proceeds were recovered. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 132 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 961 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2018).

The rights at stake in a case arising under the Kentucky Mandy Jo’s Law do not warrant a heightened standard of proof. Accordingly, trial courts must use the preponderance of the evidence standard when considering claims under Mandy Jo’s Law. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 615 S.W.3d 14, 2021 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 2021 ).

3.Applicability.

Although a parent asserted that the parent was permitted to recover under the wrongful death statute upon the death of the parent’s adult child, the statute was inapplicable because, while the parent complied with a court order requiring the parent to contribute to the child’s support, the parent was not deprived of custody via a court order. Simms v. Estate of Blake, 615 S.W.3d 14, 2021 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 2021 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Child, Form 256.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Motion for Declaratory Judgment Asserting “Mandy Jo’s Law”, § 141.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context Parent and Child, § 256.00.

411.140. What action shall survive.

No right of action for personal injury or for injury to real or personal property shall cease or die with the person injuring or injured, except actions for slander, libel, criminal conversation, and so much of the action for malicious prosecution as is intended to recover for the personal injury. For any other injury an action may be brought or revived by the personal representative, or against the personal representative, heir or devisee, in the same manner as causes of action founded on contract.

History. 10: amend. Acts 1952, ch. 147.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section is procedural only. Deupree v. Levinson, 186 F.2d 297, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3753 (6th Cir. 1950), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 915, 71 S. Ct. 736, 95 L. Ed. 1351, 1951 U.S. LEXIS 1969 (1951). See Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

2.State Courts.

Whether an action should survive to the personal or real representative of the plaintiff is a matter of policy to be settled for itself by each state and, although under Indiana law the cause of action for wrongful death dies with the decedent, an action filed in Kentucky by an Indiana resident for injuries in Indiana who died while the action was pending could be revived in the name of the decedent’s personal representative appointed in Kentucky since the law of the forum applied. Austin's Adm'r v. Pittsburg, C., C. & S. L. R. Co., 122 Ky. 304 , 91 S.W. 742, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1235 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 52 ( Ky. 1906 ).

3.Federal Courts.

Under federal law, an action for penalties and forfeitures recoverable under congressional enactment does not survive, but abates with death of claimed violator of statute. Bowles v. Farmers Nat'l Bank, 147 F.2d 425, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154 (6th Cir. Ky. 1945 ).

The question of the survival of an action, which did not exist at common law and was purely the creature of congressional enactment, was not governed by state statute of survival and, in the absence of an act of congress, the federal courts were entitled to apply the proper rules of federal law under their own standards. Bowles v. Farmers Nat'l Bank, 147 F.2d 425, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2154 (6th Cir. Ky. 1945 ).

4.Actions Ceasing with Death.

The word “slander” as used in this section embraces libel, and the right of action for a libel does not survive the death of plaintiff. Johnson's Adm'x v. Haldeman, 102 Ky. 163 , 43 S.W. 226, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1164 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1897 ). See Gross' Adm'r v. Ledford, 190 Ky. 526 , 228 S.W. 24, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1921 ).

The actions which survive in this state are those which survived at the common law and such others as are specifically named in this section and, since this section does not make provision for survivorship of election contests and at common law the courts did not have jurisdiction to try election contests, an appeal in an election contest abates upon the death of either party to it. Galvin v. Shafer, 130 Ky. 563 , 113 S.W. 485, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 288 ( Ky. 1908 ).

An action by husband for damages for the alienation of the affections of his wife is in the same nature and genus as an action for criminal conversation with her and the measure of damages, and the only basis upon which damages may be recovered, in each action are the same, and they are actions to recover damages for personal injuries — not for physical injuries to the person — and they do not survive. Gross' Adm'r v. Ledford, 190 Ky. 526 , 228 S.W. 24, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1921 ).

A claim for libel and slander ceases or dies with the death of the person injured or the person injuring. Hayes v. Rodgers, 447 S.W.2d 597, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1969 ).

The death of an air board member terminated the cause of action against him and his estate for slander. Gray v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 562 S.W.2d 656, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 472 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

5.—Assault.

A contract of employer to furnish a guard to protect an employee from assault by a mob cannot bring the action for wrongful death within KRS 411.130 and Ky. Const., § 241, nor can it have the effect of keeping alive a cause of action, if it existed, which this section declares does not survive. Lewis' Adm'r v. Taylor Coal Co., 112 Ky. 845 , 66 S.W. 1044, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2218 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1902 ) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

Since an action for assault does not survive under this section and cannot be prosecuted against the personal representative of the wrongdoer, if the defendant in an action for assault dies pending an appeal, the action should be dismissed. Shields’ Adm’rs v. Rowland, 151 Ky. 136 , 151 S.W. 408, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1912 ), modified on other grounds, Shields’ Adm’rs v. Rowland, 151 Ky. 822 , 152 S.W. 943, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 571 (1913) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

City marshal’s estate was not liable for assault and battery by deputy, since action for assault and battery does not survive. Veatch v. Derrick, 224 Ky. 332 , 6 S.W.2d 279, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 599 ( Ky. 1928 ) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

If plaintiff had any cause of action for injury by gunshot wound, it did not survive, but died with death of his assailant, as it was founded upon assault. Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

An action for damages for assault and battery does not survive under this section. Fields v. Middleton, 254 Ky. 159 , 71 S.W.2d 39, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 51 ( Ky. 1934 ) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

6.Surviving Actions.

Estate of life tenant should be answerable after his death for cost of repairs he should have made during his life; the action for waste survives. Prescott v. Grimes, 143 Ky. 191 , 136 S.W. 206, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 374 ( Ky. 191 1).

The right to contest a will, if unrelinquished by its immediate possessor through his acceptance of benefits thereunder, or otherwise, survives his death. Hall v. Blackard, 298 Ky. 354 , 182 S.W.2d 904, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 901 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The death of an employee who is disabled by a compensable cause, occurring after the filing of his claim for compensation benefits before the workmen’s compensation board but before an award in his favor has been made, does not extinguish his right to compensation for disability preceding his demise in those instances where death is caused from a nonwork-connected and noncompensable cause. Young v. Bentley, 449 S.W.2d 755, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 473 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Where prisoner was murdered by his drunken fellow inmates and decedent’s mother filed suit on the grounds that defendants failed to maintain jail in a condition of safety for its inmates, decedent’s civil rights were violated under 42 USCS, § 1983 and according to 42 USCS, § 1998, which grants to United States district courts the power to apply state statutes, the law of the forum state should be adopted as federal common law and the cause of action alleged, by the laws of Kentucky, survived the death of the injured person and could be maintained by his legal representative. Hall v. Wooten, 506 F.2d 564, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 5995 (6th Cir. Ky. 1974 ).

The fact that a particular statute giving rise to subrogation does not contain a specific provision that the action shall survive is without importance; unless survival of the action is specifically precluded, the action does survive. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Atherton, 656 S.W.2d 724, 1983 Ky. LEXIS 297 ( Ky. 1983 ).

Claims of employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge under the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, KRS 344.040(1), and KRS 344.280 , and a claim for general injunctive relief by a former employee, survived the employee’s death because the claims were plainly not for slander, libel, criminal conversation, or malicious prosecution. Turner v. Sullivan Univ. Sys., 420 F. Supp. 2d 773, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9580 (W.D. Ky. 2006 ).

Court of Appeals erred in affirming a circuit court’s dismissal of a creditor’s claim against a decedent’s heirs because the creditor was a creditor of the decedent and his estate where he filed his tort action prior to the decedent’s death, timely revived the action against the estate administrator, proceeded to obtain a judgment in that action, and filed a judgment lien, which established his status as a creditor of the decedent’s estate and entitlement to a remedy. Gregory v. Hardgrove, 562 S.W.3d 911, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 2018 ).

7.—To Widow and Children.

Action for death of man killed with bar of iron may be revived by his widow and children against personal representative of defendant who died pending litigation; action was not for an “assault” under this section but was an action under KRS 411.150 . Morehead's Adm'x v. Bitner, 106 Ky. 523 , 50 S.W. 857, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1986 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 66 ( Ky. 1899 ) (decision prior to 1952 amendment).

The action given widow or minor child under KRS 411.150 for killing of person with a deadly weapon survives against personal representative of wrongdoer. Merrill v. Puckett's Curator, 93 S.W. 912, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 595 (1906).

Where a man was killed and his adult son wounded in a gunfight in which the defendant’s decedent was also killed, the widow and minor children of the man who was killed had a right of action against the defendant’s estate under KRS 411.150 . Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ).

8.—To Personal Representative.

The right of action for use and occupation of land survives to the personal representative, and not to the devisees. Swart v. Reveal, 29 S.W. 24, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 503 (1895).

Recovery of damages for pain, suffering and anguish endured by child from the time she was bitten and lacerated by a dog until the date of her death from hydrophobia, a period of about 35 days, survived to her personal representative under this section and her parents never at any time had any right of action for the pain and suffering of the child, since the right existed in the child alone until her death. Meyer's Adm'r v. Zoll, 119 Ky. 480 , 84 S.W. 543, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 167 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 23 ( Ky. 1905 ) (see KRS 411.133 ).

Action for damage to realty may be revived by the personal representative, but not by the heirs. Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. McCoy, 288 Ky. 458 , 156 S.W.2d 493, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Where a party died after commencing suit for her own personal injuries, the party’s personal representative and not her daughter had a right to bring suit for those injuries and, therefore, the disability of the daughter did not affect the period of limitations for revival of the suit. New Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Thomas, 411 S.W.2d 672, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Although a medical malpractice action alleging delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer had to be revived or brought in the name of the personal representative of the estate when the patient/party in interest died under CR 25.01(1), KRS 411.140 , and KRS 395.278 , a radiologist’s employer waived the revival requirement by continuing to actively litigate the case for over three years after the expiration of the revival statute of limitations. Burnham v. Radiology Group of Paducah, P.S.C., 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 44 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 19, 2010).

Trial court properly set aside the jury verdict and granted a long-term care facility a new trial because not only had the facility preserved the issue of standing, but an estate’s claims under the long-term Residents’ Rights Act were improperly submitted to the jury since the resident had predeceased the claim; the statutory duties merely codify the common-law standard of care and do not survive the death of the resident. Jennings v. Berea Area Dev., LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 185 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 964 (Ky. Ct. App. June 15, 2018).

9.—To Subrogee.

Where a reparations obligor has paid the death benefits to the estate of a person killed in an accident involving a vehicle of an uninsured motorist, this death is an injury under the statute and the reparations obligor, by independent action as the subrogee, may seek recovery of the reasonable charges for funeral or burial expenses, not to exceed the statutory amount, against the uninsured party, his estate or such other persons against whom the action may survive. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Atherton, 656 S.W.2d 724, 1983 Ky. LEXIS 297 ( Ky. 1983 ).

10.—Breach of Contract.

Actions for personal injuries include such as result from a breach of contract obligation and such actions survive. Wood v. Downing's Adm'r, 110 Ky. 656 , 62 S.W. 487, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 62 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 116 ( Ky. 1901 ).

The exceptions to this section do not embrace causes of action for contract and a cause of action based on failure of father to make illegitimate child an equal heir as promised in lieu of bastardy proceedings by the child’s mother is an action in the nature of a claim for damages for a breach of contract which survives under this section even though the child predeceases the father. Moore's Adm'r v. Wagner's Adm'r, 243 Ky. 351 , 48 S.W.2d 15 ( Ky. 1932 ).

This section has no application to tort actions which are founded upon contract and grow out of the contractual relations between the parties and therefore such actions survive. Grundy v. Manchester Ins. & Indem. Co., 425 S.W.2d 735, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 432 ( Ky. 1968 ).

11.Death Pending Appeal.

Where an appellee dies before submission of the appeal, the appeal is abated and a revivor is necessary in order to proceed. Mason v. Anderson, 242 S.W.2d 1011, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1102 ( Ky. 1951 ).

12.Common Law.

At common law, whether an action survived the death of one of the parties depended upon the nature of the action and the damages sought and not upon the form of remedy and, according to the principle of the same law, all actions and causes of action for injuries to the person, which were founded upon torts, died with the person. Gross' Adm'r v. Ledford, 190 Ky. 526 , 228 S.W. 24, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1921 ).

At common law all causes of action for injuries to the person which rested upon tort died with either of the parties. Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ).

13.Assignability of Claims.

Claim for professional malpractice against an insurance agent or broker can be assigned because KRS 411.140 does not prohibit the assignment of a negligence claim resulting in injury to property or pecuniary loss and no judicially-created exception exists. Associated Ins. Serv. v. Garcia, 307 S.W.3d 58, 2010 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 2010 ).

Insured pleasure craft could assign to guests whose legs were crushed on a dinner cruise the insured’s claims of fraudulent misrepresentation and negligent procurement of insurance against its insurance agent and broker that obtained marine insurance coverage from an insolvent insurer because KRS 411.140 did not prohibit the assignment of a negligence claim resulting in injury to property or pecuniary loss. Associated Ins. Serv. v. Garcia, 307 S.W.3d 58, 2010 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 2010 ).

Cited in:

Boggs v. Blue Diamond Coal Co., 497 F. Supp. 1105, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13299 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ); McLain v. Dana Corp., 16 S.W.3d 320, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 133 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Time for revivor, KRS 395.278 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

A Post-Impact Fear of Pre-Impact Fright, 99 Ky. L.J. 401 (2010/2011).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Some Other Defenses, Form 129.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Malicious Prosecution and Wrongful Use of Civil Proceedings, § 123.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

411.145. Damages for loss of consortium.

  1. As used in this section “consortium” means the right to the services, assistance, aid, society, companionship and conjugal relationship between husband and wife, or wife and husband.
  2. Either a wife or husband may recover damages against a third person for loss of consortium, resulting from a negligent or wrongful act of such third person.

History. Enact. Acts 1970, ch. 200, § 1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Construction.

Where a wife’s suit for damages against a third party arose before the enactment of this section which is nonretroactive, the question of recovery is governed by common law which was declared to be, in the case of Kotsiris v. Ling, 451 S.W.2d 411, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 390 ( Ky. 1970 ), that a wife may sue a third party for negligence which resulted in the wife’s loss of the right of consortium. Thomas v. Deason, 317 F. Supp. 1098, 1970 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9915 (W.D. Ky. 1970 ).

KRS 411.145(2) which sets out the right of a spouse to recover damages for loss of consortium, is similar in wording to KRS 411.135 , which sets out the right of a parent to recover damages for loss of affection and companionship resulting from the wrongful death of their child, and it follows that the two (2) statutes should be interpreted consistently; a wife’s loss of spousal consortium claim in the Kentucky Board of Claims arising from an injury to her husband caused by a malfunctioning pedestrian control device was barred by KRS 44.070(1), which precluded liability for collateral or dependent claims. City of Danville v. Goode, 122 S.W.3d 591, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 314 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

In Kentucky, loss of consortium is an independent cause of action authorized by statute, KRS 411.145(2). The fact that an injured spouse prevails on his or her claim does not of itself necessarily require an award of damages to the other spouse who alleges loss of consortium. Poplar v. KKI, LLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24803 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 2005).

Loss of consortium damages do not cease at death. Therefore, where a decedent was involved in an automobile accident and succumbed after the hospital failed to timely provide appropriate medical care, the decedent’s husband was entitled to pursue a claim for loss of consortium for that short time period following the accident and the decedent’s demise. Martin v. Ohio County Hosp. Corp., 295 S.W.3d 104, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 234 ( Ky. 2009 ).

2.Application.

The damage provisions of the federal death on the high seas act, 46 U. S. C. § 761, rather than this section, were found applicable in a wrongful death action resulting from an accident involving the collision on the Ohio River of a pleasure cruiser and a tow of 15 barges. In re American Commercial Lines, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 134, 1973 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11164 (E.D. Ky. 1973 ).

Although KRS 304.39-230 (6) provides a statute of limitations for those actions involving motor vehicle collisions which fall within the purview of no-fault benefit recovery which have met or exceeded the statutory thresholds of KRS 304.39-060 (2), an action for loss of consortium does not fall within the perimeters of Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA) benefit recovery nor is a claim for loss of consortium “akin” to a claim for replacement services loss under the MVRA. Floyd v. Gray, 657 S.W.2d 936, 1983 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1983 ), limited, Hardin v. Action Graphics, Inc., 57 S.W.3d 844, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

The two-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 304.39-230 (6) applies only to those tort actions within the purview of the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), and the loss of consortium is not a recoverable injury within the purview of the MVRA; accordingly, a wife’s action for loss of consortium, brought nearly 15 months after her husband was injured in an automobile accident, was barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations of KRS 413.140 (a). Floyd v. Gray, 657 S.W.2d 936, 1983 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1983 ), limited, Hardin v. Action Graphics, Inc., 57 S.W.3d 844, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

District Court correctly granted an employer summary judgment on a wife’s claim for loss of marital consortium under KRS 411.145 , where there was no evidence that the basic aspects of the employee’s and wife’s married life had changed as a result of the employer’s retaliatory conduct. Ford v. GMC, 305 F.3d 545, 2002 FED App. 0336P, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 20501 (6th Cir. Ky. 2002 ).

Court dismissed a wife’s personal injury claim against an amusement park for lack of jurisdiction because her admission in her initial disclosures that she was entitled to $29,157 in damages could only mean that she was never entitled to $75,000 in damages. Pursuant to KRS 411.145(2), the wife’s personal injury claim and her husband’s loss of consortium claim were not based on a common and undivided interest; even if the husband had continued to pursue his claim, that would not have affected the court’s analysis of the amount in controversy. Poplar v. KKI, LLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24803 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 2005).

Trial court erred in a hospital’s motion for a directed verdict as to a husband’s loss of consortium claim under KRS 411.145(2) where no appreciable amount of time elapsed between the hospital’s alleged negligent act and his wife’s death; the husband could not have suffered loss of consortium damages during that time. Ohio County Hosp. Corp. v. Martin, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 45 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2008), rev'd, in part, aff'd, 295 S.W.3d 104, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 234 ( Ky. 2009 ).

In an action arising from an airplane crash, the airline company was entitled to dismissal of the survivors’ claims for loss of spousal consortium under KRS 411.145 ; Kentucky law did not recognize claims for post-death loss of spousal consortium, and the federal court was not authorized to speculate as to yet unarticulated law. Combs v. Comair, Inc. (In re Air Crash at Lexington, KY), 556 F. Supp. 2d 665, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1216 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

Circuit court erred in holding that the insureds could recover under a loss of consortium claim against the insurer because, while either a wife or husband could statutorily recover damages against a third person for loss of consortium and loss of consortium was an independent cause of action, neither spouse had a substantive, bodily injury claim against the insurer under the policy where the insurance policy clearly and unambiguously excluded underinsured motorists coverage for bodily injury sustained by an insured while occupying an owned motorcycle. Ky. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Armfield, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 23 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 26, 2016).

3.Workers’ Compensation.

Where a husband, who had elected coverage under the Workers’ Compensation Act, received injuries while in the scope of his employment, his wife could not recover for loss of consortium since one spouse’s decision to be covered by workers’ compensation must be binding on his or her marital partner. Brooks v. Burkeen, 549 S.W.2d 91, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 407 ( Ky. 1977 ), overruled, Giuliani v. Guiler, 951 S.W.2d 318, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1997 ), overruled in part, Martin v. Ohio County Hosp. Corp., 295 S.W.3d 104, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 234 ( Ky. 2009 ).

4.Liability as Matter of Law.

When defendant admitted liability for negligent injury to plaintiff, it became liable under this section to plaintiff’s wife as a matter of law for any loss of consortium which resulted from that injury. The fact that defendant contested the severity of plaintiff’s injuries did not relieve it of liability for his wife’s claim. The jury was always free to decide that defendant’s injuries were too slight to impact his wife’s right to consortium. Transit Authority of River City (TARC) v. Vinson, 703 S.W.2d 482, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 681 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

Though the legislature failed to pass a bill to expand this section to include a right of action for a child’s loss of consortium from the wrongful death of a parent, the court extended the common law to include such right of action. The failure of the legislature to act “does not negatively impact the authority of this Court to adopt and conform the common law.” Giuliani v. Guiler, 951 S.W.2d 318, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1997 ).

5.Military Death.

Where husband on active military service committed suicide after informing his superiors many times that he intended to do so and even displayed the weapon he planned to use to them, a claim for loss of consortium in this context was derivative of a serviceman’s death in the course of activity incident to service, and thus was barred. Skees v. United States by & Through Department of the Army, 107 F.3d 421, 1997 FED App. 0071P, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 3035 (6th Cir. Ky. 1997 ).

6.Claims by Children.

Children’s claims for loss of parental consortium were dismissed because Kentucky law prohibited recovery for a minor’s loss of consortium claim if it was not accompanied by a wrongful death claim. Since KRS 411.135 provided a parent with a loss of consortium claim for the loss of a minor child only in wrongful death actions; the “reciprocal” of KRS 411.135 was also limited to wrongful death cases. Brown v. Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42062 (W.D. Ky. May 23, 2008).

Cited in:

Burden v. Evansville Materials, Inc., 550 F. Supp. 41, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9864 (W.D. Ky. 1982 ); Moore v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 710 S.W.2d 225, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 268 ( Ky. 1986 ); Frankfort Med. Inv?rs, LLC v. Thomas, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 101 (June 14, 2019); Frankfort Med. Inv?rs, LLC v. Thomas, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 101 (June 14, 2019).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

7.Time-barred.

Unpublished decision: In a tort action arising from a collision between a tractor trailer and a car driven by decedent, plaintiff's loss-of-consortium claim accrued on the day of her husband's accident and was barred by the one-year statute of limitations; she waited nearly three years before she sued two defendants and four years before she sued the third defendant. The claim also failed, because plaintiffs were unable show that any of defendants committed a wrongful or negligent act. Richardson v. Rose Transp., Inc., 617 Fed. Appx. 480, 2015 FED App. 0484N, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11756 (6th Cir. Ky. 2015 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Toner & Asseff, Do Appellate Court Decisions Affect Health Care Costs?, Volume 75, No. 3, May 2011, Ky. Bench & Bar 23.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Pitt, The “Equal Rights” Amendment — Positive Panacea or Negative Nostrum?, 59 Ky. L.J. 953 (1971).

Note: Loss of Parental Consortium: Why Kentucky Should Re-Recognize the Claim Outside the Wrongful Death Context, 98 Ky. L.J. 919 (2009/2010).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Article: Recovery of Nonpecuniary Damages in Mass Tort Actions in Kentucky: A Defense Perspective, 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 197 (2008).

Kentucky Survey Issue: Article: Martin v. Ohio County Hospital Corp.: The Long Overdue Recognition of Post-Death Loss of Spousal Consortium and Justifications for Further Expansion of Kentucky Loss of Consortium Law, 38 N. Ky. L. Rev. 307 (2011).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Parent—Child’s Loss of Consortium by Spouse, Form 256.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death, Pre-Death Damages, and Loss of Consortium by Spouse, Form 141.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Medical Malpractice, § 136.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Damages, § 39.09.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Actions, § 17.6.

411.148. Nonliability of licensees and certified technicians for emergency care.

  1. No physician licensed under KRS Chapter 311, registered or practical nurse licensed under KRS Chapter 314, person certified as an emergency medical technician by the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, person certified by the American Heart Association or the American Red Cross to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or employee of any board of education established pursuant to the provision of KRS 160.160 , who has completed a course in first aid and who maintains current certification therein in accordance with the standards set forth by the American Red Cross shall be liable in civil damages for administering emergency care or treatment at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor’s office, or other place having proper medical equipment excluding house calls, for acts performed at the scene of such emergency, unless such acts constitute willful or wanton misconduct.
  2. Nothing in this section applies to the administering of such care or treatment where the same is rendered for remuneration or with the expectation of remuneration.
  3. The administering of emergency care or treatment at the scene of an emergency by employees of a board of education shall not be considered to be rendered for remuneration or with the expectation of remuneration because such personnel perform such care as part of their regular professional or work responsibilities for which they receive their regular salaries from the school board which is their employer.

History. Enact. Acts 1972, ch. 35, § 1; 1974, ch. 74, Art. VI, § 107 (11); 1980, ch. 3, § 1, effective July 15, 1980; 1998, ch. 426, § 599, effective July 15, 1998; 2005, ch. 99, § 647, effective June 20, 2005.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

Adoption of KRS 411.148 is within the legislature’s police powers, and does not violate the jural rights doctrine under Ky. Const. §§ 14, 54, and 241, as the purpose of KRS 411.148 is to encourage the rendering of medical assistance to those in need by trained medical personnel by removing the fear of liability that accompanies rendering aid under the common law. Cook v. Taylor, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 264 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2008), review denied, ordered not published, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 212 (Ky. Aug. 19, 2009).

2.Applicability.

Paramedic and emergency medical technicians were not subject to the Good Samaritan immunity under KRS 411.148 and KRS 311A.150 as KRS 411.148 did not apply to the regular professional work responsibilities of paramedics for which they were paid; the paramedics provided care to a decedent in the normal course of their work, and they had a pre-existing duty to assist the decedent that was specifically exempted from the immunity granted by KRS 411.148. Cook v. Taylor, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 264 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2008), review denied, ordered not published, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 212 (Ky. Aug. 19, 2009).

3.Pre-existing Duty.

Care or treatment for remuneration or due to a pre-existing duty is specifically exempted from the immunity granted by KRS 411.148 . Cook v. Taylor, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 264 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2008), review denied, ordered not published, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 212 (Ky. Aug. 19, 2009).

Opinions of Attorney General.

The immunity from suit provided for medical technicians would apply where the emergency aid was gratuitous as between the patient and technician even though the technician was being paid from another source. OAG 76-36 .

Laymen are not immune under this section from liability in civil damages for administering emergency care or treatment at the scene of an emergency. OAG 77-47 .

In absence of any court decisions on the matter, properly certified medical technicians employed by county ambulance board would be covered by the immunity provisions of this section so long as those persons are not paid directly by the persons to whom they render aid and assistance and further assuming that their actions do not constitute willful or wanton misconduct and that the aid rendered is confined to those places mentioned in the statute. OAG 78-258 .

The immunity provisions of this section do not apply to mere ambulance drivers, the board members of the ambulance service organization, or to those medical technicians not properly certified. OAG 78-258 .

A state police officer who renders emergency medical aid or treatment, while not properly certified as an emergency medical technician, may be liable in “ordinary tort” for negligence resulting in injury to persons or property or in death. OAG 79-71 .

To the extent this section relieves the persons named therein from liability arising from death or physical injury to persons caused by negligence, the statute is unconstitutional under Const., § 54 and, to the extent therefore, void. OAG 79-535 .

Although there is no specific statute authorizing the board of trustees of a fire protection district to expend district funds to train personnel in emergency medical technician techniques and to furnish equipment for such personnel to utilize, the board may undertake such expenditures as protecting and saving lives and the rendering of emergency first aid are generally recognized functions of firemen; however, those personnel rendering emergency first aid may be held personally liable for intentional wrongdoing or acts of negligence in connection therewith and, they probably cannot claim immunity under the provisions of the so-called “Good Samaritan Law,” KRS 411.148 . OAG 80-660 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Notes, Statutes Establishing a Duty to Report Crimes or Render Assistance to Strangers: Making Apathy Criminal, 72 Ky. L.J. 827 (1983-84).

411.150. Action by surviving spouse or child of person killed with deadly weapon.

The surviving spouse and child, under the age of eighteen (18) or either of them, of a person killed by the careless, wanton or malicious use of a deadly weapon, not in self-defense, may have an action against the person who committed the killing and all others aiding or promoting, or any one (1) or more of them. In such actions the jury may give vindictive damages.

History. 4: amend. Acts 1968, ch. 100, § 21; 1974, ch. 386, § 97.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

Kentucky Constitution, § 241, providing that a cause of action for damages for negligent or wrongful death must be prosecuted by the personal representative, was intended to apply only to KRS 277.310 and 411.130 and does not refer to or affect this section. McClure v. Alexander, 24 S.W. 619, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 732 (1894).

2.Application.

Where plaintiff averred his son who was past 18 years of age was “enticed, seduced, overpersuaded, and hired” by defendant’s agent without plaintiff’s knowledge or consent to labor for defendant at a sawmill, that defendant unlawfully placed plaintiff’s said son to work among lawless boys and negligently, carelessly and knowingly permitted said minor boys to wrangle and lawlessly fight with sticks, clubs, rocks, knives and pistols at divers times, all of which was unknown to plaintiff or plaintiff’s son until his son was shot and killed by the minor employees of defendant, the facts alleged were not such as would entitle anyone to maintain a cause of action under this section. Harris v. Kentucky Timber & Lumber Co., 43 S.W. 462, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1731 ( Ky. 1897 ).

A wanton act is an unrestrained act and the act of a lunatic is precisely of that character and he is liable under this section to widow of deputy sheriff killed by him. Young v. Young, 141 Ky. 76 , 132 S.W. 155, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where a man was killed and his adult son wounded in a gunfight in which the defendant’s decedent was also killed, the widow and minor children of the man who was killed had a right of action against the decedent’s estate but the adult son’s action for personal injuries did not survive the death of the defendant’s decedent, since it was based on assault. Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ).

An action filed under this section by widow as next friend of infant children against the brother, as heir and devisee, of the man who shot and killed her husband, for $1,000 as actual damages and $1,000 as vindictive damages and seeking a general order of attachment against the estate of the man who shot her husband, although it stated a cause of action against the man who shot her husband but wholly failed to state a cause of action against his brother and failed to allege that attachment was just, rendered the attachment against the estate defective. Collett v. Helton, 264 Ky. 214 , 94 S.W.2d 603, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 296 ( Ky. 1936 ).

3.When Personal Representative May Bring Action.

Administrator of one killed by wrongful use of firearms had right of action therefor, where deceased was not survived by widow or child. Howard's Adm'r v. Hunter, 126 Ky. 685 , 104 S.W. 723, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1092 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1907 ).

Personal representative of bystander killed by sheriff shooting at another may bring action, where widow and children fail to do so. Wells' Adm'r v. Lewis, 213 Ky. 846 , 281 S.W. 996, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1926 ).

4.Deadly Weapon.

This section intended to embrace any killing done with a weapon either in itself deadly or deadly when used in the manner in which it was used, and an iron bar is a deadly weapon within the meaning of this section. Morehead's Adm'x v. Bitner, 106 Ky. 523 , 50 S.W. 857, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1986 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 66 ( Ky. 1899 ).

In light of the history and purpose of this section, a motor vehicle is not to be considered a deadly weapon. Shepherd v. Suburban Motor Freight, Inc., 780 S.W.2d 633, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

5.Officers and Sureties as Defendants.

Compensatory damages may be recovered from sheriff and his surety for wrongful killing of innocent man by sheriff’s deputies. Johnson v. Williams' Adm'r, 111 Ky. 289 , 63 S.W. 759, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 658 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Growbarger v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 126 Ky. 118 , 102 S.W. 873, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 555 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1907 ).

Widow of deceased was not permitted to recover against sheriff and his sureties for death of husband killed by deputy sheriff, where petition merely alleged killer held position of deputy sheriff when he killed deceased, and not that it was in performance of an official act. Commonwealth v. Hurt, 64 S.W. 911, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1171 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 619 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

Widow of fleeing man killed by officer had action for his death, where officer acted only on suspicion of a felony and no felony had in fact been committed. Petrie v. Cartwright, 114 Ky. 103 , 70 S.W. 297, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 954 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Widow of man unnecessarily and maliciously killed by city marshal may maintain an action for killing on the bond of marshal. Growbarger v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 126 Ky. 118 , 102 S.W. 873, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 555 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1907 ).

City marshal and his sureties were liable to infant children of deceased bystander unlawfully killed by marshal. Martin v. Smith, 136 Ky. 804 , 125 S.W. 249, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 545 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where bystander was killed by a sheriff who was shooting at a third party, an action for damages could have been brought and maintained by the bystander’s widow and minor children under this section, but an action by the bystander’s personal representative for wrongful death under KRS 411.130 for the benefit of his decedent’s widow and minor children was also proper. Wells' Adm'r v. Lewis, 213 Ky. 846 , 281 S.W. 996, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1926 ).

While KRS 134.200 makes the sheriff and his surety liable for certain acts of his deputy, it is not broad enough to make the deputy the agent of the sheriff in the sense that if the deputy maliciously kills another, the sheriff is “the person who committed the killing” under this section and, since this section limits liability to the person committing the killing and persons aiding and abetting him, neither a sheriff nor his surety is liable under this section. Howard v. Caudill, 228 Ky. 403 , 15 S.W.2d 245, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 554 ( Ky. 1929 ).

An action was maintainable under this section by decedent’s widow against the chief of police and the sureties under his bond as provided under KRS 95.750 (now repealed) where the chief of police allegedly wrongfully and maliciously shot decedent while he was intoxicated and discharging a pistol and he subsequently died of the injury. Howard v. Hyden, 239 Ky. 233 , 39 S.W.2d 265, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 764 ( Ky. 1931 ).

6.Remarriage of Widow.

Under this section, the widow’s remarriage pending the suit did not affect her right of recovery or that of the children. Archer v. Bowling, 166 Ky. 139 , 179 S.W. 15, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1915 ). See Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ).

7.Pleading.

The petition need not be couched in the language of the statute, for the use of any words sufficiently broad to embrace the idea contained in any one of the words in this section is sufficient and allegations in petition charging that the killing was unlawful and wrongful and not in necessary or apparently necessary self-defense were sufficient. Young v. Young, 141 Ky. 76 , 132 S.W. 155, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1910 ). See Howard's Adm'r v. Hunter, 126 Ky. 685 , 104 S.W. 723, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1092 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1907 ).

8.Joinder of Plaintiffs.

There was no error in permitting the infant children to be joined in an action by a surviving wife to recover damages for the killing of her husband who was the father of the infant children. McClurg v. Igleheart, 33 S.W. 80, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 913 (1895).

If an action is brought under this section by the widow alone, the minor child or children, appearing by their guardian or next friend, have the right to be made parties plaintiff and the widow cannot control the action so as to defeat a recovery by the minor child or children. She may dismiss it insofar as she is concerned but the dismissal as to her will not be permitted to interfere with its prosecution by the child or children if they are parties to it, nor will it bar an action instituted by them within the proper time. Martin v. Smith, 110 S.W. 413, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 582 (1908).

Infant children of one allegedly killed by malicious use of firearms were entitled to join as parties plaintiff in a suit originally brought by the widow alone. Archer v. Bowling, 166 Ky. 139 , 179 S.W. 15, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1915 ).

9.Self-defense.

An instruction given by the court was objectionable where it in effect made defendant’s right of self-defense depend on the belief of the jury as to whether he was in danger at the time he killed the decedent, while the true rule was for the jury to find from the evidence whether the accused, at the time he shot and killed the decedent, then had reasonable grounds to believe, and did in good faith believe, that his life was in danger from violence at the hands of the decedent with the usual limitation added that accused might then only take the life of decedent provided he had no apparent and safe means of protecting his own life and person than by so taking the life of decedent. McClurg v. Igleheart, 33 S.W. 80, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 913 (1895).

If the jury believes that defendant, with intent to assault, beat or kill deceased, sought and first attacked deceased, and never abandoned said attack until he shot deceased, the jury should not find for defendant on the ground of self-defense. McClurg v. Igleheart, 33 S.W. 80, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 913 (1895).

Unless defendant is excusable upon the ground of self-defense, then he is not excusable for the killing, though he did it under such circumstances as would make it manslaughter only, and not murder. McClurg v. Igleheart, 33 S.W. 80, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 913 (1895).

There is no reason for a distinction between civil and criminal actions as to a plea of self-defense and an instruction conforming to that laid down in Wagner v. Commonwealth, 32 K.L.R. 1185, 108 S.W. 318 (1908), should have been given. Taylor v. Franklin, 208 Ky. 43 , 270 S.W. 462, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 211 ( Ky. 1925 ). See Poe v. Hankins' Adm'x, 251 Ky. 466 , 65 S.W.2d 457, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 897 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Although pleas of self-defense and mutual combat are ordinarily inconsistent, it was prejudicial for the court not to give a self-defense instruction where the defendant pleaded both and the court did not require him to elect but he did in effect make an election when he offered an instruction on self-defense and objected to the giving of an instruction on mutual combat and the evidence showed a possibly inferable abandonment of the conflict by the defendant which was consistent with a plea of self-defense but inconsistent with a plea of mutual combat. Coleman v. Hager, 307 Ky. 70 , 208 S.W.2d 316, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 581 ( Ky. 1948 ).

A self-defense plea is available to a defendant in an action brought under this section. Coleman v. Hager, 307 Ky. 70 , 208 S.W.2d 316, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 581 ( Ky. 1948 ).

10.—Burden of Proof.

This section does not place the burden of negativing self-defense upon the plaintiff but simply emphasizes a plea of self-defense based on the evidence and, in the absence of such evidence, an affirmative instruction upon it is, as a general rule, improper. Clolinger v. Callahan, 204 Ky. 33 , 263 S.W. 700, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1924 ).

An admission of the assault charged in a civil action and a plea of self-defense by the defendant places on the defendant the burden of proof of self-defense with the accompanying right to conclude the argument. Johnson v. Porter, 208 Ky. 390 , 270 S.W. 813, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 294 ( Ky. 1925 ).

In action under this section, mere proof of homicide by defendant without any evidence with respect to having been committed maliciously and not in self-defense was not sufficient to warrant submission of case to jury. Sturgeon v. Baker, 312 Ky. 338 , 227 S.W.2d 202, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1950 ).

The burden rests upon the plaintiff in an action brought under this section to introduce evidence tending to show that the homicide was “by the careless, wanton or malicious use of a deadly weapon, not in self-defense,” and on failing to sustain such burden, there is no right of recovery. Sturgeon v. Baker, 312 Ky. 338 , 227 S.W.2d 202, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In actions under this section, the burden is upon the plaintiff to prove that the killing is not in self-defense. Arthurs v. Johnson, 280 S.W.2d 504, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Plaintiff adequately met the burden of proving that killing was not in self-defense where evidence established defendant shot and killed her husband, who was a deputy sheriff, while he and other officers were attempting to serve warrant for a lunacy inquest, not because of fear decedent was planning to subject him to death or great bodily harm but because he had determined to resist by force any effort to remove him from the house and, under these circumstances, even if the arresting procedure had been unlawful, defendant would have had no right to kill one of the officers in resisting arrest. Arthurs v. Johnson, 280 S.W.2d 504, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 1955 ).

11.Abatement or Survival of Action.

The cause of action created by this section involves more than an assault and battery and is given to those who cannot maintain an action for assault and battery; therefore, by virtue of KRS 411.140 , it survives against the personal representative of the wrongdoer. Merrill v. Puckett's Curator, 93 S.W. 912, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 595 (1906) (decision prior to 1952 amendment of KRS 411.140 ).

A suit by the widow and children, under the authority of this section and because founded upon a different theory or right than actions under KRS 411.140 , survives and may be maintained against the estate of the one causing death of the husband and father. Hunt's Ex'x v. Mutter, 238 Ky. 396 , 38 S.W.2d 215, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1931 ).

12.Damages.

An instruction “At the time of his death the life expectancy of . . . . . (deceased) was 28.6 years, and in estimating the actual damages the plaintiffs have sustained the jury will consider the probable net earnings of the deceased during that period, taking into consideration his capacity to earn and his business habits,” without any testimony having been introduced on the subject of life expectancy, isolates the expectancy from all, or nearly all, other facts and circumstances with which, under the evidence, it properly stands connected, such as that the health of the deceased was only fairly good, that for a year he had not been able to work continuously, that his habits were only fairly good and that he was reasonably industrious and gives undue prominence to the life expectancy. McClurg v. Igleheart, 33 S.W. 80, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 913 (1895).

The measure of damages in an action for killing by malicious use of firearms was such a sum as would reasonably compensate the widow and children for the loss they sustained of the power of deceased to earn money, and, in addition thereto, the jury could give vindictive damages, the total recovery being divided one half to the widow and the other one half to the children. Archer v. Bowling, 166 Ky. 139 , 179 S.W. 15, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1915 ).

The measure of damages to be recovered by a widow bringing an action under this section is the amount that would compensate her for the loss of the power of decedent to earn money. Souther v. Belleau, 203 Ky. 508 , 262 S.W. 619, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 938 ( Ky. 1924 ).

13.Limitation of Action.

The limitation of one year declared under KRS 413.140 applies to an action for death under this section. Irwin v. Smith, 150 Ky. 147 , 150 S.W. 22, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 850 ( Ky. 1912 ). See Archer v. Bowling, 166 Ky. 139 , 179 S.W. 15, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1915 ).

The one-year limitation prescribed in KRS 413.140 and not the five-year limitation in KRS 413.120 applies to an action by a widow to recover damages for the wanton shooting of her husband. Irwin v. Smith, 150 Ky. 147 , 150 S.W. 22, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 850 ( Ky. 1912 ).

14.Intent.

Where defendant presented his pistol in a room in which were many people and killed plaintiff’s intestate, he was liable for the death, though the person killed was not the one he was quarreling with, and it appeared that he had no intent to injure deceased. Chiles v. Drake, 59 Ky. 146 , 1859 Ky. LEXIS 69 ( Ky. 1859 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited in:

Commonwealth v. Hallahan, 391 S.W.2d 378, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 305 ( Ky. 1965 ); Shepherd v. Wellman, 313 F.3d 963, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26449 (6th Cir. 2002), rehearing denied, — F.3d —, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 4286 (6th Cir. 2003).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Grise, Torts, 71 Ky. L.J. 307 (1982-83).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Widow under KRS 411.150 for Death by Deadly Weapon, Seeking Punitive Damages, Form 141.05.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Wrongful Death of Parent—Child’s Loss of Consortium, Form 256.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 141 Wrongful Death, § 141.syn.

411.155. Liability for damages resulting from criminal use of a firearm by another person.

  1. A person or entity shall not be held liable for damages of any kind resulting from injuries to another person sustained as a result of the criminal use of any firearm by a third person, unless the person or entity conspired with the third person to commit, or willfully aided, abetted, or caused the commission of, the criminal act in which the firearm was used.
  2. This section shall not be construed to negate, limit, or modify the doctrine of negligence or strict liability relating to abnormally dangerous products or activities and defective products.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 223, § 1, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

Regardless of its purpose, this section patently offends Ky. Const., § 14, as well as Ky. Const., § 54 which prevents the General Assembly from limiting the amount of damages recoverable. Waldon v. Housing Auth. of Paducah, 854 S.W.2d 777, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 146 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

411.160. Resolutions authorizing suit against Commonwealth not to be mentioned in trial of suit. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (Acts 1948, ch. 167) was repealed by Acts 1966, ch. 255, § 283.

411.165. Liability of attorney for professional negligence.

  1. If any attorney employed to attend to professional business neglects to attend to the business, after being paid anything for his services, or attends to the business negligently, he shall be liable to the client for all damages and costs sustained by reason thereof.
  2. If any attorney employed to attend to any professional business receives his fee and does not attend to the business, he may be sued and made to refund the fee.

History. Enact. Acts 1976, ch. 58, § 10.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

In the client’s legal malpractice action against her attorney, the recovery of lost punitive damages in legal malpractice actions was prohibited, KRS 411.184(1)(f). Allowing the client to recover lost punitive damages would not advance the policy underlying punitive damages in any way; in fact, allowing recovery would be antithetical to what punitive damages stand for, which was untying the concept of punitive damages from its doctrinal moorings. Osborne v. Keeney, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ), limited, Ind. Ins. Co. v. Demetre, 527 S.W.3d 12, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 364 ( Ky. 2017 ).

Because of the longstanding case law noting the purpose of punitive damages and Kentucky’s stated requirement of allowing recovery only against the wrongdoer, it aligns with those jurisdictions that prohibit recovery of lost punitive damages in legal malpractice actions. Osborne v. Keeney, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ), limited, Ind. Ins. Co. v. Demetre, 527 S.W.3d 12, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 364 ( Ky. 2017 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Wolff, Legal Malpractice Primer., Vol. 71, No. 1, January 2007, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Hourly Fee Agreement, Form 1.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Attorney and Client, § 1.00.

411.167. Certificate of merit for medical malpractice actions.

  1. A claimant commencing any action identified in KRS 413.140(1)(e), or against a long-term-care facility as defined in KRS 216.510 alleging that the long-term-care facility failed to provide proper care to one (1) or more residents of the facility, shall file a certificate of merit with the complaint in the court in which the action is commenced.
  2. “Certificate of merit” means an affidavit or declaration that:
    1. The claimant has reviewed the facts of the case and has consulted with at least one (1) expert qualified pursuant to the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure and the Kentucky Rules of Evidence who is qualified to give expert testimony as to the standard of care or negligence and who the claimant or his or her counsel reasonably believes is knowledgeable in the relevant issues involved in the particular action, and has concluded on the basis of review and consultation that there is reasonable basis to commence the action;
    2. The claimant was unable to obtain the consultation required by paragraph (a) of this subsection because a limitation of time established by KRS Chapter 413 would bar the action and that the consultation could not reasonably be obtained before that time expired. An affidavit or declaration executed pursuant to this paragraph shall be supplemented by an affidavit or declaration pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection or paragraph (c) of this subsection within sixty (60) days after service of the complaint or the suit shall be dismissed unless the court grants an extension for good cause; or
    3. The claimant was unable to obtain the consultation required by paragraph (a) of this subsection because the claimant or his or her counsel had made at least three (3) separate good-faith attempts with three (3) different experts to obtain a consultation and that none of those contacted would agree to a consultation; so long as none of those contacted gave an opinion that there was no reasonable basis to commence the action.
  3. A single certificate of merit is required for an action even if more than one (1) defendant has been named in the complaint or is subsequently named.
  4. A certificate of merit is not required where the claimant intends to rely solely on one (1) or more causes of action for which expert testimony is not required, including claims of res ipsa loquitur and lack of informed consent, in which case the complaint shall be accompanied by an affidavit or declaration that no cause of action is asserted for which expert testimony is required.
  5. If a request by the claimant for the records of the claimant’s medical treatment by the defendants has been made and the records have not been produced, the claimant shall not be required to file a certificate of merit under this section until ninety (90) days after the records have been produced. For purposes of this section, “records” includes but is not limited to paper or electronic copies of dictations, video recordings, fetal heart monitor strips, and imaging studies.
  6. The identity and statements of an expert relied upon in subsection (2) of this section above are not discoverable, except:
    1. When a claim is made under subsection (2)(c) of this section that the claimant was unable to obtain the required consultation with an expert, the court, upon the request of a defendant made prior to compliance by the claimant with this section, may require the claimant to divulge to the court, in camera and without disclosure by the court to any other party, the names of the physicians refusing to consult; or
    2. If any party to an action hereto prevails on the basis of the failure of an opposing party to offer any competent expert testimony, the court may, upon motion, for good cause shown compel the opposing party or party’s counsel to provide to the court the name of any expert consulted and any written materials relied upon in executing the certificate.
  7. The claimant, in lieu of serving a certificate of merit, may provide the defendant or defendants with expert information in the form required by the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure. Nothing in this section requires the disclosure of any “consulting” or nontrial expert, except as expressly stated in this section.

HISTORY: 2019 ch. 180, § 1, effective June 27, 2019.

411.170. Action on lost, destroyed, mutilated or defaced writing.

An ordinary or equitable action may be brought upon a bill of exchange, or a note or other obligation, or upon an indorsement or assignment thereof, which, or upon a judgment the record of which, is lost, destroyed, mutilated, or defaced, without fraud on the part of the plaintiff, or of those under whom he claims. But no action shall be brought upon an instrument transferable by delivery, merely, which is alleged to be lost, destroyed, mutilated, or defaced, without a previous tender by the plaintiff to the defendant, if his name and place of residence be known to the plaintiff, of an indemnifying bond, with good surety, nor shall judgment be given against the defendant, in such action, until such bond is given, with good surety approved by the court.

History. C. C. 7: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Notes.

Where a note upon which an action was brought was indorsed by the defendant, it then became transferable by delivery, and covered by this section. Hoyland v. National Bank of Middlesborough, 137 Ky. 682 , 126 S.W. 356, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 612 ( Ky. 1910 ).

2.— Without Fraud on Part of Plaintiff.

In the absence of proof that the note in controversy was lost or destroyed without fault of the deceased or the executor bringing the action, the executor could not recover thereon. Sutton v. Russell's Ex'r, 236 Ky. 535 , 33 S.W.2d 629, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 801 ( Ky. 1930 ).

In an action on a lost note where the plaintiff alleged that the original note and mortgage were lost through no fraud on his part, that no part of the note had been paid, and that the note was not transferable by delivery and plaintiff did not execute a bond to the defendant, the court erred in dismissing the action upon plaintiff’s failure to comply with defendant’s motion to produce the note. Fuson v. Henderson, 256 Ky. 729 , 77 S.W.2d 8, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 484 ( Ky. 1934 ).

In an action on a note where a lien was retained in a deed to real estate to secure payment of the note and an amended petition was filed under this section alleging the original note had been lost, the Court of Appeals, after careful consideration of the evidence, was convinced the note had been paid and that the note previously filed in the action was a forgery. Dixon v. Ward, 267 Ky. 619 , 103 S.W.2d 113, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 377 ( Ky. 1937 ).

It was held that it was a prerequisite under this section for the petition to allege that the note was lost or misplaced without fraud on the part of the plaintiff. Hoyland v. National Bank of Middlesborough, 137 Ky. 682 , 126 S.W. 356, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 612 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where plaintiff, suing on a lost note, failed to allege that the loss was brought about through no fraud of himself or of those under whom he claimed, the trial court erred in overruling defendant’s demurrer, but where the proof showed that there was no such fraud, the court could not properly grant the defendant a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Crawford v. Crawford, 222 Ky. 708 , 2 S.W.2d 401, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1928 ).

3.Bond.

A sufficient bond having been given before judgment, the circuit court properly refused to dismiss the action because bond had not been given before suit was filed. Kimbrough v. Lexington City Nat'l Bank, 150 Ky. 336 , 150 S.W. 325, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 872 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Where a note was payable to order, it was not transferable by delivery, merely, and a bond was not required to bring an action for its payment after it was lost. Ficklin v. Nickles, 238 Ky. 591 , 38 S.W.2d 456, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 284 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Lost records, KRS 422.200 to 422.270 .

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Payee Against Payor Where Instrument Lost, Form 190.02.

411.180. Actions against joint obligors — Death of joint obligors — Effect of judgment against some.

If two (2) or more persons be jointly bound by contract, the action thereon may be brought against all or any of them, at the plaintiff’s option. If any of the persons so bound be dead, the action may be brought against any or all of the survivors with the representatives of all or any of the decedents, or against the latter or any of them. If all the persons so bound be dead, the action may be brought against the representatives of all or any of them. An action or judgment against any one (1) or more of several persons jointly bound shall not be a bar to proceedings against the others.

History. C. C. 27: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Partners.

Individuals composing a partnership are personally liable and may be sued jointly or separately, whether they carry on their business in one or any number of firm names, as long as the same individuals compose each of the firms. Hunt v. Semonin, 79 Ky. 270 , 2 Ky. L. Rptr. 334 , 1881 Ky. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1881).

2.Contractor and Guarantor.

There is a distinction between a guaranty executed simultaneously with the principal contract and one subsequently made and based upon a separate consideration and, where the contract and guaranty are executed simultaneously, a joint action will be permitted against the principal and guarantor; but it is otherwise if they are not simultaneously executed, for in such case the principal and guarantor should be separately sued. Pulaski Stave Co. v. Miller's Creek Lumber Co., 138 Ky. 372 , 128 S.W. 96, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where lumber company by written contract agreed to delivery saw logs and four (4) individuals in the same contract guaranteed performance, the guarantors could be sued jointly with the company for damages for failure to perform it, as they were parties to the contract, as well as the guaranty, and primarily liable for its breach. Pulaski Stave Co. v. Miller's Creek Lumber Co., 138 Ky. 372 , 128 S.W. 96, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1910 ).

3.Contractors.

A judgment in favor of less than all the parties to a contract does not bar a suit against others on the same cause of action. Ralph Wolff & Sons v. New Zealand Ins. Co., 248 Ky. 304 , 58 S.W.2d 623, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1933 ).

4.Bond of Employee and Sureties.

Where a bond sued on was the joint and several obligation of the employee and the sureties executed to indemnify employer, employer at his option could sue all or any one of the persons jointly liable and there was no reason why the claim should be verified and demand made of the principal’s personal representative unless such personal representative was made a party defendant. Singer Sewing Mach. Co. v. Combs, 227 Ky. 61 , 11 S.W.2d 994, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1928 ).

5.Executors of Supersedeas Bond.

The designated payees in a supersedeas bond were privileged at their option to file action against all or any of the parties who executed it. S. L. Crook Corp. v. Blackburn, 261 Ky. 426 , 87 S.W.2d 927, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1935 ).

6.Coinsurers.

Where a contract between two insurance companies imposed the obligations of coinsurers upon them, the beneficiary of a policy issued in the name of one of them could sue and recover of either or both of them and, where only one was sued, the receiver of the other did not have the right to become a party. Lincoln Nat'l Life Ins. Co. v. Means, 264 Ky. 566 , 95 S.W.2d 264, Ky. LEXIS 376 (Ky.), cert. denied, 299 U.S. 578, 57 S. Ct. 42, 81 L. Ed. 426, 1936 U.S. LEXIS 299 (U.S. 1936).

7.Sureties.

Sureties on a bond given by a bank as depository of board of education were at all times, severally and jointly, primarily liable to the obligee for the breach of covenant. Bennett v. County Board of Education, 273 Ky. 143 , 116 S.W.2d 302, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 612 ( Ky. 1938 ).

8.Joint Makers of Note.

In view of this section providing grantor has the option of bringing an action against all or any persons jointly liable, purchaser of property at commissioner’s sale could not raise the question of whether another was primarily or jointly liable for the note for which the property was sold where the face of the note showed that the owner of the property was liable for the note and since the title of the property purchased was in no way affected. Rothchild v. Wallace, 155 Ky. 676 , 160 S.W. 170, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 312 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Since the owner of a note may sue any one, or all, of the parties liable thereon, it is no defense for one of the makers to allege that another maker is not properly before the court, or that it is not proceeded against at all. Daugherty v. Bell Nat'l Bank, 175 Ky. 513 , 194 S.W. 545, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1917 ) (see KRS 355.3-413).

Two joint makers of note were severally liable for full amount of the note and could not complain because the other two joint makers were not made parties to an action on the note. Hibbard v. Clay County, 299 Ky. 560 , 186 S.W.2d 423, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1945 ) (see KRS 355.3-413).

9.Maker and Guarantor of Note.

In an action against the maker of a promissory note for part of the purchase price of machinery and one who joined as guarantor, the obligee had the option of suing either the maker or the guarantor alone. Crump v. J. I. Case Threshing Mach. Co., 136 Ky. 60 , 123 S.W. 333, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 1909 ) (see KRS 355.3-416).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Survival of liability of joint obligor, KRS 412.010 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Borden, Rights and Duties of a Bank in the Application of a Deposit to the Payment of a Depositor’s Obligation, 34 Ky. L.J. 302 (1946).

Ham, Kentucky Adopts the Uniform Partnership Act, 43 Ky. L.J. 5 (1954).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Showing Failure to Join Necessary Parties as Defendants, Form 39.10.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Wrongful Death, § 141.00.

411.182. Allocation of fault in tort actions — Award of damages — Effect of release.

  1. In all tort actions, including products liability actions, involving fault of more than one (1) party to the action, including third-party defendants and persons who have been released under subsection (4) of this section, the court, unless otherwise agreed by all parties, shall instruct the jury to answer interrogatories or, if there is no jury, shall make findings indicating:
    1. The amount of damages each claimant would be entitled to recover if contributory fault is disregarded; and
    2. The percentage of the total fault of all the parties to each claim that is allocated to each claimant, defendant, third-party defendant, and person who has been released from liability under subsection (4) of this section.
  2. In determining the percentages of fault, the trier of fact shall consider both the nature of the conduct of each party at fault and the extent of the causal relation between the conduct and the damages claimed.
  3. The court shall determine the award of damages to each claimant in accordance with the findings, subject to any reduction under subsection (4) of this section, and shall determine and state in the judgment each party’s equitable share of the obligation to each claimant in accordance with the respective percentages of fault.
  4. A release, covenant not to sue, or similar agreement entered into by a claimant and a person liable, shall discharge that person from all liability for contribution, but it shall not be considered to discharge any other persons liable upon the same claim unless it so provides. However, the claim of the releasing person against other persons shall be reduced by the amount of the released persons’ equitable share of the obligation, determined in accordance with the provisions of this section.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 224, § 1, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.In General.

Claims for common law indemnity have survived the advent of comparative negligence and apportioned liability. Degener v. Hall Contr. Corp., 27 S.W.3d 775, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 2000 ).

It was not error to instruct the jury on the sudden emergency doctrine where a driver asserted that she lost control of her vehicle due to black ice; the sudden emergency doctrine was an expression of the reasonably prudent person standard of care and was not subsumed by the adoption of comparative negligence. Regenstreif v. Phelps, 142 S.W.3d 1, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 194 ( Ky. 2004 ).

Order granting a builder and a subcontractor separate sets of peremptory challenges was proper in a case alleging construction defects in a home because the builder and the subcontractor were antagonistic; among other things, before trial an apportionment instruction had been tendered to the trial court, and, inherent in the Kentucky law of apportionment was that the interests of codefendants may be considered antagonistic. Davis v. Fischer Single Family Homes, Ltd., 231 S.W.3d 767, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 261 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

No apportionment instruction was given which was mandatory for the trial court to give under KRS 411.182 . Bates v. Curtis, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 140 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 17, 2012).

2.Application.

Although this section adopts comparative negligence for all torts, including product liability cases, it was not granted expressed retroactive application and therefore did not supersede KRS 411.320 in a cause of action which arose out of an automobile accident that occurred prior to July 15, 1988. Conley v. American Motors Corp., 769 S.W.2d 75, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

This section does not have retroactive application pursuant to KRS 446.080(3). Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

This section, which adopts comparative negligence in products liability cases, overrules KRS 411.320(3). Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Where plaintiff filed suit against defendant for defendant’s negligent operation of her vehicle and where no one made a claim against plaintiff’s husband, the driver of plaintiff’s car, and no one had sued him or settled with him by a release or agreement not to sue, the trial court erred when it instructed the jury to consider the duties of plaintiff’s husband in arriving at an apportionment of fault and damages upon one who did not fall specifically within the scope of this section. This section applies to persons named as parties, regardless of how named, and those persons who bought their peace from the litigation by way of releases or agreements. These persons affected by the statute are explicitly denominated, and plaintiff’s husband did not fit into any of the described classifications. Bass v. Williams, 839 S.W.2d 559, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 196 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992), overruled in part, Regenstreif v. Phelps, 142 S.W.3d 1, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 194 ( Ky. 2004 ).

This section is not clear whether apportionment may be made to settling nonparties. Carter v. Builders Transport, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 97, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20735 (W.D. Ky. 1992 ).

KRS 452.450 and KRS 452.460 do not permit a suit in one location against two doctors who reside in different counties and hospital located in one of the counties unless venue is waived. There is no inconsistency between KRS 452.450 , 452.460 and 411.182 , as KRS 411.182 provides that apportionment may be had against all parties or settling tortfeasors, but it vests no authority to force tortfeasors to trial in improper venue. Copass v. Monroe County Medical Found., 900 S.W.2d 617, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 123 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

This section which codified the doctrine of comparative negligence merely addresses the procedure for apportioning liability among parties before the court or who have settled or been released, and it does not direct or authorize the adjudication of fault of absent, potential litigators. Copass v. Monroe County Medical Found., 900 S.W.2d 617, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 123 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

The statute does not require apportionment of liability between the drunken driver and the dram shop in an action brought under KRS 413.241 . Destock #14, Inc. v. Logsdon, 993 S.W.2d 952, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1999 ).

In a medical malpractice action in which a hospital was dismissed as a party on the ground of sovereign immunity, the other defendants were not entitled to have the jury nevertheless apportion fault to the hospital since there was no evidence at trial to show that the hospital was responsible for any injury to the plaintiff. Charash v. Johnson, 43 S.W.3d 274, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 42 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000).

Trial court in asbestosis case properly allowed the jury to consider the victims’ past history of smoking and failure to wear a protective mask in determining comparative fault between the victims and the asbestos manufacturer. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Parrish, 58 S.W.3d 467, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 2001 ).

Question of whether fault can be apportioned against a person or an entity under KRS 411.182 is to be answered by examining the statute; a person or entity entitled to absolute immunity is not a “party to an action” under KRS 411.182 (1) for apportionment of fault purposes. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Gov't v. Smolcic, 142 S.W.3d 128, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 2004 ).

Possessing absolute immunity from suit is incompatible with being “a party to the action” in any sense and construing KRS 411.182 otherwise would result in a partial abrogation of the absolute immunity defense; because nothing else in KRS 411.182 indicates any intention by the Kentucky General Assembly to abrogate common-law absolute immunity, fault can not be apportioned under KRS 411.182 against a person or entity that possesses absolute immunity. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Gov't v. Smolcic, 142 S.W.3d 128, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 2004 ).

Because a general release executed by a passenger clearly and unambiguously released all persons, firms, or corporations liable for an automobile accident in which the passenger was severely injured, pursuant to KRS 411.182(4) the release included any possible third party claims. Abney v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 215 S.W.3d 699, 2006 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 2006 ).

Defendants’ motion for reconsideration was denied because their reliance on KRS 411.182 was misplaced, as the right to apportionment could not apply in the present action because the companies presented a claim for indemnity against a party with whom they are not in pari delicto. Asher v. Unarco Material Handling, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76850 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 15, 2007).

Inability of a driver or the injured persons to present sufficient evidence of fault on the part of a car dealership, which owned the car the driver was test-driving, eliminated any proper allocation of fault to the car dealership; thus, the jury should not have been instructed on apportionment because the driver was the only party liable. Morgan v. Scott, 291 S.W.3d 622, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 2009 ).

KRS 411.182 confirms that comparative negligence applies to products liability cases. York v. Petzl Am., Inc., 353 S.W.3d 349, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 173 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

In a case involving the malpractice of a bank auditor, an appellate court did not have to apply KRS 411.182 because, even if a trial court committed error by providing an apportionment instruction, any such error was cured by the verdict in the case. Apportionment was not a substantive cause of action, but depended upon an initial finding of fault. Peoples Bank of N. Ky., Inc. v. Horwath, 390 S.W.3d 830, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 113 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

Because the Manis rule was established under contributory negligence principles, and the law of the Commonwealth has been since 1984 by case law, Hilen v. Hays, 673 S.W.2d 713 ( Ky. 1984 ), and since 1988 by statute, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.182 , that all tort actions must provide for the apportionment of fault among all parties to an action, the Manis rule is no longer viable, and the Supreme Court of Kentucky holds that all open and obvious hazard cases, including obvious natural outdoor hazard cases, are subject to the comparative fault doctrine. Carter v. Bullitt Host, LLC, 471 S.W.3d 288, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 1854 ( Ky. 2015 ).

In a breach of fiduciary case, an attorney's argument that he was not jointly and severally liable with his co-defendants was rejected because this statute did not apply to breach of attorney contracts. The attorney was bound by the Kentucky Supreme Court's determination that when he signed the agreement with the other attorneys, he signed as co-counsel, and the plaintiffs became his clients. Chesley v. Abbott, 524 S.W.3d 471, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Settlement with the doctor who had filed for bankruptcy without an admission of fault was not a bar to prosecuting the claim against the hospital where the claim against the hospital arose from the hospital's own negligence. Lake Cumberland Reg'l Hosp., LLC v. Adams, 536 S.W.3d 683, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 444 ( Ky. 2017 ).

Non-settling non-party was not subject to any apportionment of fault. Savage v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2021 Ky. App. LEXIS 8 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 15, 2021).

3.Allocation of Fault.

This section limits allocation of fault to those who actively assert claims, offensively or defensively, as parties in the litigation or who have settled by release or agreement. Baker v. Webb, 883 S.W.2d 898, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 77 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

Trial court’s failure to instruct the jury to apportion fault for infant’s injuries, that resulted in his death, between the hospital and the doctor violated both the principle that one is liable for only those damages equal to his degree of fault and this section. Reffitt v. Hajjar, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 57 (Ky. Ct. App. May 27, 1994), op. withdrawn, sub. op., 892 S.W.2d 599, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

This section applies to the same products liability actions covered by KRS 411.300(1); consequently, comparative fault applies to products liability actions based on breach of warranty. Morales v. American Honda Motor Co., 151 F.3d 500, 1998 FED App. 0230P, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 17447 (6th Cir. Ky. 1998 ).

In a products liability case, the jury’s apportionment of seventy percent fault to defendant could not be factually, legally, or logically supported where there was no proof that the fiberglass insulation distributed by defendant accounted for most of the exposure during the relevant period. Strickland v. Owens Corning, 142 F.3d 353, 1998 FED App. 0123P, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 7761 (6th Cir. Ky. 1998 ).

Apportionment of fault to defendants where the evidence is insufficient to support liability is error. Barnes v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 201 F.3d 815, 2000 FED App. 0027P, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 597 (6th Cir. Ky. 2000 ).

Trial court in asbestosis case between victims and asbestos manufacturer properly allowed the jury to apportion fault to one victim’s employer who had settled that victim’s asbestos related worker’s compensation claim before trial. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Parrish, 58 S.W.3d 467, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 2001 ).

In an action which people who were injured in a vehicle accident or who survived people who were killed in the same accident (survivors) filed against a company that manufactured a van, the trial court gave an instruction on apportionment of fault by the person who was driving the van, and that instruction was sufficient to inform the jury about fault on the part of a club that owned the van because the club’s liability was based, under the facts of the case, on the driver’s conduct. Ford Motor Co. v. Coulson, 2003 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 663 (Ky. Ct. App. May 23, 2003).

When insureds died in an automobile accident caused, in part, by an unknown party, and the insureds’ estate sought underinsured motorist coverage from their insurer, after settling for the policy limits with the insurer for the other motorist involved in the accident, it was error for the trial court to instruct the jury to apportion fault between the settling motorist and the unknown party, as the unknown party was not subject to the trial court’s personal jurisdiction or bound by the jury’s verdict. Ryan v. Ky. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2003), rev'd, 177 S.W.3d 797, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 2005 ).

When viewed in its entirety, KRS 411.182 limited allocation of fault to those who actively asserted claims, offensively or defensively, as parties in the litigation or who had settled by release or agreement. Ryan v. Ky. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2003), rev'd, 177 S.W.3d 797, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 2005 ).

District court properly admitted evidence of an individual’s alcohol consumption in his product liability action against an automobile manufacturer where his judicial admission of fault in causing the wheels to drop off the pavement did not resolve all of the issues required to be considered under KRS 411.182(2) and the evidence was not so prejudicial as to thoroughly taint the trial. Smith v. Toyota Motor Corp., 105 Fed. Appx. 47, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 14892 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 ).

In a personal injury case in which there was a great deal of testimony about whether a hazard was open and obvious, the significance of warnings given to the injured party, the sufficiency of the lighting around the hazard, and the injured party’s knowledge of the hazard’s existence, an apportionment instruction was supported under KRS 411.182(1) because there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of the injured party’s fault. Reece v. Dixie Warehouse & Cartage Co., 188 S.W.3d 440, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 78 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

An administratrix was entitled to damages resulting from the decedent’s riding of an All-Terrain Vehicle on a public highway obstructed by an indiscernible cable; the fact that the decedent was using an ATV to unlawfully travel a public road under KRS 189.515(1) did not render the Transportation Cabinet free of fault for its negligence, but rather the decedent’s negligence was a factor which the circuit court properly considered in apportioning the liability between the parties under KRS 411.182 . Commonwealth v. Guffey, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 150 (Ky. Ct. App. May 19, 2006), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 244 S.W.3d 79, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 2 ( Ky. 2008 ).

Trial court violated KRS 413.241 by instructing the jury to apportion fault between an injured passenger, an allegedly negligent driver, and the two nightclubs that served them alcohol before they were involved in a one-vehicle accident. The jury should have been instructed to apportion fault between just the passenger and the driver; only if the jury found that the passenger had some percentage of fault should it have determined whether the nightclubs could be held secondarily liable under KRS 413.241 . Jackson v. Tullar, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 72 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 2007), sub. op., 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Nothing was fundamentally unfair about assigning 100 percent of the fault for an injury to the only party that breached a duty and caused the injury under KRS 411.182(1) where the jury had originally apportioned fault equally between the driver and a car dealership, but the dealership was found not to be liable on appeal. Morgan v. Scott, 291 S.W.3d 622, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 2009 ).

Taking each allegation in the manufacturer’s cross-claim for indemnity, contribution, and apportionment of fault as true, the fact remained that no agency relationship existed between the parties and it could not be said with certainty that any negligence by the instructor or supervisor was the primary cause of the chief’s injuries; a jury could find that the chief was injured based on the manufacturer’s failure to design a harness correctly or supply proper warnings, or the jury might determine all parties were equally liable, and summary judgment was not appropriate. York v. Petzl Am., Inc., 353 S.W.3d 349, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 173 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

Jury should have been instructed to apportion liability to the fault of each defendant, as KRS 411.182 provides for fault to be apportioned to a settling party; assuming the manufacturer’s cross-claim allegations were true and the jury agreed, the amount of the accident caused by the negligence of the instructor and supervisor would be apportioned to them and not the manufacturer, who would be liable only for its own negligence. York v. Petzl Am., Inc., 353 S.W.3d 349, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 173 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

Trial court did not err in failing to give a hospital’s tendered apportionment instruction, which would have permitted a jury to assign a portion of the fault for leaving a sponge in a patient’s abdomen to the surgeon who performed the operation, because the hospital failed to meet its burden of establishing by expert testimony the standard of care imposed upon the surgeon, and that the surgeon breached that standard of care. Savage v. Three Rivers Med. Ctr., 390 S.W.3d 104, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 2012 ).

In a civil rights suit, defendants were granted leave to file a third-party complaint against plaintiff’s parents because defendants had stated allegations against the parents that, if proved at trial, would warrant an apportionment instruction on plaintiff’s state law claims. Compton v. City of Harrodsburg, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142306 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 2, 2013).

Medical device manufacturer was not entitled to an apportionment instruction because it could not prove that the dismissed component manufacturer was liable for the consumers' injuries under the Biomaterials Access Assurance Act (BAAA), and further, the BAA expressly preempted the instruction. Sadler v. Advanced Bionics, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54697 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 16, 2013).

Plaintiff’s negligence that merely provides the occasion for the medical care, attention, and treatment that subsequently results in a medical malpractice action should not be considered by a jury assessing fault; the case concerned the care, not the cause, of the patient’s injuries, and evidence relating to the patient’s alleged negligence was not relevant. Pauly v. Chang, 498 S.W.3d 394, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).

Trial court did not err by instructing the jury to apportion fault to a vehicle repair company and a former corporate director in awarding damages on the company's aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty claim against a former customer where whether the joint tortfeasors were or were not in pari delicto had no bearing whether fault could be apportioned to a plaintiff, liability among joint tortfeasors was no longer joint and several, but several only, and case law interpreting comparative negligence did not provide otherwise. Insight Ky. Partners II, L.P. v. Preferred Auto. Servs., 514 S.W.3d 537, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 98 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).

It was the configuration of the company's baseball field and fence that allowed the injury to the player to take place, not any failure to notice and warn, supervise or build differently than instructed, and thus the company was the primary cause of the injury; contribution was not available against third-party defendants because apportionment was required, and the company would not be responsible for any damages attributed to third-party defendants because the company was entitled to an apportionment instruction allowing allocation of fault to them. Mem'l Sports Complex, LLC v. McCormick, 499 S.W.3d 700, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 153 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).

In a medical malpractice action against a radiologist, the trial court properly included another radiologist who settled with the patient in the apportionment instructions to the jury because the evidence of the other radiologist's liability was both necessary and sufficient to allow the submission of the issue of the other radiologist's fault to the jury. Fraley v. Zambos, 555 S.W.3d 441, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 84 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

4.Joint and Several Liability.

Under this section, once the court has decided which parties are liable under the proper theories, it must then apportion liability among those at fault rather than simply holding the wrongdoers jointly and severally liable. Radcliff Homes, Inc. v. Jackson, 766 S.W.2d 63, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 19 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

The trial court did not err in instructing jury to apportion fault between intentional tortfeasor and negligent tortfeasor; there was no requirement that the court hold both tortfeasors jointly and severally liable for the entire amount of the damages. Roman Catholic Diocese v. Secter, 966 S.W.2d 286, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Joint and several liability was properly imposed against three attorneys who had taken excessive fees from settlement funds because the clients’ claims, which included both breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties, did not sound exclusively in tort and because the attorneys had engaged in a joint enterprise to which partnership liability applied. Abbott v. Chesley, 413 S.W.3d 589, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 367 ( Ky. 2013 ), cert. denied, 572 U.S. 1135, 134 S. Ct. 2672, 189 L. Ed. 2d 210, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 3798 (U.S. 2014).

4.5.Common Law Indemnity.

Apportionment statute does not abolish the common law right of indemnity where one is only constructively or secondarily liable to a plaintiff. York v. Petzl Am., Inc., 353 S.W.3d 349, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 173 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

Because testimony established some defect in defendant oven manufacturer’s oven as a probable cause of the oven’s explosion, but there was no evidence to establish liability on the part of third-party defendant temperature regulator manufacturer, summary judgment was warranted in favor of the regulator manufacturer on the oven manufacturer’s indemnity claim; that conclusion was not affected by KRS 411.182 , because apportioned liability still required proof of the same elements of liability against the impleaded party, including causation in a product liability case, and there was insufficient evidence for a jury to find that the regulator manufacturer had manufactured a defective part. Siegel v. Dynamic Cooking Sys., 501 Fed. Appx. 397, 2012 FED App. 1033N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20416 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

5.Contributory Negligence.

In a two-party products liability case, where the facts of the case raised a jury issue of whether or not the plaintiff was negligent, and whether such negligence was a substantial factor in causing his death (and perhaps would justify a directed verdict for the defendant), the court should have applied the principle of contributory negligence pursuant to KRS 411.320 and Reda Pump Co., Etc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ), rather than the principle of comparative negligence pursuant to this section. Koching v. International Armament Corp., 772 S.W.2d 634, 1989 Ky. LEXIS 60 ( Ky. 1989 ).

Fisherman’s contributory negligence barred his estate’s recovery in a products liability action where the cause of action arose prior to the effective date of this section. Wyke v. Sea Nymph, Inc., 758 F. Supp. 418, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18467 (W.D. Ky. 1990 ).

Because KRS 411.182 superseded KRS 411.320(1) and (2), the manufacturers were not entitled to a jury instruction on the alleged alteration of the miter saw that injured a consumer. Low v. Power Tool Specialist, Inc., 803 F. Supp. 2d 655, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29617 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

6.Workers’ Compensation.

Subsection (4) of this section covers the workers’ compensation situation; thus, an agreement to operate under the act is a “similar agreement” within the statute. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Fact that a third-party defendant employer had paid workers’ compensation benefits to the plaintiff employee did not preclude the defendant lessor and the third-party defendant manufacturer from naming the employer as a third-party defendant for purposes of apportionment under KRS 411.182 or for common law indemnity, and the employer’s motion to dismiss the third-party complaint against it was denied. Smith v. Leveelift, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19997 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 13, 2005).

7.Suppression of KRS 411.320 (1), (2).

This section, enacted in 1988 and which codified the comparative fault standard, supersedes subsections (1) and (2) of KRS 411.320 , for a statute that forgives the liability of manufacturers is manifestly contradictory to the purpose of the comparative fault system. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

This comparative fault statute, which contains a provision to include products liability actions, negates the products liability statute enunciated in KRS 411.320(1). Caterpillar, Inc. v. Brock, 915 S.W.2d 751, 1996 Ky. LEXIS 12 ( Ky. 1996 ).

8.Discount of Liability.

The fact that defendant manufacturer of salt spreader, in which plaintiff injured his arm, met the bid specifications set by the state did not preclude a product liability suit against the manufacturer; accordingly, lower court did not err in holding that defendant could not discount its liability under the government contractor theory. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

9.Statute of Repose.

KRS 411.310 , though enacted before the enactment of this section, which codified the comparative fault standard, does not contradict the principles underlying the comparative negligence doctrine, rather it acts as a statute of repose, limiting potential liability by limiting the time during which a cause of action can arise. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

10.Damages.

The correct measure of damages to be applied to a subrogation case involving the destruction of a leased premises by fire is the fair and reasonable value of the building when destroyed. Continental Ins. Co. v. Plummer, 904 S.W.2d 231, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 105 ( Ky. 1995 ).

11.New Trial.

Jury verdict that plaintiff, who injured his arm in salt spreader when he attempted to extract a chain from turning augers, was not negligent in regard to his own safety was clearly against the weight of the evidence and new trial was necessary to reconsider plaintiff’s liability and the comparative fault of all the parties. Because amount of damages was not in dispute, no new trial on damages was necessary. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

Administratrix was entitled to a new trial in the first of two (2) of her malpractice actions, filed in two (2) different counties against four (4) doctors and their respective hospitals, where two (2) of the doctors were found not liable after a trial in the second suit, but the court in the first suit erroneously gave an apportionment instruction therein including these non-party doctors, as they were non-party non-settling doctors in the first lawsuit. Jones v. Stern, 168 S.W.3d 419, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 19 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).

Jury award to an estate administrator, in a case where the administrator claimed that a financial advisor and her mother procured an inter vivos gift from the decedent as a result of either their own undue influence or the decedent’s unsound mind, was reversed and remanded for a retrial where the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury to apportion liability between the advisor and the mother pursuant to Kentucky’s comparative fault statute, KRS 411.182 . Hilsmeier v. Chapman, 192 S.W.3d 340, 2006 Ky. LEXIS 143 ( Ky. 2006 ).

12.Former Law Applicable.

In case involving an accident that occurred prior to July, 1988 when this apportionment statute became effective and thus required examination of prior law, defendant’s claims against third-party defendant for apportionment, contribution and indemnity had to be dismissed because prior settlement between plaintiff and defendant could only have settled that defendant’s portion of liability; settlement could not have settled or paid for a portion of liability caused by a third party defendant. Continental Marine v. Bayliner Marine Corp., 929 S.W.2d 206, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 152 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996), overruled in part, Degener v. Hall Contr. Corp., 27 S.W.3d 775, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 2000 ).

13.Expert Testimony.

Although certified issue unequivocally pronouncing that subsection (1) of this section repealed KRS 411.320(1) meant that KRS 411.320(1) did not provide bulldozer manufacturer a complete defense to product liability action, judgment in favor of plaintiff, injured when bulldozer he was operating lost braking power, was reversed because allowing expert testimony as to the comparison between bulldozers that were substantially different or marketed and sold at a considerably later time was error. Brock v. Caterpillar, Inc., 94 F.3d 220, 1996 FED App. 0277P, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 21912 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166, 117 S. Ct. 1428, 137 L. Ed. 2d 537, 1997 U.S. LEXIS 2240 (U.S. 1997).

14.Dram Shops.

Liability among multiple dram shops is properly apportioned under comparative fault principles as multiple dram shops that violate KRS 413.241 commit similar acts that have a similar relationship to a plainitff’s ultimate injury; once a jury finds that the KRS 413.241 elements are satisfied such that either or both bars can be held secondarily liable, the jury should be instructed to determine to what degree the sale or service of alcohol by each bar was a substantial factor in causing a driver’s intoxication at the time of an accident. Jackson v. Tullar, 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

15.Vicarious Liability of Franchisor.

The franchisor is vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of the franchisee when it, in fact, has control or right of control over the daily operation of the specific aspect of the franchisee’s business that is alleged to have caused the harm. Since the franchisor had no control over the franchisee delivery driver’s intentional, tortious conduct in this case, the franchisor cannot be held vicariously liable. Papa John's Int'l, Inc. v. McCoy, 244 S.W.3d 44, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 16 ( Ky. 2008 ).

Cited:

Kevin Tucker & Assoc., Inc. v. Scott & Ritter, Inc., 842 S.W.2d 873, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 243 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992); Rice v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Pac. Ry., 920 F. Supp. 732, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4206 (E.D. Ky. 1996 ); Geyer v. Mankin, 984 S.W.2d 104, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 128 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998); United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Clara J. Preston, 26 S.W.3d 145, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 2000 ); Hollar v. Cain, 36 Fed. Appx. 846, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 11648 (6th Cir. Ky. 2002 ); Foister v. Purdue Pharma, L.P., 295 F. Supp. 2d 693, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24274 (E.D. Ky. 2003 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Application.

Unpublished decision: Transportation cabinet should not be subject to apportionment in the negligence action, as it was being dismissed on sovereign immunity grounds. Commonwealth v. Watson, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 155 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 2, 2016), review denied, ordered not published, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 292 (Ky. Aug. 16, 2017).

Unpublished decision: Neither the Kentucky Supreme Court’s decision in Richardson nor KRS 411.182(4) expressly requires that a party must be identified by name to be covered by a release. Pennington v. AT&T, 202 Fed. Appx. 880, 2006 FED App. 0786N, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26408 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

Unpublished decision: Appellate court erred in reversing and remanding a case for a new trial because the determination by the trial judge that the health care providers in a medical malpractice case had antagonistic interests and were entitled to separate peremptory challenges was not an abuse of discretion or clearly erroneous. Accordingly, the appellate court failed to properly consider the giving of an apportionment instruction by one of the health care providers. Sommerkamp v. Linton, 114 S.W.3d 811, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: District court properly interpreted existing precedent and KRS 411.182(4) to conclude that the plain, unambiguous language of a prior release signed by the administrator of a decedent’s estate included within its scope a company that was not specifically named in the release; thus, summary judgment for the company was proper in the estate administrator’s wrongful death action. Pennington v. AT&T, 202 Fed. Appx. 880, 2006 FED App. 0786N, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26408 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

2.Allocation of Fault.

Unpublished decision: District court properly overruled an individual’s motion in limine to preclude instruction on the apportionment of fault and evidence of the individual’s negligence in a product liability action against an automobile manufacturer because KRS 411.182(1) required an apportionment instruction in product liability actions. Smith v. Toyota Motor Corp., 105 Fed. Appx. 47, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 14892 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 ).

Unpublished decision: District court erred by requiring a bankruptcy debtor's partner to pay all of the debtor's damages resulting from a conspiracy to defraud rather than apportioning the damages between the partner and a co-conspirator; the common-law rule that co-conspirators are each liable for all of the damages that result from the conspiracy had been abrogated by this section. Waldman v. Stone, 599 Fed. Appx. 569, 2015 FED App. 0219N, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4668 (6th Cir. Ky. 2015 ).

3.Common Law Indemnity.

Unpublished decision: Since jury found that neither company nor railroad breached their respective duties of care, error in jury instructions apportioning fault to company was effectively cured by jury’s ultimate verdict; erroneous instructions did not prejudice railroad worker’s substantial rights, resulting in harmless error. Downs v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 93 (Ky. Ct. App. June 21, 2013), review denied, ordered not published, 2014 Ky. LEXIS 278 (Ky. June 11, 2014).

Unpublished decision: Circuit court erroneously instructed jury as to defendant electronics company (under Federal Employers’ Liability Act, jury should never have been instructed to apportion fault between railroad and nonrailroad causes, and because railroad only asserted an indemnity claim against company, Kentucky law was clear that jury did not apportion fault between railroad and company under KRS 411.182 . Downs v. CSX Transp., Inc., 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 93 (Ky. Ct. App. June 21, 2013), review denied, ordered not published, 2014 Ky. LEXIS 278 (Ky. June 11, 2014).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Glover, Tort Reform: The Effects of Compulsory Apportionment, Volume 53, No. 1, Winter 1989 Ky. Bench & B. 16.

Eades, Some Thoughts About “Tort Reform.”, Vol. 70, No. 6, November 2006, Ky. Bench & Bar 9.

Hickey, Summary Judgment: Let’s Eliminate Any Need for Tort Reform., Vol. 70, No. 6, November 2006, Ky. Bench & Bar 15.

Feamster & White, Tort Reform: The Defense Perspective., Vol. 70, No. 6, November 2006, Ky. Bench & Bar 18.

Wolff, Legal Malpractice Primer., Vol. 71, No. 1, January 2007, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Note, Apportioning Liability to Nonparties in Kentucky Tort Actions: A Natural Extension of Comparative Fault or a Phantom Scapegoat for Negligent Defendants? 82 Ky. L.J. 789 (1993-94).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Comment, A Survey of Kentucky Tort Reform, 17 N. Ky. L. Rev. 473 (1990).

Notes, University of Louisville v. O’Bannon: Retroactive Application of Board of Claims Act Amendments, 18 N. Ky. L. Rev. 121 (1990).

Huelsman, Insurance Law in Kentucky in the 1990s — Where Will the Court Go from Here?, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 721 (1993).

Phillips, Crashworthiness in the Commonwealth: An Analysis of the Defectiveness of Tractors Without Rops, 23 N. Ky. Rev. 325 (1996).

Elder, 2001: An End of Millennium Odyssey Through Tort Liability of Occupiers and Owners of Land, 28 N. Ky. L. Rev. 352 (2001).

Raper & Evans, A Survey of Kentucky Medical Malpractice Law., 32 N. Ky. L. Rev. 711 (2005).

General Law Issue: Article: Almost a Century and Three Restatements After Green It’s Time to Admit and Remedy the Nonsense of Negligence, 38 N. Ky. L. Rev. 61 (2011).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Assorted Defenses, Form 130.10.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Defense of Comparative Fault of Careless Driving of “Seatbelt Defense”, Form 135.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 137.15.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Wrongful Death Claim Based upon Dangerous Condition, Form 141.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Visibility of Condition and Other Defenses, Form 131.11.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant Tavern Asserting Defenses and Crossclaim Against Co-defendant for Indemnity, Form 132.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant Tavern Asserting Defenses and Crossclaim Against Driver for Indemnity, Form 135.07.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Police Officer to Complaint Alleging Reasonable, Form 120.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer of City to Complaint of Battery Against Police Officer, Form 120.07.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer of Defendant Driver in Two-Car Accident Asserting Plaintiff Passenger’s Contributory Negligence in Riding with Reckless or Dangerous Driver, Form 135.13.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Malpractice Complaint Asserting Various Defenses, Form 136.10.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Carrier’s Answer to Complaint for Personal Injuries Asserting Assorted Defenses, Form 134.13.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Automobiles/No Fault/Uninsured Motorist, § 135.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Medical Malpractice, § 136.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Negligence, § 130.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Animals, § 15.01.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Assault and Battery, § 28.12.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Bailments, § 34.11.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Definitions Relating to Negligence, § 14.08.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Joint Tortfeasors, § 46.01.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Products Liability, § 49.01.

411.184. Definitions — Punitive damages — Proof of punitive damages.

  1. As used in this section and KRS 411.186 , unless the context requires otherwise:
    1. “Oppression” means conduct which is specifically intended by the defendant to subject the plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship.
    2. “Fraud” means an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of material fact known to the defendant and made with the intention of causing injury to the plaintiff.
    3. “Malice” means either conduct which is specifically intended by the defendant to cause tangible or intangible injury to the plaintiff or conduct that is carried out by the defendant both with a flagrant indifference to the rights of the plaintiff and with a subjective awareness that such conduct will result in human death or bodily harm.
    4. “Plaintiff” means any party claiming punitive damages.
    5. “Defendant” means any party against whom punitive damages are sought.
    6. “Punitive damages” includes exemplary damages and means damages, other than compensatory and nominal damages, awarded against a person to punish and to discourage him and others from similar conduct in the future.
  2. A plaintiff shall recover punitive damages only upon proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant from whom such damages are sought acted toward the plaintiff with oppression, fraud or malice.
  3. In no case shall punitive damages be assessed against a principal or employer for the act of an agent or employee unless such principal or employer authorized or ratified or should have anticipated the conduct in question.
  4. In no case shall punitive damages be awarded for breach of contract.
  5. This statute is applicable to all cases in which punitive damages are sought and supersedes any and all existing statutory or judicial law insofar as such law is inconsistent with the provisions of this statute.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 224, § 2, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Constitutionality.

Subsection (1)(c), which changed the existing common law standard of gross negligence for awarding punitive damages, instead conditioning such an award on a finding that defendant acted “with a flagrant indifference to the rights of the plaintiff and with a subjective awareness that such conduct will result in human death or bodily harm,” violates the jural rights doctrine inherent in Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54 and 241. Williams v. Wilson, 972 S.W.2d 260, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Successive awards of punitive damages for the same course of conduct do not violate due process. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Kentucky Supreme Court had not struck down the provision of KRS 411.184 that allowed punitive damages awards for fraud, and the Federal District Court could not predict that the Kentucky Supreme Court would strike down KRS 411.186(2)(c). Thus, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery; plaintiff was entitled to discover defendant’s financial condition, not so plaintiff could present evidence of that condition to the trier of fact, but so that plaintiff could determine whether there was any evidence that defendant’s alleged misconduct resulted in a profit that it would not otherwise have gained. Derby Fabricating v. Packing Material Co., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28765 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 18, 2005).

Where defendant intentionally killed the decedent, where he was convicted of murder but his conviction was reversed, where defendant pled guilty to manslaughter to avoid a retrial, where plaintiff, the decedent’s father, filed a wrongful death suit against defendant, where the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of plaintiff on the issue of liability and conducted a jury trial on the issue of damages, where the jury awarded $3.3 million in compensatory damages and $60 million in punitive damages, and where defendant challenged the propriety of the punitive damages award, the court held that the purpose of the punitive damage award was not to compensate the estate but to vindicate the state’s legitimate interests in punishment and deterrence of conduct of the type in which defendant engaged. Under that analysis, the $60 million punitive award was grossly excessive; as such, it was violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. Const. amend. XIV, and the punitive damages award was reduced to $30 million. Ragland v. Estate of Digiuro, 352 S.W.3d 908, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 201 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

As the court found that the owner was entitled to a directed verdict as to punitive damages, the court did not need to address whether the damages award was based on prejudice or unconstitutionally excessive. Gibson v. Fuel Transp., Inc., 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

As the court was vacating and remanding the case for a new punitive damages determination, the court did not need to address whether the trial court properly reduced the verdict, other than to say an award of punitive damages at a rate 25 times the award of compensatory damages could easily cross the line into the area of constitutional impropriety when it has been recognized that a ratio of just 4:1 might be close to the line. Crutcher v. Harrod Concrete & Stone Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2013), rev'd, 458 S.W.3d 290, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2015 ).

1.5.Application.

Because Kentucky prohibits courts from construing statutes as retroactive unless the statute expressly so declares and there is no such express declaration in this section and court did not construe subsection (5) of this section as being the required express declaration, this section, enacted in 1988, was inapplicable to an action in damages for fraud where the events involved occurred in late 1979 and the early 1980’s. Miller's Bottled Gas v. Borg-Warner Corp., 56 F.3d 726, 1995 FED App. 0186P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 14907 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

Evidence pertaining to prior litigation involving an insurance company and its adjuster is relevant in a punitive damages action alleging bad faith and unfair settlement practices in order to show the adjuster’s pattern of unfair methods in handling claims and the insurer’s knowledge of such conduct; however, monetary amounts involved in the prior litigation are not admissible. Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Troxell, 959 S.W.2d 82, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 148 ( Ky. 1997 ).

KRS 411.184 through 411.186 do not make punitive damages available under KRS 344.450 . Ky. Dep't of Corr. v. McCullough, 123 S.W.3d 130, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 2003 ), modified, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 23 (Ky. Jan. 22, 2004), modified, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Jan. 22, 2004).

Since plaintiff would be potentially able to recover punitive damages for her claims related to products liability or under the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act, consideration of a potential punitive damage award could be considered when calculating the amount in controversy under 28 USCS § 1332. Hollon v. Consumer Plumbing Recovery Ctr., 417 F. Supp. 2d 849, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7789 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

When several homeowners sued the same builder for selling them four-bedroom homes that had septic systems approved for three bedrooms, it was error to instruct the jury on punitive damages under KRS 411.184(1)(b) because punitive damages for this type of fraudulent concealment were permissible only if the concealment itself caused damages independent of those flowing from the wrongful act attempted to be concealed; as to one owner, there was no evidence he incurred any damages from the concealment apart from the jury’s award of damages for breach of warranty, and as to the other homeowners, who also recovered damages based on building code violations and breach of warranty claims, even if the builder intentionally concealed information about the septic systems, there was no evidence that it did so with the intention of causing injury to the homeowners. Young v. Vista Homes, Inc., 243 S.W.3d 352, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 12 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Where an auto dealer’s employee shot out the tires of plaintiff’s truck in order to repossess it, the dealer was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages under KRS 411.184(3) as there was no evidence that the dealer ever authorized the employee to use the conduct he employed to repossess the truck, and there was no factual issue as to whether the dealer should have anticipated the employee’s conduct; retention of the truck was not ratification of the means employed to repossess it. Patterson v. Tommy Blair, Inc., 265 S.W.3d 241, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 467 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Because of the longstanding case law noting the purpose of punitive damages and Kentucky’s stated requirement of allowing recovery only against the wrongdoer, it aligns with those jurisdictions that prohibit recovery of lost punitive damages in legal malpractice actions, KRS 411.184(1)(f). Osborne v. Keeney, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ), limited, Ind. Ins. Co. v. Demetre, 527 S.W.3d 12, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 364 ( Ky. 2017 ).

In the client’s legal malpractice action against her attorney, the recovery of lost punitive damages in legal malpractice actions was prohibited, KRS 411.184(1)(f). Allowing the client to recover lost punitive damages would not advance the policy underlying punitive damages in any way; in fact, allowing recovery would be antithetical to what punitive damages stand for, which was untying the concept of punitive damages from its doctrinal moorings. Osborne v. Keeney, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ), limited, Ind. Ins. Co. v. Demetre, 527 S.W.3d 12, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 364 ( Ky. 2017 ).

Punitive damages cannot be transformed into compensatory damages without negating the specific purpose of the award; while there is no standard for setting punitive damages, Kentucky’s legislature identified five factors in KRS 411.186(2). Crutcher v. Harrod Concrete & Stone Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2013), rev'd, 458 S.W.3d 290, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2015 ).

2.Appellate Review.

To the extent an owner claimed alleged inflammatory evidence affected the compensatory damages award in addition to the punitive damages award, the error was unpreserved, as the owner made this argument solely in the context of the punitive damages award to the appellate court. Gibson v. Fuel Transp., Inc., 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

3.Award Held Not Excessive.

When the concept of reasonableness and other factors identified were considered in the light of evidence presented, evidence from which the jury believed the bank engaged in an elaborate fraud to gain additional security for existing loans with no intentions of performing its representations of fact and with knowledge of the likely destruction of borrower’s business, punitive judgment was not so “grossly excessive” as to violate the substantive component of the Due Process Clause. Hanson v. American Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 865 S.W.2d 302, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1993 ).

The trial judge was not clearly erroneous in determining that a punitive judgment verdict of $435,000 against a manufacturer of asbestos products was not excessive. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Award of $5,000 in punitive damages in neighbors’ action concerning the use of a dirt road which bordered the parties’ properties was affirmed, as the neighbors provided adequate proof that defendants acted with malice or oppression in denying the neighbors access to the road as required by KRS 411.184 , and the amount of the award did not violate due process rights under Ky. Const. § 2, as the award was reasonable in light of and proportionate to the conduct of the defendants, which included harassment of the neighbors. Roberie v. VonBokern, 2006 Ky. LEXIS 186 (Ky. Aug. 24, 2006).

There was no factual basis in the record for a reasonable juror to impose punitive damages based on an employer’s fraud, malice, or oppression under KRS 411.184(2) for off-the-clock work and for a denial of meal and rest breaks in violation of KRS 337.355 and 337.365 . At most, the employee was trained by his store manager to clock out earlier in the store closing procedures than the company’s written store closing procedures required. England v. Advance Stores Co., 263 F.R.D. 423, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79329 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Trial court’s punitive damages award to the clients was sustainable where knowing the clients’ aversion to tax risks personally and professionally, an accounting firm made false representations and omitted material facts imperative to the clients’ fully-informed decisionmaking as to a tax shelter the accounting firm was promoting, the firm never disclosed the general or specific problems with the tax shelter despite multiple IRS notices, legal opinions, and professional articles, and when the clients discovered on their own the potential problems, the firm continued to misrepresent the product. Yung v. Thornton, 563 S.W.3d 22, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 2018 ).

4.Instructions.

Kentucky law does not mandate the submission of instructions on punitive damages in fraud actions. Miller's Bottled Gas v. Borg-Warner Corp., 817 F. Supp. 643, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5268 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ), aff'd, 56 F.3d 726, 1995 FED App. 0186P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 14907 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

Where the trial court instructed the jury in accordance with the provisions of KRS 411.186 and this section and, where the judge set forth in detail the definitions and standards the jury was to use in its deliberation in deciding whether punitive damages should be awarded and, if so, in what amount, such instructions are the only guidance that may be given the jury. Reasonable men and women will differ in determining the amount of exemplary damages, but so long as the jury’s decision is free of passion or prejudice and is appropriately reviewed by the trial judge, there is no basis for substituting the court’s opinion in the place of the jury’s. Hanson v. American Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 865 S.W.2d 302, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1993 ).

Although the evidence of defendant physician’s negligence was overwhelming, and plaintiff asserted that defendant physician did not pay sufficient attention to her or her infant while in labor because of her status as a welfare patient, no evidence was shown that defendant physician discriminated against plaintiff or her infant because of her status and plaintiff’s assertion did not support an instruction on punitive damages as it did not meet the standards set forth in this section, requiring the conduct complained of to be carried out both with a flagrant indifference to the rights of the plaintiff and her infant and with a subjective awareness that such conduct would result in human death or bodily harm. Reffitt v. Hajjar, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 57 (Ky. Ct. App. May 27, 1994), op. withdrawn, sub. op., 892 S.W.2d 599, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

While a proper verdict in most civil actions requires only that the jury “believe” or be “satisfied” from the evidence, for those civil actions requiring a heightened degree of proof such as “clear and convincing evidence” it is necessary to expressly state the standard to assure an appropriately informed jury. Hardin v. Savageau, 906 S.W.2d 356, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 108 ( Ky. 1995 ).

In light of the determination that plaintiff, injured in an accident with another driver who had been drinking, was wrongfully deprived of a jury instruction on punitive damages, granting of a retrial on the issue of punitive damages alone was appropriate. Shortridge v. Rice, 929 S.W.2d 194, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

Jury’s determination that a manufacturer’s conduct authorized a punitive damages award was law of the case even though portions of KRS 411.184 that had subsequently been held to be unconsitutional were included in the jury instructions; neither party had challenged those portions of the statute. Sand Hill Energy, Inc. v. Smith, 142 S.W.3d 153, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 2004 ).

5.Proof.

Where plaintiff met its burden of production on the issue of fraudulent intent by only the barest of margins, much less a showing of aggravated circumstances, and where there was no showing of spite, evil or fraudulent motive that so enhance the intentional tort to warrant an instruction on punitive damages, plaintiff failed to carry its burden of production on the issue of punitive damages. Miller's Bottled Gas v. Borg-Warner Corp., 817 F. Supp. 643, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5268 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ), aff'd, 56 F.3d 726, 1995 FED App. 0186P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 14907 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

Recovery of punitive damages, under this section, where a defendant has acted toward the plaintiff with oppression, fraud or malice, only requires one of these elements for the levying of damages. Holliday v. Campbell, 873 S.W.2d 839, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 37 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

Even if the estate offered sufficient proof to warrant punitive damages against the truck drivers, the estate would not be able to recover punitive damages against the corporation or the trucking company as the drivers’ employers because under Kentucky law, punitive damages cannot be assessed against a principal or employer for the act of an agent or employee unless such principal or employer authorized or ratified or should have anticipated the conduct in question, KRS 411.184(3), and the estate had not introduced any evidence that showed that either the corporation or the trucking company condoned or authorized such unsafe driving, or should have anticipated the accident; therefore, the corporation and the trucking company were entitled to summary judgment on the punitive damages claim. Estate of Presley v. CCS of Conway, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9583 (W.D. Ky. May 18, 2004).

A drilling company was entitled to summary judgment on a vicarious liability claim and on a punitive damages claim under KRS 411.184 ; the company’s employee was acting outside the scope of his employment when he rammed the rear of a plaintiff’s vehicle with the company truck while intoxicated. Further, the plaintiff did not demonstrate that the company should have anticipated the employee’s conduct on the night of the accident for purposes of KRS 411.184 (3). McGonigle v. Whitehawk, 481 F. Supp. 2d 835, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26978 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Court agreed that punitive damages were not warranted; the trial court found that the facts did not rise to fraud, malice, or oppression. McAlpin v. Bailey, 376 S.W.3d 613, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 86 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

Truck owner claimed that the punitive damages instruction erroneously excluded the clear and convincing evidentiary requirement under KRS 411.184(2), but the court would not address the argument because it was not properly preserved for review because the owner did not offer a proposed instruction or object, for purposes of CR 51(3); the court also did not address the estate’s responsive argument. Gibson v. Fuel Transp., Inc., 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Issue of causation had not been expressly presented to the court as a grounds for reversal of the judgment setting aside the punitive damages award, but even when insufficiently raised on appeal, the court will not disregard obvious error, under CR 61.02. Gibson v. Fuel Transp., Inc., 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Estate failed to establish what caused the owner’s truck to overturn, and even accepting as true that the owner did not maintain the fifth wheel property, nothing showed that wheel caused the accident; thus, the owner was entitled to a directed verdict as to punitive damages. Gibson v. Fuel Transp., Inc., 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

5.5.Expert Testimony.

Expert had sufficient credentials to qualify as an expert, and his testimony was relevant and helped the jury in its award of compensatory and punitive damages, as the expert discussed the value of limestone, which was something an average juror would unlikely know but need to know in order to properly assess damages; as the testimony developed, there was no error under Daubert or KRE. 702, and if offered at a retrial, the expert’s testimony was to be admitted. Crutcher v. Harrod Concrete & Stone Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2013), rev'd, 458 S.W.3d 290, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2015 ).

6.Jury’s Discretion.

In a statutory bad faith claim case against insurer, where insurer presented various arguments against submitting the issue of punitive damages to the jury based on its interpretation of statutory language found in the new punitive damages statute enacted in 1988, now codified as this section, the court could not interpret this section to destroy a cause of action for punitive damages otherwise appropriate without fatally impaling upon jural rights guaranteed by Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54, and 241. Wittmer v. Jones, 864 S.W.2d 885, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1993 ).

There must be sufficient evidence of intentional misconduct or reckless disregard of the rights of an insured or a claimant to warrant submitting the right to award punitive damages to the jury. If there is such evidence, the jury should award consequential damages and may award punitive damages. The jury’s decision as to whether to award punitive damages remains discretionary because the nature of punitive damages is such that the decision is always a matter within the jury’s discretion. Wittmer v. Jones, 864 S.W.2d 885, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1993 ).

7.Submission to Jury.

Where loggers knew they were cutting trees on landowner’s property, where trees were topped so as to damage nearby seedlings, where loggers failed to maintain a logging road so as to increase the probability of increased soil erosion to landowner’s property, where loggers sold landowner’s timber for $10,000 yet offered her but $1,000 after the cutting, and where loggers caused additional loads of logs to be removed after landowner told them they were trespassing, the matter of punitive damages was properly submitted to the jury. Holliday v. Campbell, 873 S.W.2d 839, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 37 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

Evidence that a manufacturer of asbestos products knew of the health risks associated therewith both before and during the time it placed them in the stream of commerce was sufficient to overcome its motion for a directed verdict on the issue of punitive damages asserting that the products conformed to the state of the art at the time. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Trial judge did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on punitive damages, pursuant to KRS 411.184(3), where there was no party remaining in the case against whom punitive damages could be assessed after plaintiff voluntarily dismissed all claims against defendant employees with prejudice and there was no evidence that the defendant employer authorized or ratified the alleged misconduct on the part of the employees. Berrier v. Bizer, 57 S.W.3d 271, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 2001 ).

In a diversity action involving two American real estate investment trusts specializing in health care related properties (plaintiff and defendant), in which plaintiff accused defendant of tortious interference with a prospective advantage, the district court erred in granting defendant’s motion for a directed verdict on the issue of punitive damages under KRS 411.184 et seq., because there was sufficient evidence of fraud to submit the issue of punitive damages to the jury. The record contained evidence that defendant’s offer of $18 per unit for the Canadian real estate investment trust, for which both defendant and plaintiff were bidders, was not genuine and that defendant’s tortious interference harmed plaintiff by causing plaintiff to pay an additional $1.50 per unit for the Canadian real estate investment trust beyond plaintiff’s initial offer of $15 per unit. Ventas, Inc. v. HCP, Inc., 647 F.3d 291, 2011 FED App. 0130P, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9941 (6th Cir. Ky. 2011 ), cert. dismissed, 565 U.S. 1031, 132 S. Ct. 572, 181 L. Ed. 2d 418, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 8079 (U.S. 2011).

Creditor established by clear and convincing evidence that the attorney committed fraud by telling the creditor that the loan the creditor made to the attorney’s client would be reimbursed once the client received an expected personal injury settlement and the reimbursement was not then forthcoming once the settlement was reached. Since the client showed that fraud had occurred, the trial court should have granted the creditor’s request to instruct the jury on the creditor’s punitive damage claim, pursuant to KRS 411.184 , and on remand a new trial had to be held on the issue of punitive damages to see if the criteria for awarding them under KRS 411.186 had been met. Pezzarossi v. Nutt, 392 S.W.3d 417, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 303 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

Passengers could not recover punitive damages from a bus driver because the driver's conduct in the accident was ordinary negligence as a matter of Kentucky law, any misrepresentation or failure to disclose the driver's medical condition did not justify punitive damages since that condition did not cause the accident, testimony characterizing the driver's driving as reckless was inadmissible and could not serve as a basis for punitive damages. M.T. v. Saum, 3 F. Supp. 3d 617, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31674 (W.D. Ky. 2014 ).

8.Wrongful Termination Action.

Lower court did not err by allowing recovery of punitive damages in action by employees for wrongful termination as a result of union activity where evidence demonstrated a violation of KRS 336.130 , employees were threatened about attending a union meeting and employees were dismissed after attending such meeting and instructions and jury assessments were in line with this section and 411.186 . Simpson County Steeplechase Ass'n v. Roberts, 898 S.W.2d 523, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

In an action for wrongful termination, the plaintiff was not entitled to punitive damages on the basis of the defendant’s allegedly fraudulent notation that the termination was due to “lack of work-services not needed,” notwithstanding the contention that such notation was intended to conceal the real reason for termination, since the plaintiff did not sustain any separate and distinct damages as a result of the alleged fraud. Hardaway Mgmt. Co. v. Southerland, 977 S.W.2d 910, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 137 ( Ky. 1998 ).

A punitive damages award was proper where two (2) employees were constructively discharged for refusing their supervisor’s request to perform illegal activities when they were segregated from other employees and each other, and were otherwise ostracized. Northeast Health Mgmt., Inc. v. Cotton, 56 S.W.3d 440, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 701 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

Since the employer did have knowledge of the employee’s protected activity, and despite this knowledge, and with the recommendation of the employee’s immediate supervisor, the employee was fired days after exercising her right, sufficient support existed for an award of punitive damages under Kentucky law. Layne v. Huish Detergents, Inc., 40 Fed. Appx. 200, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14015 (6th Cir. Ky. 2002 ).

9.Drunk Driver.

Because evidence that an individual was driving under the influence undoubtedly shows “a flagrant indifference to the rights of other drivers and pedestrians,” this section should be interpreted to cover injuries caused by a drunk driver. Shortridge v. Rice, 929 S.W.2d 194, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

10.Sexual Abuse.

Trial court did not err in allowing punitive damages against diocese that employed teacher who sexually abused plaintiff; subsection (2) did not require that diocese have actual knowledge of abuse against plaintiff, where it was shown that it had knowledge of abuse against other students. Roman Catholic Diocese v. Secter, 966 S.W.2d 286, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

11.Breach of Contract.
12.—Damages.

Although subsection (4) of this section and case law are clear that punitive damages are not recoverable for mere breach of contract, if the breach included separately tortuous conduct, punitive damages may be awarded. Faulkner Drilling Co. v. Gross, 943 S.W.2d 634, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

In action for breach of contract to drill a water well, where developer asserted fraud and misrepresentation in the inducement of the contract as a defense to driller’s breach of contract action, and developer’s counterclaim contained a separate action for fraud and misrepresentation for which he sought punitive damages, appellate court remanded court’s ruling denying punitive damages to determine whether such damages were allowable under the facts as applied to this section and KRS 411.186 . Faulkner Drilling Co. v. Gross, 943 S.W.2d 634, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

Where an investor’s only surviving claim against a natural gas company was for breach of contract, the investor’s punitive damages claim failed as a matter of law. Pioneer Res. Corp. v. Nami Res. Co., LLC, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43192 (E.D. Ky. June 26, 2006).

Lessor was not entitled to a punitive damages award where it was made whole through its award for unpaid royalties, it asserted no compensable injury beyond its claim for unpaid royalties, and it alleged no misconduct by the lessee other than the conduct of breaching the contract by underpaying the royalties due. Nami Res. Co., L.L.C. v. Asher Land & Mineral, L.T.D., 554 S.W.3d 323, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 353 ( Ky. 2018 ).

13.Malpractice Actions.

Attorney’s actions in failing to diligently pursue plaintiff’s workers’ compensation claim, and in subsequently lying to conceal his neglect, constituted malpractice and entitled plaintiff to punitive damages under this section. Bierman v. Klapheke, 967 S.W.2d 16, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 55 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Pursuant to KRS 411.184(3), the question of whether the hospital ratified the conduct of its employees in discharging decedent from its facility while decedent was suffering from a serious medical issue and had not been stabilized involved an issue of fact for the jury to decide and, thus, the jury could award punitive damages. However, the punitive damage award was excessive in part because the trial court did not instruct the jury as to any of the factors to consider in calculating the amount of punitive damages to be awarded as the trial court should have done pursuant to KRS 411.186(2). Thomas v. St. Joseph Healthcare, Inc., 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 371 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 5, 2008).

Where a small airplane crashed into a client’s home and the attorney failed to inform the client of the dismissal of the client’s negligence suit against the pilot on statute-of-limitations grounds, the client was properly awarded punitive damages against the attorney in a legal malpractice action, but the client was limited under CR 8.01(2) to punitive damages in the amount of $1 million based on the client’s last itemization of such damages in the client’s trial memorandum. Keeney v. Osborne, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 57 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 5, 2010), rev'd, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ).

Where a patient suffered an unexpected and substantial blood loss during surgery, where there was an extraordinary delay in obtaining blood from the medical center’s blood bank, where the patient sustained an anoxic brain injury as a result and subsequently succumbed, and where her family filed a medical malpractice action, the trial court erred in instructing the jury on punitive damages because, even if the delay in obtaining blood for transfusion were found to constitute gross negligence, a punitive damages instruction was proper only if the evidence supported a finding that the medical center should have anticipated the inordinate delay in obtaining blood for transfusion or that it authorized or ratified the delay. Univ. Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Beglin, 375 S.W.3d 783, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 162 ( Ky. 2011 ).

14.Negligence Actions.

In an action against a utility arising from a natural gas explosion which destroyed four (4) houses, the evidence was insufficient to show malice where it appeared that a gas pipe burst suddenly and without warning due to extremely cold temperatures and where there was no evidence that the gas line had leaked for an extended period of time and that the utility had disregarded the danger or failed to discover the leak. Bowling Green Mun. Utils v. Atmos Energy Corp., 989 S.W.2d 577, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1999 ).

Motorists could not recover punitive damages from an employee in their action against the employee and his employer for injuries sustained when the employee’s tractor-trailer struck the motorists’ pickup truck because there was no evidence of fraud, oppression, or the type of subjective malice required for an award of punitive damages under KRS 411.184(2), and there was no evidence that the employee acted with wanton disregard for the safety of others. Driving while sleepy, but within the speed limit, apparently within the proper lane, and without any suggestion of intoxication did not constitute gross negligence. Turner v. Werner Enters., 442 F. Supp. 2d 384, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56572 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

In motorists’ action against an employee and his employer for injuries sustained when the employee’s tractor-trailer struck the motorists’ pickup truck, the motorists’ claim for punitive damages against the employer was barred by KRS 411.184(3) because there was no case law supporting the motorists’ theory that the employer’s failure to discipline the employee after he caused the accident by driving while sleepy constituted ratification of the employee’s conduct. Turner v. Werner Enters., 442 F. Supp. 2d 384, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56572 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

In litigation over an auto accident, since plaintiff did not sustain any separate and distinct damages as a result of defendant’s alleged concealment regarding discovery issues, the trial court erred by allowing testimony regarding it. However, the error was harmless, as there was sufficient admissible evidence that defendant’s conduct while driving amounted to gross negligence to justify a jury instruction on punitive damages. Gersh v. Bowman, 239 S.W.3d 567, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 372 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Tractor-trailer owner, independent trucking operator, and a truck driver were entitled to summary judgment on a claim for punitive damages under KRS 411.184(2) in an action arising out of an automobile-truck collision; the truck driver’s ordinary negligence in losing control after choking on coffee did not rise to the level of gross negligence so as to support an award of punitive damages under KRS 411.184(2), and the driver’s extraterritorial conduct of failing to report his whole medical history to his employer did not satisfy the constitutional nexus requirement. Estate of Embry v. Geo Transp. of Ind., Inc., 478 F. Supp. 2d 914, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51250 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ).

A bank could not be barred from seeking punitive damages against its auditors in the bank’s action against them for not discovering and disclosing sooner financial misconduct that resulted in destruction of the bank. Under the common law, punitive damages could be awarded on a showing of gross negligence and KRS 411.184 could not constitutionally exclude recovery of punitive damages on that basis. Peoples Bank of N. Ky., Inc. v. Crowe Chizek & Co. LLC, 277 S.W.3d 255, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 176 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Where the driver of a coal truck entered the wrong lane and overcorrected, causing his rig to overturn and moments later, the vehicle in which the decedent was a passenger crashed into the coal debris, and the decedent sustained fatal injuries, an award of punitive damages in the ensuing wrongful death action was improper because, although the driver may have failed to exercise reasonable care, his actions did not rise to the level of wanton or reckless disregard for others. An award of punitive damages under the circumstances would eliminate the distinction between ordinary and gross negligence. Fuel Transp., Inc. v. Gibson, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 25, 2009), aff'd, 410 S.W.3d 56, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Landowners’ motion to reconsider the court’s prior decision as to the availability of punitive damages on the negligence claims was granted where the court failed to recognize that KRS 411.560(4) provided for punitive damages if the landowners recovered for private nuisance and proved that the conduct met the KRS 411.184 standards. Powell v. Tosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63567 (W.D. Ky. May 3, 2013).

Where a former employee alleged sexual harassment, gender discrimination, and wrongful termination under the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, remand to state court was not warranted, because it was more likely than not that the amount in controversy was at least $75,000 since the calculation of backpay appropriately included accruals through the projected trial date, and the employee allegedly was entitled to punitive damages for gross negligence. Shupe v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 566 Fed. Appx. 476, 2014 FED App. 0382N, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 9668 (6th Cir. Ky. 2014 ).

Employee was granted summary judgment on an injured driver's punitive damages claim where the employee's acts and omissions while driving a tractor-trailer amounted to nothing more than poor driving choices resulting in a collision. Martin v. Matthew R. Browning & U.S. Xpress, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82974 (E.D. Ky. June 27, 2016).

15.Actions Against An Insurer for Bad Faith.

Plaintiff is not required to prove oppression or fraud pursuant to KRS 411.184(2) in order to establish a bad faith claim under the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act, KRS 304.12-230 . Plaintiff proved that an insurer was obligated to pay a claim under the terms of a policy, that the insurer’s reliance on its agreement with a car owner to not pay a claim through the insurance was unreasonable, and that the insurer had a statutory duty to attempt to negotiate settlement in good faith. Thomas v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co., 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 163 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2004 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. June 4, 2004).

Punitive damages are available to a plaintiff in a suit for bad faith against an insurance company even in the absence of a showing of actual damages. Thomas v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co., 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 163 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2004 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. June 4, 2004).

16.Defamation Actions.

In an amusement park’s defamation suit arising out of statements broadcast by a television station following an accident involving a roller coaster at the park, the trial court’s instructions to the jury on punitive damages, which included language from KRS 411.061 , was not erroneous. The jury found actual malice and also malice and oppression as those terms are defined in KRS 411.184 by clear and convincing evidence. Ky. Kingdom Amusement Co. v. Belo Ky., Inc., 179 S.W.3d 785, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 2005 ).

16.5.Fraud Actions.

Claim for statutory punitive damages pursuant to KRS 411.184(1)(b) and KRS 411.186 remained for trial because plaintiff trust beneficiaries presented enough evidence of possible fraud, through intentional concealment of material facts, to survive summary judgment. Anderson v. Old Nat'l Bancorp, 675 F. Supp. 2d 701, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116124 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Punitive damages under KRS 411.184(1)(b) were available because (1) a former business partner and the attorney acted fraudulently; (2) the attorney violated the Rules of Professional Conduct and breached his fiduciary duty; (3) the fraudulent and overreaching conduct of the attorney was the type of conduct that undermined public confidence in the entire legal profession; and (4) the partner was a sophisticated businessman with extensive experience and success. Stone v. Atherton (In re Stone), 421 B.R. 401, 2009 Bankr. LEXIS 3476 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2009 ), aff'd, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124172 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2010), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 698 F.3d 910, 2012 FED App. 0372P, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22230 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Husband and wife who owned and operated a Kentucky oil and gas drilling company were ordered to pay investors $5,662,662 in compensatory damages plus prejudgment interest because they committed fraud, breach of contract, and conversion when they made misrepresentations that induced an elderly investor, members of his family, and family trusts to invest in nonexistent and worthless gas wells, and the debt was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C.S. § 523. Although the investors asked the court for an award of punitive damages under KRS 411.184 , the court denied plaintiffs’ request because punitive damages were not required to deter the husband and wife from engaging in the same type of conduct in the future. Fontaine v. P&J Resources, Inc. (In re P&J Resources Inc.), 475 B.R. 838, 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 2167 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. 2012 ).

Misconduct on the part of a mortgage loan servicer including its imposition of unauthorized fees and charges and its failure to apply a debtor’s payments thereon in accordance with the terms of the loan was grossly reckless and fraudulent and justified the imposition of punitive damages under KRS 411.184 . Tolliver v. U.S. Bank (In re Tolliver), 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 3333 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. July 19, 2012).

17.Actions Against an Insurer.

District Court erred in denying plaintiffs’ request for an instruction on the availability of punitive damages against defendant insured in their action alleging bad faith. Both contract formation and the insurer’s alleged bad faith refusal to pay a valid claim were issues for jury determination; that being so, the jurors should have been instructed that, under Kentucky law, they were free to consider punitive damages if they first found the insurer had deliberately rejected the plaintiffs’ claim in bad faith. Estate of Riddle v. S. Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 421 F.3d 400, 2005 FED App. 0370P, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 18414 (6th Cir. Ky. 2005 ).

17.5.Trespass actions.

Appellant knew its mining operation was in the vicinity of appellee’s land, but assumed appellant was within its acreage and continued mining; appellant’s conduct in not bothering to confirm its precise location was outrageous and an award of punitive damages was appropriate under KRS 411.184(1)(f). Crutcher v. Harrod Concrete & Stone Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2013), rev'd, 458 S.W.3d 290, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2015 ).

For punitive damages purposes, it was proper for the jury to know the market value of the limestone removed by appellant on appellee’s land, in order to determine compensatory damages and quantify the nature of the harm, but it was wrong to award appellee the market value of the limestone as punitive damages, given that there was no direct correlation between those damages and the loss. Crutcher v. Harrod Concrete & Stone Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 999 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2013), rev'd, 458 S.W.3d 290, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2015 ).

18.Summary Judgment Not Appropriate.

Motion for summary judgment was denied in a case where punitive damages were sought because there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether certain conduct rose to the level of oppression, fraud, or malice. Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Inv. Brokerage Co. v. Skeeters, 395 F. Supp. 2d 541, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24358 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

Trial for punitive damages under KRS 411.184(3) was warranted, and therefore the trial court erred by granting the bus company summary judgment, because the bus driver’s and the bus company’s treatment of the passenger immediately after the accident could rise to the level of gross negligence or reckless disregard for her life and safety, as neither called EMS or the police. There was also proof that the bus company authorized and ratified the driver’s conduct, as she was trained to not admit fault for an accident and not to speak with victims and witnesses, and she was not instructed on all of the company’s safety policies. Allgeier v. MV Transp., Inc., 2012 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1019 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2012), aff'd, 433 S.W.3d 324, 2014 Ky. LEXIS 230 ( Ky. 2014 ).

19.Dram Shop Act.

As there can be no punitive damages absent proximate cause, and KRS 413.241(1) provides that a dram shop’s sale of alcohol cannot be the proximate cause of any injury caused by an intoxicated tortfeasor, a trial court erred by awarding a passenger who was injured in auto accident punitive damages against a nightclub and its owner. Jackson v. Tullar, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 72 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 2007), sub. op., 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

The focus of KRS 413.241 on dram shop liability for “injuries suffered” indicates that the legislature did not intend for a dram shop to be liable for an award of punitive damages. Jackson v. Tullar, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 72 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 2, 2007), sub. op., 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Punitive damages cannot be awarded against a dram shop as under KRS 411.184(1)(f) a plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages against a defendant unless that defendant’s conduct was the proximate cause of any injury to the plaintiff; under KRS 413.241(1), a dram shop’s sale or service of intoxicating beverages cannot be the proximate cause of any injury caused by an intoxicated tortfeasor. Jackson v. Tullar, 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

20.Liability of Employer.

The specific wrongful death statute, KRS 411.130 , prevailed over the general punitive damages statute, KRS 411.184(3). Under KRS 411.130 (1), punitive damages could be imposed on an employer for the gross negligence of an employee. In re Air Crash at Lexington, Kentucky, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44888 (E.D. Ky. June 6, 2008).

Where a restaurant corporation knew of a hoax that was being perpetrated at fast-food restaurants where a caller would represent himself to be a police officer, falsely accuse a female employee of theft, and convince managers and other employees to hold the employee in a locked room and subject her to strip and body cavity searches, where the hoax had been perpetrated at one of the restaurant corporation’s own restaurants, where corporate management made an executive decision not to inform employees and managers of the hoax or to provide training and guidance or instruction to prevent the hoax from successfully occurring again, and where the hoax was perpetrated again and the victim was sexually assaulted by one of her captors, the jury’s award of punitive damages was not unreasonable because the evidence permitted the jury to conclude that the restaurant corporation owed a duty to train, supervise, or warn about the hoax calls and that it failed in that duty. McDonald's Corp. v. Ogborn, 309 S.W.3d 274, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 236 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

Court erred when it found that Kentucky’s punitive damages statute, KRS 411.184 , did not apply to a wrongful death case because Ky. Const. § 241 prohibited limitations on damages in wrongful death cases, and held that Kentucky courts would apply § 411.184 to wrongful death cases, including the instant case; the court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the airline on the issue of punitive damages because plaintiffs had not shown by clear and convincing evidence that there were similar incidents from which the airline should have anticipated the pilots’ conduct that caused the plane crash or that the airline authorized or ratified the conduct of the pilots, and thus, plaintiffs failed to present clear and convincing evidence of gross negligence on the part of the airline management such that it should be held liable for punitive damages for the conduct of the pilots. In re Air Crash at Lexington, Ky., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10429 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 2, 2011).

Passengers could not recover punitive damages from the company that chartered the bus involved in the accident based on vicarious liability because no direct employment relationship existed between the bus driver and the company, and the particular risk created by the company delegating driver screening responsibilities to the driver's employer was not the risk that resulted in the accident, but rather, the passenger's injuries were caused by the driver's ordinary negligence. M.T. v. Saum, 3 F. Supp. 3d 617, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31674 (W.D. Ky. 2014 ).

Passengers could not recover punitive damages from the bus driver's employer based on vicarious liability because they failed to demonstrate that the employer should have anticipated the driver's conduct on the night of the accident, and plaintiffs' negligent hiring, training, and supervision claim against the employer also failed as a matter of law. M.T. v. Saum, 3 F. Supp. 3d 617, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31674 (W.D. Ky. 2014 ).

Employer was granted summary judgment on an injured driver's punitive damages claim where its alleged failings in hiring the tractor-trailer driver, including not noticing that he listed the wrong birth year on his application twice and allowing him to be medically certified for two years, when he should have only been certified for one, did not rise to the level of gross negligence. Martin v. Matthew R. Browning & U.S. Xpress, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82974 (E.D. Ky. June 27, 2016).

20.5.Ratification.

Hospital was properly denied a directed verdict on the issue of ratification under this section because there was evidence showing that it approved of the actions of its staff, as it did not conduct any investigation or review of the deceased patient’s treatment at the emergency room and it asserted that its staff’s actions were entirely appropriate under the circumstances. St. Joseph Healthcare, Inc. v. Thomas, 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1011 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 6, 2013), aff'd, 487 S.W.3d 864, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 179 ( Ky. 2016 ).

21.Procedure.

In an action relating to protestors being ejected from a campaign rally by supporters, the court declined to strike paragraphs in the complaint discussing defendant supporter's association with a white nationalist group and his statements about how the candidate might further the interests of that group because those paragraphs supported a claim for punitive damages. Nwanguma v. Trump, 273 F. Supp. 3d 719, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49013 (W.D. Ky. 2017 ), modified, dismissed, in part, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126039 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 8, 2017).

Cited:

Klepper v. First Am. Bank, 916 F.2d 337, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 17437 (6th Cir. Ky. 1990 ); Carter v. Builders Transport, Inc., 812 F. Supp. 97, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20735 (W.D. Ky. 1992 ); Tractor & Farm Supply v. Ford New Holland, 898 F. Supp. 1198, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13296 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ); Nicely v. McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie, & Kirkland, 163 F.3d 376, 1998 FED App. 0366P, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 31482 (6th Cir. Ky. 1998 ); Steinhoff v. Upriver Restaurant Joint Venture, 117 F. Supp. 2d 598, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15413 (E.D. Ky. 2000 ); Farmland Mut. Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 36 S.W.3d 368, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 2000 ); Hurst v. Curtsinger, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 17 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 23, 2004); Strathmore Web Graphics v. Sanden Mach., Ltd., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22618 (W.D. Ky. May 16, 2000).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Application.

Unpublished decision: Automobile accident victims could not recover punitive damages from the drunken driver’s estate or executrix after they were substituted as parties defendant upon the death of the drunken driver, because the accident victims could not show oppressive, fraudulent, or malicious conduct on the part of the estate and the executrix as the plain language of KRS 411.184(2) required. Stewart v. Estate of Cooper, 102 S.W.3d 913, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 2003 ).

2.Submission to Jury.

Unpublished decision: Court properly submitted the issue of bad faith to the jury to consider whether punitive damages were warranted under KRS 411.184 because the 27-month delay between plaintiff’s injury and an initial settlement offer, where fault was clear, was not “mere delay” even though an insurer had to investigate plaintiff’s injury. Medical Protective Co. v. Wiles, 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 983 (Ky. Ct. App. June 17, 2011), review denied, ordered not published, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 625 (Ky. Aug. 15, 2012).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Moore, Punitive Damages in Wrongful Death Actions: Is KRS 411.184 Constitutional?, Vol. 54, No. 3, Summer 1990, Ky. Bench & Bar 18.

Rankin, Punitive Damages Under KRS 411.184 and 411.186 : A View from the Defense Bar, 56 Ky. Bench & B. 29.

Feamster & White, Tort Reform: The Defense Perspective., Vol. 70, No. 6, November 2006, Ky. Bench & Bar 18.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Murphy, “Common Sense Legal Reform” and Bell’s Toll: Eliminating Punitive Damage Claims from Jurisdictional Amount Calculations in Federal Diversity Cases, 84 Ky. L.J. 71 (1995-96).

McIntyre, The Future of Kentucky’s Punitive Damages Statute and Jural Rights Jurisprudence: A Call for Separation of Powers, 88 Ky. L.J. 719 (1999-2000).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Comment, A Survey of Kentucky Tort Reform, 17 N. Ky. L. Rev. 473 (1990).

Elder, Kentucky Defamation and Privacy Law — The Last Decade, 23 N. Ky. L. Rev. 231 (1996).

Kareth, Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly: A Lost Opportunity for the Kentucky Supreme Court, 26 N. Ky. L. Rev. 159 (1999).

Burns & Fischesser, A Survey of Kentucky Employment Law., 31 N. Ky. L. Rev. 85 (2004).

Article: Recovery of Nonpecuniary Damages in Mass Tort Actions in Kentucky: A Defense Perspective, 35 N. Ky. L. Rev. 197 (2008).

General Law Issue: Article: The Doctrine of Other Wrongs: A Framework for Punishing Civil Recidivism, 36 N. Ky. L. Rev. 67 (2009).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Appellant’s Brief, Form 101.25.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Bar KRS 413.241 by Third Party Injured by Intoxicated Driver, Form 132.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Contractor for Trespass, Form 304.05.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Tavern and Driver by Pedestrian Struck by Intoxicated Driver on Sidewalk, Failure to Keep Control of Vehicle, Form 135.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Business Invitee Injured by Dangerous Condition of Premises Against Owner of Premises, Form 131.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Landlord Against Tenant for Fixtures Removed, Form 302.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Abuse of Process—Criminal Proceedings Filed to Thwart First Amendment Rights, Form 124.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Assault With a Firearm, Form 120.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Damage of Chattel, Form 126.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Independent Action under KRS 344.650 , Alleging Violation of KRS 344.36, Form 308.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Injuries to Child—Parent’s Loss of Consortium, Form 256.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Form 262.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress for Racial Insults, Form 125.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Intentional Trespass (General Form), Form 304.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Interference with Contract (General Form), Form 143.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Intrusion—Hidden Camera, Form 128.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Slander Per Se Against Private Defendant, Form 129.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Seeking Damages for Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Form 122.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Conversion of Property Wrongfully Taken from Owner, Form 127.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Negligence, § 130.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Trespass, § 304.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Cemeteries, § 37.01.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Damages, § 39.15.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Defamation and Privacy, §§ 40.01-40.10.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Trespass, § 32.02.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Wrongful Discharge from Employment or Interference With Business Expectancy, Damages, Punitive Damages, § 51.02.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Outrageous Conduct, § 52.01.

411.186. Assessment of punitive damages.

  1. In any civil action where claims for punitive damages are included, the jury or judge if jury trial has been waived, shall determine concurrently with all other issues presented, whether punitive damages may be assessed.
  2. If the trier of fact determines that punitive damages should be awarded, the trier of fact shall then assess the sum of punitive damages. In determining the amount of punitive damages to be assessed, the trier of fact should consider the following factors:
    1. The likelihood at the relevant time that serious harm would arise from the defendant’s misconduct;
    2. The degree of the defendant’s awareness of that likelihood;
    3. The profitability of the misconduct to the defendant;
    4. The duration of the misconduct and any concealment of it by the defendant; and
    5. Any actions by the defendant to remedy the misconduct once it became known to the defendant.
  3. KRS 411.184 and this section are applicable to all cases in which punitive damages are sought.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 224, § 3, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

Successive awards of punitive damages for the same course of conduct do not violate due process. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Kentucky Supreme Court had not struck down the provision of KRS 411.184 that allowed punitive damages awards for fraud, and the Federal District Court could not predict that the Kentucky Supreme Court would strike down KRS 411.186(2)(c). Thus, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery; plaintiff was entitled to discover defendant’s financial condition, not so plaintiff could present evidence of that condition to the trier of fact, but so that plaintiff could determine whether there was any evidence that defendant’s alleged misconduct resulted in a profit that it would not otherwise have gained. Derby Fabricating v. Packing Material Co., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28765 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 18, 2005).

Where defendant intentionally killed the decedent, where he was convicted of murder but his conviction was reversed, where defendant pled guilty to manslaughter to avoid a retrial, where plaintiff, the decedent’s father, filed a wrongful death suit against defendant, where the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of plaintiff on the issue of liability and conducted a jury trial on the issue of damages, where the jury awarded $3.3 million in compensatory damages and $60 million in punitive damages, and where defendant challenged the propriety of the punitive damages award, the court held that the purpose of the punitive damage award was not to compensate the estate but to vindicate the state’s legitimate interests in punishment and deterrence of conduct of the type in which defendant engaged. Under that analysis, the $60 million punitive award was grossly excessive; as such, it was violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. Const. amend. XIV, and the punitive damages award was reduced to $30 million. Ragland v. Estate of Digiuro, 352 S.W.3d 908, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 201 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

2.Punitive Damages.

KRS 411.184 through 411.186 do not make punitive damages available under KRS 344.450 . Ky. Dep't of Corr. v. McCullough, 123 S.W.3d 130, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 2003 ), modified, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 23 (Ky. Jan. 22, 2004), modified, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Jan. 22, 2004).

Although the District Court did not cite KRS 411.186 when calculating the amount of punitive damages awarded to the private plaintiffs in a nuisance action, the court explicitly considered two (2) of the statutory factors when it discussed the duration of defendants’ misconduct and their consistent refusal to stop fugitive dust from crossing their property lines. These references, taken in conjunction with the court’s other references to defendants’ conduct and the statute’s discretionary language, indicated that the court had applied the proper legal standard. Ellis v. Gallatin Steel Co., 390 F.3d 461, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 22252 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 ).

Evidence that a motorist drove 34 miles per hour over the speed limit for a curve, at night, with two passengers, one of whom had warned him of the upcoming curve, was sufficient to create a jury question as to whether the motorist had acted with gross negligence. Therefore, his motion for a directed verdict, seeking dismissal of a punitive damages claim, was properly denied. Gersh v. Bowman, 239 S.W.3d 567, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 372 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

In litigation over an auto accident, since plaintiff did not sustain any separate and distinct damages as a result of defendant’s alleged concealment regarding discovery issues, the trial court erred by allowing testimony regarding it. However, the error was harmless, as there was sufficient admissible evidence that defendant’s conduct while driving amounted to gross negligence to justify a jury instruction on punitive damages. Gersh v. Bowman, 239 S.W.3d 567, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 372 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Claim for statutory punitive damages pursuant to KRS 411.184(1)(b) and KRS 411.186 remained for trial because plaintiff trust beneficiaries presented enough evidence of possible fraud, through intentional concealment of material facts, to survive summary judgment. Anderson v. Old Nat'l Bancorp, 675 F. Supp. 2d 701, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116124 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

In a civil assault and battery case, punitive damages were properly awarded in a case where the evidence showed that an injured party was viciously attacked and severely beaten with an object; this conduct constituted an egregious display of total disregard for the safety of others. Buda v. Schuler, 352 S.W.3d 350, 2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 167 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).

Creditor established by clear and convincing evidence that the attorney committed fraud by telling the creditor that the loan the creditor made to the attorney’s client would be reimbursed once the client received an expected personal injury settlement and the reimbursement was not then forthcoming once the settlement was reached. Since the client showed that fraud had occurred, the trial court should have granted the creditor’s request to instruct the jury on the creditor’s punitive damage claim, pursuant to KRS 411.184 , and on remand a new trial had to be held on the issue of punitive damages to see if the criteria for awarding them under KRS 411.186 had been met. Pezzarossi v. Nutt, 392 S.W.3d 417, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 303 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

When an estate sued a realtor to recover misappropriated funds, an award of punitive damages was not improper because (1) the evidence showed the realtor's concealment and deception, and (2) the jury was properly instructed. Watts v. Henry, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 154 (Ky. Ct. App. Nov. 13, 2015), review denied, ordered not published, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Apr. 27, 2016).

Circuit court did not abuse its discretion when it invoked Ky. R. Civ. P. 54.02 to make an October 22, 2014 order a final and appealable judgment; a prayer for punitive damages was not so tethered to the interrelated fiduciary breach and compensatory damages claim that it prevented its independent adjudication as an interlocutory judgment. Chesley v. Abbott, 524 S.W.3d 471, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted a hotel’s financial records about revenues in the months before the decedent drowned in the hotel pool as well as the hotel manager’s bonus received in the prior year based on the hotel’s increased revenues because the evidence of the hotel’s revenue and expenses for the months immediately preceding the decedent’s drowning was not to inform the jury of the hotel’s financial condition but to show a need for increased staffing. Louisville SW Hotel v. Lindsey, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 91 (Ky. Ct. App. May 17, 2019).

3.Award Held Not Excessive.

When the concept of reasonableness and other factors identified were considered in the light of evidence presented, evidence from which the jury believed the bank engaged in an elaborate fraud to gain additional security for existing loans with no intentions of performing its representations of fact and with knowledge of the likely destruction of borrower’s business, punitive judgment was not so “grossly excessive” as to violate the substantive component of the Due Process Clause. Hanson v. American Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 865 S.W.2d 302, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1993 ).

The trial judge was not clearly erroneous in determining that a punitive judgment verdict of $435,000 against a manufacturer of asbestos products was not excessive. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Where the previous parent company of the bank which was found liable for fraud agreed to indemnify the bank’s purchaser for any judgment, punitive damages were properly awarded against the parent company even though the bank no longer existed. Sallee v. Fort Knox Nat'l Bank, N.A. (In re Sallee), 286 F.3d 878, FED App. 0128P, U.S. App. LEXIS 6841 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 949, 123 S. Ct. 415, 154 L. Ed. 2d 294, 2002 U.S. LEXIS 7622 (U.S. 2002).

Trial court’s punitive damages award to the clients was sustainable where knowing the clients’ aversion to tax risks personally and professionally, an accounting firm made false representations and omitted material facts imperative to the clients’ fully-informed decisionmaking as to a tax shelter the accounting firm was promoting, the firm never disclosed the general or specific problems with the tax shelter despite multiple IRS notices, legal opinions, and professional articles, and when the clients discovered on their own the potential problems, the firm continued to misrepresent the product. Yung v. Thornton, 563 S.W.3d 22, 2018 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 2018 ).

Jury properly awarded $100,000 in punitive damages to the co-executors of a deceased nursing home resident because a jury instruction clearly set forth the standard of proof, the record showed a series of misconduct by the home, it promised a level of care that it was neither able nor licensed to provide, and its egregious conduct, combined with the minimal amount of compensatory damages, supported the award. Trilogy Healthcare of Fayette I, LLC v. Techau, 605 S.W.3d 60, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 98 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

4.Instructions.

Instructions to the jury must define the purpose of punitive damages as punishment to the wrongdoer and as a deterrent to wrongdoers and others from such activities in the future and that the post trial procedures be in place and utilized by the trial court to scrutinize the award of such damages. The instructions in this case were adequate. Hanson v. American Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 865 S.W.2d 302, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1993 ).

Where the trial court instructed the jury in accordance with the provisions of KRS 411.184 and this section, and where the judge set forth in detail the definitions and standards the jury was to use in its deliberation in deciding whether punitive damages should be awarded and, if so, in what amount, such instructions are the only guidance that may be given the jury. Reasonable men and women will differ in determining the amount of exemplary damages, but so long as the jury’s decision is free of passion or prejudice and is appropriately reviewed by the trial judge, there is no basis for substituting the court’s opinion in the place of the jury’s. Hanson v. American Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 865 S.W.2d 302, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1993 ).

Jury award of punitive damages to plaintiff, who was brutally beaten by defendant after being found in defendant’s former betrothed’s apartment, could not stand because the trial court failed to incorporate in the jury instructions any of the factors enumerated in the statute and provided no standard whatsoever to assist or guide the jury in its determination. Snyder v. McCarley, 2003 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 804 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2003).

In a products liability action, a vehicle manufacturer’s motion for a new trial was properly denied where it agreed to the language of the jury instruction, and therefore the court’s failure to include the punitive damages guideposts set out in KRS 411.186(2) did not necessitate a new trial. Clark v. Chrysler Corp., 436 F.3d 594, 2006 FED App. 0045P, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 2435 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

5.Wrongful Termination Action.

Lower court did not err by allowing recovery of punitive damages in action by employees for wrongful termination as a result of union activity where evidence demonstrated a violation of KRS 336.130 , employees were threatened about attending a union meeting and employees were dismissed after attending such meeting and instructions and jury assessments were in line with KRS 411.184 and this section. Simpson County Steeplechase Ass'n v. Roberts, 898 S.W.2d 523, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

6.Breach of Contract.

Although subsection (4) of KRS 411.184 and case law are clear that punitive damages are not recoverable for mere breach of contract, if the breach included separately tortuous conduct, punitive damages may be awarded. Faulkner Drilling Co. v. Gross, 943 S.W.2d 634, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

In action for breach of contract to drill a water well, where developer asserted fraud and misrepresentation in the inducement of the contract as a defense to driller’s breach of contract action, and developer’s counterclaim contained a separate action for fraud and misrepresentation for which he sought punitive damages, appellate court remanded court’s ruling denying punitive damages to determine whether such damages were allowable under the facts as applied to KRS 411.184 and this section. Faulkner Drilling Co. v. Gross, 943 S.W.2d 634, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

7.Malpractice Actions.

Attorney’s actions in failing to diligently pursue plaintiff’s workers’ compensation claim, and in subsequently lying to conceal his neglect, constituted malpractice and entitled plaintiff to punitive damages under this section. Bierman v. Klapheke, 967 S.W.2d 16, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 55 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Pursuant to KRS 411.184(3), the question of whether the hospital ratified the conduct of its employees in discharging decedent from its facility while decedent was suffering from a serious medical issue and had not been stabilized involved an issue of fact for the jury to decide and, thus, the jury could award punitive damages. However, the punitive damage award was excessive in part because the trial court did not instruct the jury as to any of the factors to consider in calculating the amount of punitive damages to be awarded as the trial court should have done pursuant to KRS 411.186(2). Thomas v. St. Joseph Healthcare, Inc., 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 371 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 5, 2008).

Where a small airplane crashed into a client’s home and the attorney failed to inform the client of the dismissal of the client’s negligence suit against the pilot on statute-of-limitations grounds, the client was properly awarded punitive damages against the attorney in a legal malpractice action, but the client was limited under CR 8.01(2) to punitive damages in the amount of $1 million based on the client’s last itemization of such damages in the client’s trial memorandum. Keeney v. Osborne, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 57 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 5, 2010), rev'd, 399 S.W.3d 1, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2012 ).

Bifurcation of medical malpractice action did not violate KRS 411.186 , which mandates that the jury consider all issues concurrently to include punitive damages, because the trial court bifurcated plaintiff’s claims as between defendants but did not bifurcate the punitive damages claims from either liability or compensatory damages as to each individual defendant. Therefore, plaintiff was free to pursue punitive damages and introduce evidence to support said damages in the first phase and second phase of the trial. Estate of Judith Burton v. Trover Clinic Found., Inc., 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1001 (Ky. Ct. App. June 10, 2011), rev'd, 423 S.W.3d 165, 2014 Ky. LEXIS 2 ( Ky. 2014 ).

Cited in:

UPS v. Rickert, 996 S.W.2d 464, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1999 ); Hurst v. Curtsinger, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 17 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004), rehearing denied, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 241 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004), review denied and ordered not published, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 2005 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Rankin, Punitive Damages Under KRS 411.184 and 411.186 : A View from the Defense Bar, 56 Ky. Bench & B. 29.

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Comment, A Survey of Kentucky Tort Reform, 17 N. Ky. L. Rev. 473 (1990).

Elder, Kentucky Defamation and Privacy Law — The Last Decade, 23 N. Ky. L. Rev. 231 (1996).

General Law Issue: Article: The Doctrine of Other Wrongs: A Framework for Punishing Civil Recidivism, 36 N. Ky. L. Rev. 67 (2009).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Cemeteries, § 37.01.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Damages, § 39.15.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Defamation and Privacy, §§ 40.01-40.10.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Trespass, § 32.02.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Wrongful Discharge from Employment or Interference With Business Expectancy, Damages, Punitive Damages, § 51.02.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Outrageous Conduct, § 52.01.

411.187. Supersedeas bond for punitive damages on appeal — Limit — Rescission of limit if assets diverted or dissipated.

  1. In any civil action brought under any legal theory, the amount of a supersedeas bond necessary to stay execution of a judgment granting legal, equitable, or any other relief during the entire course of all appeals or discretionary reviews of the judgment by all appellate courts shall be set in accordance with applicable law, except that the total amount of the supersedeas bonds that are required collectively of all appellants during the appeal of a civil action may not exceed one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in the aggregate, regardless of the amount of the judgment that is appealed.
  2. If the appellee proves by a preponderance of the evidence that a party bringing an appeal, for whom the supersedeas bond requirement has been limited, is purposefully dissipating or diverting assets outside of the ordinary course of its business for the purpose of avoiding ultimate payment of the judgment, the limitation granted under subsection (1) of this section shall be rescinded and a court may require the appellant to post a bond in an amount up to the full amount of the judgment pursuant to the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure.

History. Enact. Acts 2000, ch. 205, § 1, effective March 29, 2000; 2007, ch. 111, § 1, effective June 26, 2007.

Compiler’s Notes.

Section 3 of Acts 2000, ch. 205, effective March 29, 2000, read: “The provisions of Sections 1 and 2 of this Act [KRS 426.965 and this section] are hereby expressly declared to be retroactive and may be applied to all civil actions, including those on appeal, presently docketed in the courts of this Commonwealth.”

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(6/26/2007). 2007 Ky. Acts ch. 111, sec. 2, provides that “Section 1 of this Act (this section) shall apply to all civil actions pending on the effective date of this Act (June 26, 2007).”

411.188. Notification of parties holding subrogation rights — Collateral source payments and subrogation rights admissible.

  1. This section shall apply to all actions for damages, whether in contract or tort, commenced after July 15, 1988.
  2. At the commencement of an action seeking to recover damages, it shall be the duty of the plaintiff or his attorney to notify, by certified mail, those parties believed by him to hold subrogation rights to any award received by the plaintiff as a result of the action. The notification shall state that a failure to assert subrogation rights by intervention, pursuant to Kentucky Civil Rule 24, will result in a loss of those rights with respect to any final award received by the plaintiff as a result of the action.
  3. Collateral source payments, except life insurance, the value of any premiums paid by or on behalf of the plaintiff for same, and known subrogation rights shall be an admissible fact in any civil trial.
  4. A certified list of the parties notified pursuant to subsection (2) of this section shall also be filed with the clerk of the court at the commencement of the action.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 224, § 4, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

Subsection (3) of this section does not violate § 54 of the Kentucky Constitution. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 987 F.2d 383, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4293 (6th Cir. Ky. 1993 ), vacated, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 11695 (6th Cir. May 19, 1993).

This section, which specifies that collateral source payments shall be an admissible fact in any civil trial, is unconstitutional as it violates Ky. Const., §§ 27, 28 and 116 mandating and elaborating on separation of powers doctrine, intrudes on the responsibility exclusively assigned to the judicial branch or government, and serves, in this case, to confuse the jury regarding the factual issue rather than assist them in deciding the damages incurred by the plaintiff. O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1995 ).

This section was not so written as to express a substantive law change denying damages for medical expenses and wage loss in a civil action to those plaintiffs who have access to collateral source benefits, as to do so would violate Ky. Const., § 54. Those plaintiffs receiving collateral source payments cannot have their tort remedy denied as punishment for their prudence in obtaining insurance coverage to assist them in the event of a catastrophe, and their misfortune compounded by making them appear to seek damages for which they have no need. O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1995 ).

Rule 61.02 did not authorize an appellate court to retroactively apply a decision overruling this section when the parties did not challenge the constitutionality of the section in the trial court and the Attorney General was not notified of a constitutional challenge, as required by KRS 418.075 . Burns v. Level, 957 S.W.2d 218, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1997 ).

2.Application.

In subsection (2) of this section, the threshold question is not just whether there has been payment for something from a collateral source, but whether the payment is for an element of damages included in the tort action. When it is, the payor must be notified, must assert its claim in the tort action, and must be paid from the proceeds of the tort action. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Ruschell, 834 S.W.2d 166, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Subsection (3) of this section does not alter the measure of damages for wrongful death in Kentucky. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 987 F.2d 383, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4293 (6th Cir. Ky. 1993 ), vacated, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 11695 (6th Cir. May 19, 1993).

This section prevents an insurer from remaining hidden from the fact-finder’s view when the insurer intends to benefit from a suit instituted against a tort-feasor. An insurer’s duty simply involves a motion to intervene with a notice of payment made and does not impose an onerous obligation to litigate the merits of that claim. McCormack Baron & Assocs. v. Trudeaux, 885 S.W.2d 708, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

This section does not apply to a reparations obligor’s reimbursement for basic reparations benefits or added reparations benefits. Saxe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 955 S.W.2d 188, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

3.Purpose.

The legislature by enacting subsection (3) of this section, which mandates disclosure of collateral source payments and known subrogation rights, has decided that disclosure of insurance will not be deemed prejudicial per se; therefore, as a matter of law, public policy no longer requires the sanctioning of the loan agreement procedure in cases not involving life insurance payments. Lampton v. Boley, 870 S.W.2d 428, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 96 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

The enactment of this section was aimed at eroding the collateral source rule and rendered evidence of collateral benefits and the existence of subrogated benefits admissible in tort and contract actions commenced after July 15, 1988, and the necessary implication permits fact-finders to consider the plaintiff’s receipt of collateral benefits and to decide to reduce the damages awarded accordingly. McCormack Baron & Assocs. v. Trudeaux, 885 S.W.2d 708, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

4.No-fault Coverage.

This section does not extend to no-fault coverage because no-fault benefits are not “collateral source payments.” Ohio Casualty Ins. Co. v. Ruschell, 834 S.W.2d 166, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1992 ).

5.Collateral Source Rule.
6.— Worker’s Compensation Payments Not Collateral Source Payment.

Where widow received benefits under Ohio worker’s compensation statute due to death of her husband, in course of his employment for an Ohio Corporation, this section does not consider such payments to be payments from a collateral source, paid to, or for, the benefit of the estate of the husband, and as such, evidence of the worker’s compensation payments was not admissible at trial in a wrongful death action. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 889 S.W.2d 804, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 143 ( Ky. 1994 ).

Both KRS 342.700(1) and KRS 411.188(2) provide only that the failure of the subrogee to assert its rights results in the loss of those rights, and neither provides that those rights are thereby transferred to the subrogor in order to permit double recovery; an employee of an independent contractor seeking damages for injuries sustained in a fall at the plant of an owner was not permitted to recover from the owner those elements of damages that he had already recovered from the independent contractor by way of workers’ compensation benefits. Krahwinkel v. Commonwealth Aluminum Corp., 183 S.W.3d 154, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 2005 ).

7.— Applicability in Federal Court.

Subsection (3) of this section is merely a statutory rule of evidence which allows evidence of collateral source benefits to be admitted at trial, not because it is relevant to the measure of damages, but rather to temper jury verdicts; therefore, Kentucky’s collateral source rule was inapplicable in U.S. District Court. Birkenshaw v. Union Light, Heat & Power Co., 987 F.2d 383, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4293 (6th Cir. Ky. 1993 ), vacated, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 11695 (6th Cir. May 19, 1993).

The trial court did not err by directing that the jury be apprised that appellant’s medicals had been paid by a collateral source without identifying the collateral source. Mason v. Keltner, 854 S.W.2d 780, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 199 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

8.— Reduction of Damages Award Not Required.

In suit against third party for damages to apartment as a result of a fire, where insured did not notify insurer of the suit and its duty to intervene, but insurer had actual knowledge of the suit and did not intervene, while trial judge was not compelled to reduce the damages award to insured after learning of its receipt of collateral benefits from insurer, since nothing in the record indicated that any entity held subrogation rights. McCormack Baron & Assocs. v. Trudeaux, 885 S.W.2d 708, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

9.Notification.

Where defendants in bringing suit against third party who was responsible for defendants’ injuries did not comply with subsection (2) of this section in notifying insurance company it believed held subrogation rights to any award received as a result of such action of the need to assert subrogation rights by intervention, they cannot claim that company’s failure to intervene in the suit caused company to forfeit any subrogation claim it might have against them. Health Cost Controls v. Wardlow, 825 F. Supp. 152, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9090 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ), aff'd, 47 F.3d 1169, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 12668 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

Compensation insurance carrier which made collateral source payments must intervene when notified of the commencement of the underlying tort action in order to preserve its claim for reimbursement from plaintiff’s recovery, but carrier need not separately, independently, and actively pursue its claim in the tort litigation to maintain its subrogation rights. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Haile, 882 S.W.2d 681, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1994 ).

Since under this section one who holds subrogation rights can preserve those rights only by acting affirmatively to announce his intention to be compensated by intervening in the action, where insurer was not notified by insured of suit against third party for damage caused to apartment by fire, but who had knowledge of such suit and did not intervene, insurer’s motion to intervene filed after entry of judgment was clearly filed out of time and trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. McCormack Baron & Assocs. v. Trudeaux, 885 S.W.2d 708, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

A plain reading of KRS 411.188 suggests that the statute is not directed specifically to regulation of insurance. Thus, it will not be “saved” from preemption under 29 USCS § 1144(b)(2)(A). Humana Health Plans, Inc. v. Powell, 603 F. Supp. 2d 956, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14586 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

10.Expert Witness.

This section does not elevate a claims adjuster to a medical expert; therefore, defendant was not entitled to question compensation insurance carrier’s claims representative as to whether plaintiff should have been entitled to further temporary total disability benefits. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Haile, 882 S.W.2d 681, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1994 ).

11.Enforcement of Subrogation Rights.

Under this section an insurance carrier cannot pay its insured and rely upon its subrogation agreement as its method of enforcing its contractual subrogation rights but must intervene in the action after receiving from its insured notice of suit and advice that failure to intervene in the action would result in a loss of subrogation rights. McCormack Baron & Assocs. v. Trudeaux, 885 S.W.2d 708, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994).

12.Preservation of Error.

Under this section a motion in limine to exclude evidence of collateral source payments, resolved by order of record is sufficient to preserve error for appellate review. O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1995 ).

Once a motion in limine to exclude evidence of collateral source payments under this section has been overruled, a party may go forward with adverse evidence to avoid the appearance of concealment and still preserve error for appellate review: that to construe a motion in limine as waived by the plaintiff’s would defeat the purpose of the rule and destroy the value of having it. O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1995 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Durant, Medical Benefits Subrogation and Personal Injury Tort Recovery Conflicting Claims: Prescriptions For Relief, Vol. 58, No. 1, Winter 1994, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

Terry and Edens, Workers’ Compensation Procedural Changes — An ALJ Perspective, Vol. 58, No. 4, Fall 1994, Ky. Bench & Bar 12.

Jones, A Defense Perspective of the Kentucky Workers’ Compensation Reform Legislation (House Bill 928), Vol. 58, No. 4, Fall 1994, Ky. Bench & Bar 20.

Eades, Some Thoughts About “Tort Reform.”, Vol. 70, No. 6, November 2006, Ky. Bench & Bar 9.

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Comment, A Survey of Kentucky Tort Reform, 17 N. Ky. L. Rev. 473 (1990).

Notes, Restoration of the Collateral Source Rule in Kentucky: A Review of O’Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 23 N. Ky. L. Rev. 357 (1996).

2012 Kentucky Survey Issue: Article: Determining Who Gets the Windfall: Recent Developments of the Collateral Source Rule in Kentucky, 39 N. Ky. L. Rev. 63 (2012).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Assault With a Firearm, Form 120.01.

411.190. Obligations of owner to persons using land for recreation.

  1. As used in this section:
    1. “Land” means land, roads, water, watercourses, private ways and buildings, structures, and machinery or equipment when attached to the realty;
    2. “Owner” means the possessor of a fee, reversionary, or easement interest, a tenant, lessee, occupant, or person in control of the premises;
    3. “Recreational purpose” includes, but is not limited to, any of the following, or any combination thereof: hunting, fishing, swimming, boating, camping, picnicking, hiking, bicycling, horseback riding, pleasure driving, nature study, water-skiing, winter sports, and viewing or enjoying historical, archaeological, scenic, or scientific sites; and
    4. “Charge” means the admission price or fee asked in return for invitation or permission to enter or go upon the land but does not include fees for general use permits issued by a government agency for access to public lands if the permits are valid for a period of not less than thirty (30) days.
  2. The purpose of this section is to encourage owners of land to make land and water areas available to the public for recreational purposes by limiting their liability toward persons entering thereon for such purposes.
  3. Except as specifically recognized by or provided in subsection (6) of this section, an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational purposes, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity on the premises to persons entering for such purposes.
  4. Except as specifically recognized by or provided in subsection (6) of this section, an owner of land who either directly or indirectly invites or permits without charge any person to use the property for recreation purposes does not thereby:
    1. Extend any assurance that the premises are safe for any purpose;
    2. Confer upon the person the legal status of an invitee or licensee to whom a duty of care is owed; or
    3. Assume responsibility for or incur liability for any injury to person or property caused by an act or omission of those persons.
  5. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, the provisions of subsections (3) and (4) of this section shall be deemed applicable to the duties and liability of an owner of land leased to the state or any subdivision thereof for recreational purposes.
  6. Nothing in this section limits in any way any liability which otherwise exists:
    1. For willful or malicious failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity; or
    2. For injury suffered in any case where the owner of land charges the person or persons who enter or go on the land for the recreational use thereof, except that in the case of land leased to the state or a subdivision thereof, any consideration received by the owner for the lease shall not be deemed a charge within the meaning of this section.
  7. Nothing in this section shall be construed to:
    1. Create a duty of care or ground of liability for injury to persons or property;
    2. Relieve any person using the land of another for recreational purposes from any obligation which he may have in the absence of this section to exercise care in his use of the land and in his activities thereon, or from the legal consequences of failure to employ such care; or
    3. Ripen into a claim for adverse possession, absent a claim of title or legal right.
  8. No action for the recovery of real property, including establishment of prescriptive easement, right-of-way, or adverse possession, may be brought by any person whose claim is based on use solely for recreational purposes.

History. Enact. Acts 1966, ch. 252, §§ 1 to 7; 1998, ch. 275, § 12, effective July 15, 1998; 2000, ch. 338, § 12, effective July 14, 2000; 2002, ch. 306, § 2, effective July 15, 2002.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.In General.

This section provides that an owner of land, who makes it available to the public for recreational purposes without payment of fees is under no general duty, and a person entering upon the premises takes the land as he or she finds it to be. Page v. Louisville, 722 S.W.2d 60, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1501 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

A party is not protected under this section when the party neither prevents nor affirmatively invites a person to enter the land in question. Coursey v. Westvaco Corp., 790 S.W.2d 229, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1990 ).

Regulations pertaining to swimming and bathing facilities, 902 KAR 10:120, did not create liability on the part of a city for injuries sustained when the plaintiff jumped into a creek in a city park and injured his heel and foot, since the creek had not been modified for the purpose of public swimming or bathing. City of Louisville v. Silcox, 977 S.W.2d 254, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

2.Constitutionality.

In encouraging dedication of land for recreational use by land owners, this section creates a class of users which, by such dedication, loses its label as trespassers, but does not acquire the label of invitees; this is a reasonable classification and there is no violation of Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54, or any other pertinent section of the Kentucky Constitution. Sublett v. United States, 688 S.W.2d 328, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 215 ( Ky. 1985 ).

Kentucky’s Recreational Use Statute was constitutional because it did not violate the jural rights doctrine. Poore v. 21st Century Parks, Inc., 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 88 (Ky. Ct. App. July 31, 2020).

3.Purpose.

The traditional purpose behind this section is to encourage landowners, through legislative immunity from acts of ordinary negligence, to open their lands to the public, thereby relieving states of having to acquire land for recreational use by their citizens. Midwestern, Inc. v. Northern Kentucky Community Center, 736 S.W.2d 348, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

The Recreational Use Statute was adopted to encourage owners of land and water areas to make their property available for recreational use, by limiting their liability for injuries, which might be suffered by those coming upon the property. Collins v. Rocky Knob Assocs., 911 S.W.2d 608, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

4.Limitation of Liability.

The United States was the owner of land under the control of the Army Corps of Engineers, and as the land was available to the public to use without fees for recreation, its liability was limited by this section. Sublett v. United States, 688 S.W.2d 328, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 215 ( Ky. 1985 ).

There was no liability on the part of the parks and recreation board, a joint city-county agency, where there was no contention of willful or malicious behavior. Page v. Louisville, 722 S.W.2d 60, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1501 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

Although the injured plaintiff may have been subject to an admission charge at other times and had paid such charges before the date of his accident, it was undisputed that, on the day in question, he was not charged nor did he pay a fee for admission into the center’s pool; therefore, as the element of payment of an admission fee was missing, and there were no allegations of conduct rising to the level of willful negligence, the city and center were entitled to the immunity granted by this section and the plaintiff’s claim against them failed. Midwestern, Inc. v. Northern Kentucky Community Center, 736 S.W.2d 348, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

Even if owner of marina was negligent, where such negligence did not rise to the level of willful or malicious indifference to the rights of the drowned swimmers, the owner of marina was entitled to judgment as a matter of law under the Recreational Use Statute. Collins v. Rocky Knob Assocs., 911 S.W.2d 608, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

In a negligence action in which an invitee alleged that he was injured when he fell from a swing on a school playground after school hours, the school principals and two employees were protected from liability under KRS 411.190 because the invitee did not contend that the injury resulted out of a willful or malicious failure to guard or warn, and because he did not challenge the free public recreational use of the land. Both principals had a duty to supervise school personnel, including the two employees who were charged with maintenance of the schools’ grounds, and, to the extent that those obligations gave rise to a duty that would subject the principals and the employees to liability for failure to maintain the property or warn of dangerous conditions, their liability was limited by § 411.190 (3)-(4). Roach v. Hedges, 419 S.W.3d 46, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Trial court did not err by granting the mall summary judgment in the mall walker's premises liability action where the mall could raise a defense under this section, as the mall knew about and condoned mall walking on its property before the stores opened, the mall walker was walking during a non-business hour at the time of her fall and was not window shopping, mall walking was a recreational purpose as it was a form exercise similar to swimming and hiking and nothing in the statute indicated that the legislature intended to limit recreational purposes to outdoor activities, and the mall's interior constituted land under this section. Bryant v. Jefferson Mall Co., L.P., 486 S.W.3d 310, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 192 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015).

City and a softball league were immune from liability under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.190 where both the city and the league fell under the Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.190 (1)(b) definition of owner, and because the list codified in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.190(1)(c) was not limited to the enumerated activities, but was broad enough to include activities conducted by organized team sports, the league’s activities fell under the statutory definition of recreational purpose. Draper v. Trace Creek Girls' Softball, Inc., 571 S.W.3d 103, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 302 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

Government employees were not liable when a child fell from bleachers in a park located on property owned by a county urban government and open to the public without charge for recreational use because the employees owed no duty of care to keep the premises safe for the child’s use or to give any warning of any dangerous condition of a building or structure on the land, including the bleachers. Johnson v. Bond, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 38 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2019 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 632 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2019).

Although the surviving spouse alleged that a landowner, which owned and operated a park, failed to train its employees to handle medical emergencies and to develop and implement a safety plan for a state-controlled waterway, the landowner and its employees were entitled to summary judgment because the decedent used the owner’s park for free to access the waterway for kayaking and died outside of the park on private property. Furthermore, the conduct of the owner and its employees was not willful or malicious. Poore v. 21st Century Parks, Inc., 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 88 (Ky. Ct. App. July 31, 2020).

5.Owner.

Despite the fact that the contract between the city and the community center purported to be a lease, it was clear from the language of the contract itself and the monetary arrangement between the city and the center that the document was essentially an employment contract pursuant to which the center was paid to manage and oversee the day-to-day operation of the facility; therefor, with regard to the question of ownership of the property, the city and center fell squarely within the provision of subdivision (1)(b) of this section, defining an owner as “a possessor of a fee interest” or one “in control of the premises.” Midwestern, Inc. v. Northern Kentucky Community Center, 736 S.W.2d 348, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

By adopting a broad definition of “owner” and including the provision “in control of the premises” in KRS 411.190(1)(b), the legislature intended to eliminate negligence liability, under the circumstances set forth in the statute, by removing the duty of care from individuals who have sufficient control to render them liable absent the statute’s application. Roach v. Hedges, 419 S.W.3d 46, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

6.Payment of Charge.

The payment of a “charge” for permission to enter upon land for recreational use, including swimming (and, logically, diving), is the one element necessary to defeat the blanket immunity granted by this section. Midwestern, Inc. v. Northern Kentucky Community Center, 736 S.W.2d 348, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 506 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

A $2.00 fee charged to park at a city park did not constitute a fee to enter upon the land and use the park for recreational purposes where pedestrians and bicyclists could use the same entrance for no fee, there were other entrances into the park where no fee was charged, and there were other parking areas in the park which could be used for no charge. City of Louisville v. Silcox, 977 S.W.2d 254, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Fee plaintiff paid to the league was not a charge under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.190(1)(d) as it was not paid for permission to enter the land, but was paid to the league to cover the cost of providing umpires, equipment, and softball-related expenses the league incurred in organizing the games, and the league had not paid the city a fee for the use of the softball fields. Draper v. Trace Creek Girls' Softball, Inc., 571 S.W.3d 103, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 302 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

7.Attractive Nuisance Doctrine.

This section precludes application of the attractive nuisance doctrine. Coursey v. Westvaco Corp., 790 S.W.2d 229, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1990 ).

8.Sufficiency of Public Use.

A landowner must show he knew and condoned the public making recreational use of his property, and by the landowner’s words, actions or lack of action it must be able to be reasonably inferred that the landowner intended to permit such use. Coursey v. Westvaco Corp., 790 S.W.2d 229, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1990 ).

A party is not required to dedicate the property in question for a public recreational purpose in order to be protected by this section. Coursey v. Westvaco Corp., 790 S.W.2d 229, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1990 ).

Where plaintiff sought a prescriptive easement over a roadway on property owners’ land which had been used for decades by hunters and fishermen to access a creek, pursuant to KRS 446.080(3), an amendment to KRS 411.190 that banned the creation of a prescriptive easement for recreational activities could not be applied retroactively, since the amendment did not state that it could be given retroactive effect, and doing so would affect the parties’ substantive rights with respect to prior events. Allen v. Thomas, 209 S.W.3d 475, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

9.Willful or Malicious.

The terms “willful or malicious” as used in subsection (6) of this section do not necessarily and solely entail an intention to do wrong and inflict an injury; therefore, liability will not be limited by this section if an owner of land acts with indifference to the natural consequences of its actions or evidences an entire want of care or great indifference to the safety of others. Huddleston v. Hughes, 843 S.W.2d 901, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 236 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

This section specifically provides that a person using the land of another for recreational purposes is not relieved from his obligation to exercise care as otherwise required by law, and the failure of owner of marina to guard or warn against a dangerous condition could not be said to be “willful or malicious.” Collins v. Rocky Knob Assocs., 911 S.W.2d 608, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

The defendant city did not act willfully or maliciously and, therefore, the plaintiff could not recover for injuries sustained when he jumped into a creek in a city park and sustained an injury to his heel and foot; the city did not create the creek or introduce any object into the creek which could have caused the injury. City of Louisville v. Silcox, 977 S.W.2d 254, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

10.—Failure to Guard or Warn.

Where the evidence was uncontradicted that a basketball goal had fallen on a number of occasions, yet each time it was set upright with no additional security in place to prevent a recurrence, where it was conceded that children playing basketball on the school parking lot often attempted to “slam-dunk” basketballs by removing the counter-weights balancing the free-standing goals, or by otherwise tilting the goals forward, and where there was no evidence that a warning was posted regarding the hazards connected with the goals on the day the minor was injured, or that a warning had ever been posted, a question of material fact was presented regarding whether the school willfully or maliciously failed to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity under subdivision (6)(a) of this section. Huddleston v. Hughes, 843 S.W.2d 901, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 236 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

Government employees were not liable when a child fell from bleachers in a park located on property owned by a county urban government and open to the public without charge for recreational use because the employees owed no duty of care to keep the premises safe for the child’s use or to give any warning of any dangerous condition of a building or structure on the land, including the bleachers. The employees did not act willfully and maliciously as the danger to the child playing on the bleachers was obvious and not a trap set by the employees. Johnson v. Bond, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 38 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2019 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 632 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2019).

11.Waiver of Liability.

Because deceased, who died while exploring defendants’ cave, was not on equal footing with the defendants, was unaware of the dangers inside the cave and relied entirely on his tour guide and because no public interests are served by encouraging commercial caving by validating such releases and the cave tour did not qualify as a recreational activity, waiver signed by deceased did not release defendants from liability and defendants’ motion for summary judgment was denied. Coughlin v. T.M.H. Int'l Attractions, 895 F. Supp. 159, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12499 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

Owner of marina did not waive the protection of this section when owner agreed to lease terms which required him to maintain liability insurance on the premises, as owner fell within the protective ambit of the Recreational Use Statute. Collins v. Rocky Knob Assocs., 911 S.W.2d 608, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

12.Adverse Possession.

Petitioners were not entitled to adverse possession because KRS 411.190 applied retroactively, and even if their timber sale, as a non-recreational use, lay outside the scope of the statute, it would nonetheless apply to petitioners’ solely-recreational-use claim prior to 1999 and thus left them with a claim that fell far short of the requirement that the adverse possession continue for fifteen years. Moore v. Stills, 307 S.W.3d 71, 2010 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 2010 ).

Evidence demonstrated that a disputed parcel of property had been enclosed by a fence since at least the 1940s. This fenced enclosure amounted to actual possession for purposes of a claim of adverse possession, not the sporadic recreational use of the property. Vick v. Elliot, 422 S.W.3d 277, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 78 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Cited:

Shortridge v. Rice, 929 S.W.2d 194, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Waldrop, Torts, 74 Ky. L.J. 469 (1985-86).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

Elder, 2001: An End of Millennium Odyssey Through Tort Liability of Occupiers and Owners of Land, 28 N. Ky. L. Rev. 352 (2001).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Premises Liability, § 131.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Visibility of Condition and Other Defenses, Form 131.11.

411.195. Enforceability of written agreement to pay attorney fees in event of default.

Any provisions in a writing which create a debt, or create a lien on real property, requiring the debtor, obligor, lienor or mortgagor to pay reasonable attorney fees incurred by the creditor, obligee or lienholder in the event of default, shall be enforceable, provided, however, such fees shall only be allowed to the extent actually paid or agreed to be paid, and shall not be allowed to a salaried employee of such creditor, obligor or lienholder.

History. Enact. Acts 1980, ch. 169, § 1, effective July 15, 1980; repealed and reenact., Acts 1984, ch. 111, § 164, effective July 13, 1984.

Compiler’s Notes.

This section was formerly compiled as KRS 453.250 but was repealed and reenacted as this section by Acts 1984, ch. 111, § 164, effective July 13, 1984.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

While this section provides for the enforcement of agreements to pay attorney fees contained in an instrument that creates a debt, it applies only to those who are parties to the writing, it does not obligate persons like alternative payees of certificates of deposit who are not a party to the debt instrument. Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Brazell, 902 S.W.2d 830, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 27 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

2.Construction.

This section opens all loans to the allowance of attorney fees, limiting them only to reasonableness as determined by the trial court. The fact the loans are executed before the effective date of this section is not a bar to its enforcement as of the date of judgment. Duff v. Bank of Louisville & Trust Co., 705 S.W.2d 920, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1986 ).

3.Conversion Action.

Attorney’s fees incurred by a secured creditor in a conversion action for collateral against the transferee of the original creditor are not recoverable. Ranier v. Gilford, 688 S.W.2d 753, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

4.Parties to Agreement.

Where there was no written agreement among the bank, the insurer, and the guarantor to pay attorney’s fees, and the guarantor had agreed to pay attorney’s fees in the event of default, but the insurer was not a party to that agreement, the bank was not entitled to attorney’s fees from the insurer in the action upon the insurance contract. Investors Heritage Life Ins. Co. v. Farmers Bank, 749 S.W.2d 688, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 615 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

Homeowners association was not entitled to attorney fees in dispute over whether owners’ property was subject to restrictive covenants because, although the covenants provided for attorney fees for cost of collection of assessments, KRS 411.195 only applied to the original parties to the contract. Triple Crown Subdivision Homeowners Ass'n v. Oberst, 279 S.W.3d 138, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 287 ( Ky. 2008 ).

5.Collection and Foreclosure Actions.

Attorney’s fee may be recovered in collection and foreclosure actions, even when the agreement allowing for such fee was executed prior to its enforceability. Kane v. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 668 S.W.2d 564, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 462 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984) (decided under prior law).

6.Sureties.

Where the only provision for an attorney’s fee was contained in the security agreement executed by debtor and related only to a situation where the bank took legal action against the collateral, and where sureties were not liable under the security agreement as individuals and neither the note nor the guaranty agreement signed by sureties made any mention of an attorney’s fee, the trial court did not err as a matter of law or abuse its discretion in denying the bank an award of an attorney’s fee in this case in its action against sureties. Kane v. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 668 S.W.2d 564, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 462 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Action on Open Book Account for Goods Sold and Delivered, Agreement to Pay Attorney Fees, Form 212.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Default on Promissory Note and Attorney Fees, Form 210.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Enforce Mortgage Lien Due to Default on Payment, Form 301.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Enforce Mortgage Lien Under Due-on-Sale Clause, Form 301.02.

411.200. Immunity from civil liability of officer, director or trustee of nonprofit organization.

Any person who serves as a director, officer, volunteer or trustee of a nonprofit organization qualified as a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as from time to time amended, and who is not compensated for such services on a salary or prorated equivalent basis, shall be immune from civil liability for any act or omission resulting in damage or injury occurring on or after July 15, 1988, if such person was acting in good faith and within the scope of his official functions and duties, unless such damage or injury was caused by the willful or wanton misconduct of such person.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 2, § 1, effective July 15, 1988.

Opinions of Attorney General.

This section is unconstitutional and in violation of §§ 14, 54, and 241 of the Kentucky Constitution to the extent that it attempts to immunize from civil liability any act or omission resulting in damage or injury caused by a person who serves as a director, officer, volunteer or a trustee of a nonprofit organization. OAG 91-89 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Lawyers Serving as Directors of Kentucky Nonprofit Corporations: Special Considerations, Vol. 69, No. 5, Sept. 2005, Ky. Bench & Bar 21.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Stipanowich, The Quiet Revolution Comes to Kentucky: A Case Study in Community Mediation, 81 Ky. L.J. 855 (1992-93).

411.210. Action for theft of identity or trafficking in stolen identities — Statute of limitations.

  1. In addition to pursuing any other remedy, anyone who is a victim under KRS 434.872 , 434.874 , 514.160 , or 514.170 , shall have a cause of action, either where the victim resides or the defendant resides, for compensatory and punitive damages against anyone who violates KRS 434.872 , 434.874 , 514.160 , or 514.170 and, if successful, shall be awarded reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees.
  2. The statute of limitations for cases under the provisions of this section shall be five (5) years from the date of the discovery of the violation of KRS 434.872 , 434.874 , 514.160 , or 514.170 .

History. Enact. Acts 2000, ch. 174, § 3, effective July 14, 2000; 2002, ch. 175, § 3, effective July 15, 2002.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Expert Testimony.

It was error to summarily dismiss a patient’s statutory emotional damage claim for lack of expert testimony because the expert testimony requirement only applied to the patient’s intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims. Crook v. Maguire, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 133 (Ky. Ct. App. May 11, 2018), aff'd, 605 S.W.3d 343, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 272 ( Ky. 2020 ).

411.215. Action for failure to remove sexually explicit image from Web site, online service or application, or mobile application upon request — Damages — Statute of limitations.

  1. A civil action may be maintained under this section against any person who, in violation of KRS 531.120(3), does not remove a sexually explicit image upon the request of the person depicted in the image.
  2. A civil action may be maintained under this section whether or not the individual who is alleged to have violated KRS 531.120 (3) has been charged or convicted under KRS 531.120 . Liability under this section shall include damages of one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each sexually explicit image for each day the image remains on the Web site after receipt of the request.
  3. An action under this section shall be brought within two (2) years of the last act of conduct in violation of KRS 531.120(3).

HISTORY: 2018 ch. 50, § 3, effective July 14, 2018.

411.220. Action by crime stalking victim against stalker — Damages — Statute of limitations.

A civil action may be maintained under this section against any person who commits the conduct prohibited under KRS 508.140 or 508.150 . A civil action may be maintained under this section whether or not the individual who is alleged to have violated KRS 508.140 or 508.150 has been charged or convicted of the alleged crime. Liability under this section shall include the actual damages caused by the violation and may include punitive damages, court costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees. An action under this section shall be brought within two (2) years of the last act of conduct in violation of this section.

History. Enact. Acts 2000, ch. 400, § 2, effective July 14, 2000.

411.225. Employer immunity from civil liability for disclosure of employee information — Exceptions — Effect of provision.

  1. An employer who provides information about the job performance, professional conduct, or evaluation of a former or current employee to a prospective employer of that employee, at the request of that employee or prospective employer, shall be immune from civil liability arising out of the disclosure unless the plaintiff in the civil action proves:
    1. That the employer disclosed the information knowing that it was false, with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false, or with intent to mislead the prospective employer; or
    2. That the disclosure of the information by the employer constitutes an unlawful discriminatory practice under KRS Chapter 344.
  2. This section does not create a new cause of action or substantive legal right against an employer.
  3. This section does not limit an employer’s immunity from civil liability or defenses established in another section of the Kentucky Revised Statutes or available at common law.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 77, § 1, effective July 13, 2004.

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Kentucky Survey Issue: Article: Off-Duty Privacy: How Far Can Employers Go?, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 287 (2010).

411.230. Action for damages caused by tampering with operations of key infrastructure asset.

A civil action may be maintained under this section against any person that knowingly directs or causes a person to violate KRS 512.020(1)(b). Liability shall include actual damages to personal or real property caused by the offense and may include punitive damages and court costs.

HISTORY: 2020 ch. 12, § 3, effective July 15, 2020.

Donations of Apparently Wholesome Food or Apparently Fit Grocery Product

411.240. Definitions of KRS 411.240 to 411.243.

As used in Sections KRS 411.240 to 411.243 :

  1. “Apparently fit grocery product” means  a grocery product that meets all consumer safety standards imposed  by federal, state, and local laws and regulations even though the  product may not be readily marketable because of appearance, age,  date labeling, freshness, grade, size, surplus, or other conditions;
  2. “Apparently wholesome food” means food  that meets all consumer safety standards imposed by federal, state, and local laws and regulations even though the food may not be readily  marketable because of appearance, age, date labeling, freshness, grade,  size, surplus, or other conditions;
  3. “Donate” means to give without requiring  anything of monetary value from the recipient. The term donate includes giving by a nonprofit organization to another nonprofit organization,  even if the donor organization has charged a fee to the donee organization,  if the ultimate recipient or user is not required to give anything  of monetary value;
  4. “Food” means any raw, cooked,  processed, or prepared edible substance, ice, beverage, or ingredient  used or intended for use in whole or in part for human consumption;
  5. “Gleaner” means a person  who harvests an agriculture crop that has been donated by the owner  for:
    1. Free distribution to people; or
    2. Donation to a nonprofit organization  for ultimate distribution to people;
  6. “Grocery product” means  a nonfood grocery product, including but not limited to a disposable  paper or plastic product, household cleaning product, laundry detergent  cleaning product, or miscellaneous household item;
  7. “Intentional misconduct”  means conduct by a person with actual knowledge at the time of the  conduct that the conduct is harmful to the health and well-being of  another person;
  8. “Nonprofit organization”  means an incorporated or unincorporated entity that:
    1. Is operating for religious, charitable,  or educational purposes; and
    2. Does not provide net earnings to, or  operate in any manner that inures to the benefit of, any officer,  employee, or shareholder of the entity; and
  9. “Person” means an individual,  corporation, partnership, organization, association, or governmental  entity, including a retail grocer, wholesaler, hotel, motel, restaurant,  caterer, farmer, nonprofit food distributor, or hospital. In the case  of a corporation, partnership, organization, association, or governmental  entity, the term includes an officer, director, partner, deacon, trustee,  council member, or other elected or appointed individual responsible  for the governance of the entity.

History. 2017 ch. 19, § 1, effective June 29, 2017.

411.241. Immunity from liability for person, gleaner, or representative of nonprofit organization for donation of apparently wholesome food or apparently fit grocery product made in good faith to a nonprofit organization — Exception.

    1. A person, gleaner, or paid or unpaid representative  of a nonprofit organization shall not be subject to any civil or criminal  liability arising from the nature, age, packaging, or condition of  apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery product that  the person or gleaner donates in good faith to a nonprofit organization  for ultimate distribution to people, unless the acts constitute intentional  misconduct. (1) (a) A person, gleaner, or paid or unpaid representative  of a nonprofit organization shall not be subject to any civil or criminal  liability arising from the nature, age, packaging, or condition of  apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery product that  the person or gleaner donates in good faith to a nonprofit organization  for ultimate distribution to people, unless the acts constitute intentional  misconduct.
    2. The protection from liability created  by this subsection extends to an apparently wholesome food or apparently  fit grocery product bearing a past-date expiration date, sell-by date,  use-by date, or other date.
    1. A nonprofit organization or paid or unpaid  representative of a nonprofit organization shall not be subject to  any civil or criminal liability arising from the nature, age, packaging,  or condition of apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery  product that the nonprofit organization received as a donation in  good faith from a person or gleaner for ultimate distribution to people,  unless the acts constitute intentional misconduct. (2) (a) A nonprofit organization or paid or unpaid  representative of a nonprofit organization shall not be subject to  any civil or criminal liability arising from the nature, age, packaging,  or condition of apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery  product that the nonprofit organization received as a donation in  good faith from a person or gleaner for ultimate distribution to people,  unless the acts constitute intentional misconduct.
    2. The protection from liability created  by this subsection extends to an apparently wholesome food or apparently  fit grocery product bearing a past- due expiration date, sell-by date,  use-by date, or other date.
  1. A person who allows the collection or  gleaning of donations on property owned or occupied by the person,  by gleaners or by paid or unpaid representatives of a nonprofit organization  for ultimate distribution to people, shall not be subject to civil  or criminal liability that arises due to the injury or death of the  gleaner or representative unless the acts constitute intentional misconduct.

History. 2017 ch. 19, § 2, effective June 29, 2017.

411.242. Immunity from liability for person or gleaner donating food or grocery products not meeting governmental consumer safety standards — Conditions.

If some or all of any food or grocery products donated by a person or gleaner to a nonprofit organization do not meet consumer safety standards imposed by federal, state, and local laws and regulations, the person or the gleaner who donates the food or grocery products shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability in accordance with this section, if the nonprofit organization that receives the donated food or grocery products:

  1. Is informed by the donor of the distressed or defective  condition of the donated food or grocery product;
  2. Agrees to recondition the donated food or grocery product  to comply with consumer safety standards prior to distribution; and
  3. Is knowledgeable about the standards  to properly recondition the donated food or grocery product.

History. 2017 ch. 19, § 3, effective June 29, 2017.

411.243. Construction of KRS 411.240 to 411.243.

KRS 411.240 to 411.243 shall not be construed to create any liability for any person or entity. Nothing in KRS 411.240 to 411.243 shall be construed to supersede any federal or state regulations.

History. 2017 ch. 19, § 4, effective June 29, 2017.

Look Before You Lock Act

411.245. Immunity from liability for damaging a vehicle to remove a minor — Conditions — Limitations.

  1. A person who enters a vehicle, as defined in KRS 503.010 , for the purpose of removing a minor shall be immune from civil liability for any resulting damage to the vehicle if the person:
    1. Has a reasonable, good faith belief, based upon the circumstances known to the person at the time, that entry into the vehicle is necessary because the minor is in imminent danger of physical injury if not immediately removed from the vehicle;
    2. Has contacted local law enforcement, the local fire department, or a 911 emergency telephone service prior to entering the vehicle;
    3. Uses no more force to enter the vehicle and remove the minor than is reasonably necessary under the circumstances; and
      1. Remains with the minor in a safe location, out of the elements but reasonably close to the vehicle, until law enforcement, firefighters, or other emergency responders arrive; or (d) 1. Remains with the minor in a safe location, out of the elements but reasonably close to the vehicle, until law enforcement, firefighters, or other emergency responders arrive; or
      2. Reasonably determines that emergency conditions require leaving the scene with the minor, and places written notice on the vehicle containing:
        1. The person’s contact information;
        2. The reason entry into the vehicle was made;
        3. The minor’s location; and
        4. Notice that authorities have been contacted.
  2. This section does not limit a person’s immunity from civil liability or defenses established in another section of the Kentucky Revised Statutes or available at common law.

HISTORY: 2016 ch. 52, § 1, effective April 8, 2016.

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(4/8/2016). 2016 Ky. Acts ch. 52, sec. 2 provided that this statute shall be known and may be cited as the “Look Before You Lock Act.”

Construction Professionals’ Opportunity to Repair

411.250. Legislative intent.

The General Assembly finds that limited changes in the law are necessary and appropriate concerning actions claiming damages, indemnity, or contribution in connection with alleged residential construction defects. It is the intent of the General Assembly that KRS 411.250 to 411.266 apply to these types of civil actions while preserving adequate rights and remedies for homeowners who bring and maintain such actions.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 2, effective June 24, 2003.

411.252. Definitions for KRS 411.250 to 411.266.

As used in KRS 411.250 to 411.266 , unless the context otherwise requires:

  1. “Action” means any civil lawsuit or action in contract or tort for damages or indemnity brought against a construction professional to assert a claim, whether by complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim, for damage or the loss of use of real or personal property caused by a defect in the construction of a residence. “Action” does not include any civil action in tort alleging personal injury or wrongful death to a person or persons resulting from a construction defect;
  2. “Claimant” means a homeowner who asserts a claim against a construction professional concerning a defect in the construction of a residence;
  3. “Construction professional” means a builder;
  4. “Homeowner” means any person, company, firm, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity that contracts with a construction professional for the construction of a residence. “Homeowner” includes but is not limited to a subsequent purchaser of a residence from any homeowner;
  5. “Residence” means a single-family house, duplex, triplex, or quadraplex, or a unit in a multiunit residential structure in which title to each individual unit is transferred to the owner under a condominium regime as established in KRS 381.815 and shall include general common elements and limited common elements as defined in KRS 381.810 ; and
  6. “Serve” or “service” means personal service or delivery by certified mail to the last known address of the addressee.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 1, effective June 24, 2003.

411.254. Applicability of KRS 411.250 to 411.266.

KRS 411.250 to 411.266 shall:

  1. Apply to any claim that arises before, on, or after July 15, 2003, as the result of a construction defect, except a claim for personal injury or wrongful death, if the claim is the subject of an action commenced on or after July 15, 2003;
  2. Prevail over any conflicting law otherwise applicable to the claim or cause of action;
  3. Not bar or limit any claim or defense otherwise available except as otherwise provided in KRS 411.250 to 411.266 ; and
  4. Not create a new theory upon which liability may be based.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 3, effective June 24, 2003.

411.256. Circumstances under which construction professional is liable.

In a claim to recover damages resulting from a construction defect, a construction professional is liable for his or her acts or omissions or the acts or omissions of his or her agents, employees, or subcontractors and is not liable for any damages caused by:

  1. The acts or omissions of a person other than the construction professional or his or her agent, employee, or subcontractor;
  2. The failure of a person other than the construction professional or his or her agent, employee, or subcontractor to take reasonable action to reduce the damages or maintain the residence;
  3. Normal wear, tear, or deterioration;
  4. Normal shrinkage, swelling, expansion, or settlement; or
  5. Any construction defect disclosed to a claimant before his or her purchase of the residence, if the disclosure was provided in writing and in language that is understandable and was signed by the claimant.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 4, effective June 24, 2003.

411.258. Written notice of claim to be served on construction professional in construction defect action — Offer to remedy or settle — Acceptance or rejection of offer — Commencement of action — Notice of claim tolls statute of limitations.

  1. In every construction defect action brought against a construction professional, the claimant shall serve written notice of claim on the construction professional. The notice of claim shall state that the claimant asserts a construction defect claim against the construction professional and shall describe the claim in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the general nature of the defect.
  2. Within twenty-one (21) days after service of the notice of claim, the construction professional shall serve a written response on the claimant by registered mail or personal service. The written response shall:
    1. Propose to inspect the residence that is the subject of the claim and to complete the inspection within a specified time frame. The proposal shall include the statement that the construction professional shall, based on the inspection, offer to remedy the defect, compromise by payment, or dispute the claim;
    2. Offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment without inspection. A construction professional’s offer under this paragraph to compromise and settle a homeowner’s claim may include but is not limited to an express offer to purchase the claimant’s residence that is the subject of the claim, and to pay the claimant’s reasonable relocation costs; or
    3. State that the construction professional disputes the claim and will neither remedy the construction defect nor compromise and settle the claim.
    1. If the construction professional disputes the claim or does not respond to the claimant’s notice of claim within the time stated in subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant may bring an action against the construction professional for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice. (3) (a) If the construction professional disputes the claim or does not respond to the claimant’s notice of claim within the time stated in subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant may bring an action against the construction professional for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice.
    2. If the claimant rejects the inspection proposal or the settlement offer made by the construction professional pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant shall serve written notice of the claimant’s rejection on the construction professional. After service of the rejection, the claimant may bring an action against the construction professional for the construction defect claim described in the notice of claim. If the construction professional has not received from the claimant, within thirty (30) days after the claimant’s receipt of the construction professional’s response, either an acceptance or a rejection of the inspection proposal or settlement offer, then at any time thereafter the construction professional may terminate the proposal or offer by serving written notice to the claimant, and the claimant may thereafter bring an action against the construction professional for the construction defect claim described in the notice of claim.
    1. If the claimant elects to allow the construction professional to inspect in accordance with the construction professional’s proposal pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section, then the claimant shall provide the construction professional and its contractors or other agents reasonable access to the claimant’s residence during normal working hours to inspect the premises and the claimed defect. (4) (a) If the claimant elects to allow the construction professional to inspect in accordance with the construction professional’s proposal pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section, then the claimant shall provide the construction professional and its contractors or other agents reasonable access to the claimant’s residence during normal working hours to inspect the premises and the claimed defect.
    2. Within fourteen (14) days following completion of the inspection, the construction professional shall serve on the claimant:
      1. A written offer to remedy the construction defect at no cost to the claimant, including a report of the scope of the inspection, the findings and results of the inspection, a description of the additional construction necessary to remedy the defect described in the claim, and a timetable for the completion of this construction; or
      2. A written offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment pursuant to subsection (2)(b) of this section; or
      3. A written statement that the construction professional will not proceed further to remedy the defect.

        The claimant shall have the right to accept or reject the proposed construction defect correction, or the monetary offer to settle the claim.

    3. If the construction professional does not proceed further to remedy the construction defect within the agreed timetable, or if the construction professional fails to comply with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this subsection, then the claimant may bring an action against the construction professional for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice.
    4. If the claimant rejects the offer made by the construction professional pursuant to paragraph (b)1. or 2. of this subsection to either remedy the construction defect or to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment, then the claimant shall serve written notice of the claimant’s rejection on the construction professional. After service of the rejection notice, the claimant may bring an action against the construction professional for the construction defect claim described in the notice of claim. If the construction professional has not received from the claimant, within thirty (30) days after the claimant’s receipt of the construction professional’s response, either an acceptance or a rejection of the offer made pursuant to paragraph (b)1. or 2. of this subsection, then at any time thereafter the construction professional may terminate the offer by serving written notice to the claimant.
    1. Any claimant accepting the offer of a construction professional to remedy the construction defect pursuant to subsection (4)(b)1. of this section shall do so by serving the construction professional with a written notice of acceptance within a reasonable time period after receipt of the offer, and no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the offer. The claimant shall provide the construction professional and its contractors or other agents reasonable access to the claimant’s residence during normal working hours to perform and complete the construction by the timetable stated in the offer. (5) (a) Any claimant accepting the offer of a construction professional to remedy the construction defect pursuant to subsection (4)(b)1. of this section shall do so by serving the construction professional with a written notice of acceptance within a reasonable time period after receipt of the offer, and no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the offer. The claimant shall provide the construction professional and its contractors or other agents reasonable access to the claimant’s residence during normal working hours to perform and complete the construction by the timetable stated in the offer.
    2. The claimant and construction professional may, by written mutual agreement, alter the extent of construction or the timetable for completion of construction stated in the offer, including but not limited to repair of additional defects.
  3. If a claimant files a complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim prior to meeting the requirements of this section, then the court may issue an order holding the action in abeyance until the parties comply with this section.
  4. Nothing in this section may be construed to prevent a claimant from commencing an action on the construction defect claim described in the notice of claim if the construction professional fails to perform the construction agreed upon, fails to remedy the defect, or fails to perform by the timetable agreed upon pursuant to subsection (2)(a) or (5) of this section.
  5. The service of an amended notice of claim shall relate back to the original notice of claim for purposes of tolling statutes of limitations and repose.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 5, effective June 24, 2003.

411.260. Notice of construction professional’s right to offer to cure defects before commencement of litigation — Action not barred if homeowner is not given notice.

  1. The construction professional shall provide notice to each homeowner, upon entering into a contract for the construction of a residence, of the construction professional’s right to offer to cure construction defects before a homeowner may commence litigation against the construction professional. The notice shall be conspicuous and may be included as part of the underlying contract signed by the homeowner.
  2. The notice required by this section shall be in substantially the following form: “SECTIONS 411.250 TO 411.260 OF THE KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES CONTAIN IMPORTANT REQUIREMENTS YOU MUST FOLLOW BEFORE YOU MAY FILE A LAWSUIT FOR DEFECTIVE CONSTRUCTION AGAINST THE BUILDER OF YOUR HOME. YOU MUST DELIVER TO THE BUILDER A WRITTEN NOTICE OF ANY CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS YOU ALLEGE ARE DEFECTIVE AND PROVIDE YOUR BUILDER THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN OFFER TO REPAIR OR PAY FOR THE DEFECTS. YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO ACCEPT ANY OFFER MADE BY THE BUILDER. THERE ARE STRICT DEADLINES AND PROCEDURES UNDER STATE LAW, AND FAILURE TO FOLLOW THEM MAY AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO FILE A LAWSUIT.”
  3. KRS 411.250 to 411.266 shall not preclude or bar any action if notice is not given to the homeowner as required by this section.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 6, effective June 24, 2003.

411.262. Construction of KRS 411.250 to 411.266.

  1. Nothing in KRS 411.250 to 411.266 shall be construed to hinder or otherwise affect the employment, agency, or contractual relationship between and among homeowners and construction professionals during the process of construction and nothing in KRS 411.250 to 411.266 precludes the termination of those relationships as allowed under other law.
  2. Nothing in KRS 411.250 to 411.266 shall negate or otherwise restrict a construction professional’s right to access or inspection provided by law, covenant, easement, or contract.
  3. Noncompliance by the homeowner with KRS 411.258 shall not operate as an affirmative defense in an action against a construction professional by the homeowner or another construction professional for emergency repairs.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 7, effective June 24, 2003.

411.264. Effect of notice of claim on statute of limitations.

If a written notice of claim is served under KRS 411.258 , then the statute of limitation for the underlying action is tolled until seventy-five (75) days after the expiration of the time frame agreed to by the parties as permitted in KRS 411.258 (2), or the date established for inspection pursuant to KRS 411.258(2)(a), or the expiration of the time frame contained in KRS 411.258(4)(b), whichever occurs later.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 8, effective June 24, 2003.

411.266. Short title for KRS 411.250 to 411.266.

KRS 411.250 to 411.266 shall be known as the Notice and Opportunity to Repair Act.

History. Enact. Acts 2003, ch. 123, § 9, effective June 24, 2003.

Home Inspectors’ Opportunity to Cure

411.270. Definitions for KRS 411.270 to 411.282.

As used in KRS 411.270 to 411.282 , unless the context otherwise requires:

  1. “Action” means any civil lawsuit or action in contract or tort for damages or indemnity brought against a home inspector to assert a claim, whether by complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim, for damages or the loss of use of real or personal property caused by a deficient home inspection or home inspection report regarding the inspection of a home. “Action” does not include any civil action in tort alleging personal injury or wrongful death to a person or persons resulting from a deficient home inspection or home inspection report;
  2. “Claimant” means a client who asserts a claim against a home inspector concerning a deficient home inspection or home inspection report regarding the inspection of a home;
  3. “Home” means a structure consisting of at least one (1) but not more than four (4) units, each designed for occupancy by a single family, whether the units are occupied or unoccupied;
  4. “Home inspector” means a person licensed in accordance with KRS 198B.700 to 198B.738 ; and
  5. “Serve” or “service” means personal service or delivery by certified mail to the last known address of the addressee.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 21, effective July 13, 2004.

Legislative Research Commission Note.

(7/13/2004). Although 2004 Ky. Acts ch. 109, sec. 21, directed that this section be created as a new section of KRS Chapter 21, the statute has been codified in KRS Chapter 411 because it is clear from the subject matter of this statute, the structure of ch. 109, and the range created by ch. 109, secs. 21 to 27, that placement in KRS Chapter 411 was intended. See KRS 7.136(1)(a) and (h).

(7/13/2004). In 2004 Ky. Acts ch. 109, sec. 21, subsec. 4, “home inspector” is defined as “a person licensed in accordance with Sections 1 to 27 of this Act.” Because the home inspector licensure provisions in ch. 109 are confined to Sections 1 to 20, and Sections 21 to 27 set forth notice and opportunity to repair procedures that must be followed prior to bringing an action for damages against a home inspector, the reference to Sections 1 to 27 in subsection (4) has been changed by the Reviser of Statutes to the statutes at which Sections 1 to 20 are codified. See KRS 7.136(1)(a) and (h).

411.272. Scope of KRS 411.270 to 411.282.

KRS 411.270 to 411.282 shall:

  1. Apply to any claim that arises before, on, or after July 15, 2004, as the result of a deficient home inspection or home inspection report regarding the inspection of a home, except a claim for personal injury or wrongful death, if the claim is the subject of an action commenced on or after July 15, 2004;
  2. Prevail over any conflicting law otherwise applicable to the claim or cause of action;
  3. Not bar or limit any claim or defense otherwise available except as otherwise provided in KRS 411.270 to 411.282 ; and
  4. Not create a new theory upon which liability may be based.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 22, effective July 13, 2004.

411.274. Circumstances under which home inspector liable.

In a claim to recover damages resulting from a deficient home inspection or home inspection report regarding the inspection of a home, a home inspector is liable for his or her acts or omissions or the acts or omissions of his or her agents or employees and is not liable for any damages caused by:

  1. The acts or omissions of a person other than the home inspector or his or her agent or employee; or
  2. Any construction defect disclosed to a claimant before his or her purchase of the home, if the disclosure was provided in writing and in language that is understandable and was signed by the claimant.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 23, effective July 13, 2004.

411.276. Written notice of claim required — Offer to remedy or settle — Acceptance or rejection of offer — Tolling of statute of limitations.

  1. In every deficient home inspection or home inspection report action brought against a home inspector, the claimant shall serve written notice of claim on the home inspector. The notice of claim shall state that the claimant asserts a deficient home inspection or home inspection report claim against the home inspector and shall describe the claim in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the general nature of the deficiency.
  2. Within twenty-one (21) days after service of the notice of claim, the home inspector shall serve a written response on the claimant by registered mail or personal service. The written response shall:
    1. Propose to inspect the residence that is the subject of the claim and to complete the inspection within a specified time frame. The proposal shall include the statement that the home inspector shall, based on the inspection, offer to remedy the defect, compromise by payment, or dispute the claim;
    2. Offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment without inspection; or
    3. State that the home inspector disputes the claim.
    1. If the home inspector disputes the claim or does not respond to the claimant’s notice of claim within the time stated in subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant may bring an action against the home inspector for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice. (3) (a) If the home inspector disputes the claim or does not respond to the claimant’s notice of claim within the time stated in subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant may bring an action against the home inspector for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice.
    2. If the claimant rejects the inspection proposal or the settlement offer made by the home inspector pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, then the claimant shall serve written notice of the claimant’s rejection on the home inspector. After service of the rejection, the claimant may bring an action against the home inspector for the deficient home inspection or home inspection report claim described in the notice of claim. If the home inspector has not received from the claimant, within thirty (30) days after the claimant’s receipt of the home inspector’s response, either an acceptance or a rejection of the inspection proposal or settlement offer, then at any time thereafter the home inspector may terminate the proposal or offer by serving written notice to the claimant, and the claimant may thereafter bring an action against the home inspector for the deficient home inspection or home inspection report claim described in the notice of claim.
    1. If the claimant elects to allow the home inspector to inspect in accordance with the home inspector’s proposal pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section, then the claimant shall provide the home inspector reasonable access to the claimant’s home during normal working hours to inspect the premises. (4) (a) If the claimant elects to allow the home inspector to inspect in accordance with the home inspector’s proposal pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section, then the claimant shall provide the home inspector reasonable access to the claimant’s home during normal working hours to inspect the premises.
    2. Within fourteen (14) days following completion of the inspection, the home inspector shall serve on the claimant:
      1. A written offer to remedy the defect at no cost to the claimant, including a report of the scope of the inspection, the findings and results of the inspection, a description of the remedy necessary to cure the defect described in the claim, and a timetable for the completion of this remedy;
      2. A written offer to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment pursuant to subsection (2)(b) of this section; or
      3. A written statement that the home inspector will not proceed further to remedy the defect.

        The claimant shall have the right to accept or reject the proposed remedy, or the monetary offer to settle the claim.

    3. If the home inspector does not proceed further to remedy the defect within the agreed timetable, or if the home inspector fails to comply with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this subsection, then the claimant may bring an action against the home inspector for the claim described in the notice of claim without further notice.
    4. If the claimant rejects the offer made by the home inspector pursuant to paragraph (b)1. or 2. of this subsection to either remedy the defect or to compromise and settle the claim by monetary payment, then the claimant shall serve written notice of the claimant’s rejection on the home inspector. After service of the rejection notice, the claimant may bring an action against the home inspector for the deficient home inspection or home inspection report claim described in the notice of claim. If the home inspector has not received from the claimant, within thirty (30) days after the claimant’s receipt of the home inspector’s response, either an acceptance or a rejection of the offer made pursuant to paragraph (b)1. or 2. of this subsection, then at any time thereafter the home inspector may terminate the offer by serving written notice to the claimant.
    1. Any claimant accepting the offer of a home inspector to remedy the defect pursuant to subsection (4)(b)1. of this section shall do so by serving the home inspector with a written notice of acceptance within a reasonable time period after receipt of the offer, and no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the offer. The claimant shall provide the home inspector reasonable access to the claimant’s home during normal working hours to perform and complete the remedy by the timetable stated in the offer. (5) (a) Any claimant accepting the offer of a home inspector to remedy the defect pursuant to subsection (4)(b)1. of this section shall do so by serving the home inspector with a written notice of acceptance within a reasonable time period after receipt of the offer, and no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the offer. The claimant shall provide the home inspector reasonable access to the claimant’s home during normal working hours to perform and complete the remedy by the timetable stated in the offer.
    2. The claimant and home inspector may, by written mutual agreement, alter the extent of remedy or the timetable, including but not limited to repair of additional defects.
  3. If a claimant files a complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim prior to meeting the requirements of this section, then the court may issue an order holding the action in abeyance until the parties comply with this section.
  4. Nothing in this section may be construed to prevent a claimant from commencing an action on the deficient home inspection or home inspection report claim described in the notice of claim if the home inspector fails to perform the remedy agreed upon or fails to perform by the timetable agreed upon pursuant to subsection (2)(a) or (5) of this section.
  5. The service of an amended notice of claim shall relate back to the original notice of claim for purposes of tolling statutes of limitations and repose.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 24, effective July 13, 2004.

411.278. Notice of home inspector’s right to cure before commencement of litigation — Action not barred if home inspector fails to give notice.

  1. The home inspector shall, upon entering into a contract for the inspection of a building or residence, provide notice to each client of the home inspector’s right to offer to cure a deficient home inspection or home inspection report before a client may commence litigation against the home inspector. The notice shall be conspicuous and may be included as part of the underlying contract signed by the client.
  2. The notice required by this section shall be in substantially the following form:

    “CHAPTER 411 OF THE KENTUCKY REVISED STATUTES CONTAINS IMPORTANT REQUIREMENTS YOU MUST FOLLOW BEFORE YOU MAY FILE A LAWSUIT FOR DEFECTIVE CONSTRUCTION AGAINST THE HOME INSPECTOR OF YOUR RESIDENCE. YOU MUST DELIVER TO YOUR HOME INSPECTOR A WRITTEN NOTICE OF ANY CONDITIONS YOU ALLEGE THAT YOUR HOME INSPECTOR FAILED TO INCLUDE IN THE HOME INSPECTION REPORT AND PROVIDE YOUR HOME INSPECTOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN OFFER TO REPAIR OR PAY FOR THE DEFECTS. YOU ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO ACCEPT ANY OFFER MADE BY THE HOME INSPECTOR. THERE ARE STRICT DEADLINES AND PROCEDURES UNDER STATE LAW, AND FAILURE TO FOLLOW THEM MAY AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO FILE A LAWSUIT.”

  3. KRS 411.270 to 411.282 shall not preclude or bar any action if notice is not given to the client as required by this section.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 25, effective July 13, 2004.

411.280. Construction of KRS 411.270 to 411.282.

  1. Nothing in KRS 411.270 to 411.282 shall be construed to hinder or otherwise affect the employment, agency, or contractual relationship between and among homeowners and home inspectors during the process of inspection, and nothing in KRS 411.270 to 411.282 precludes the termination of those relationships as allowed under other law.
  2. Noncompliance by the client with KRS 411.276 shall not operate as an affirmative defense in an action against a home inspector by the client for emergency repairs.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 26, effective July 13, 2004.

411.282. Effect of notice of claim on statute of limitations.

If a written notice of claim is served under KRS 411.276 , then the statute of limitation for the underlying action is tolled until seventy-five (75) days after the expiration of the time frame agreed to by the parties under KRS 411.276 (2), or the date established for inspection pursuant to KRS 411.276(2)(a), or the expiration of the time frame contained in KRS 411.276(4)(b), whichever occurs later.

History. Enact. Acts 2004, ch. 109, § 27, effective July 13, 2004.

Product Liability Act

411.300. Definitions.

  1. As used in KRS 411.310 to 411.340 , a “product liability action” shall include any action brought for or on account of personal injury, death or property damage caused by or resulting from the manufacture, construction, design, formulation, development of standards, preparation, processing, assembly, testing, listing, certifying, warning, instructing, marketing, advertising, packaging or labeling of any product.
  2. As used in KRS 411.310 to 411.340 , a “plaintiff” shall mean a person asserting a claim and, if said claim is asserted on behalf of an estate, “plaintiff” shall include plaintiff’s decedent.

History. Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 2, effective June 17, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Application.

Because transactions involving blood and blood components are considered services, as opposed to sales, they are outside the purview of this Commonwealth's Products Liability Act. McKee v. Miles Laboratories, Inc., 675 F. Supp. 1060, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12025 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), aff'd, 866 F.2d 219, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 722 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

The Product Liability Act (PLA) codifies the idea that a manufacturer is not liable when the injuries result from the mutilation or alteration of the chattel since such intervening conduct severs any causal connection between the product and the injury precludes any imposition of liability on a manufacturer in cases where the product has not been used in its original, unaltered and unmodified condition. Monsanto Co. v. Reed, 950 S.W.2d 811, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 1997 ).

If a claim is brought against a seller or manufacturer of a product which is alleged to have caused injury then the Product Liability Act (PLA) applies, regardless of whether the action is founded on strict liability in tort, negligence, or breach of warranty. Thus while each of these theories of recovery in products liability cases requires proof of different elements and has different implications the central purpose is the same: recovery of damages for injury for property damage caused by a product. Monsanto Co. v. Reed, 950 S.W.2d 811, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 1997 ).

The Product’s Liability Act (PLA) does not attempt to abolish a right of recovery, be it jural or otherwise, but merely codifies long established Kentucky law that a manufacturer, under whatever legal theory, is not liable for injuries following the alteration, destruction, or mutilation of its product, or by its misuse which was not reasonably foreseeable. Monsanto Co. v. Reed, 950 S.W.2d 811, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 1997 ).

The Product Liability Act was inapplicable to an insurer’s subrogation claim against a fire alarm company seeking damages arising from a house fire because the contract between the insureds and the fire alarm company was not for the sale of goods, but was for services; while the fire alarm company agreed to supply the alarm system, title to the control set remained with the fire alarm company. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. ADT Sec. Servs., 241 S.W.3d 335, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 284 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Product liability action within the meaning of KRS 411.300 (1), which was brought against manufacturers of generic versions of metoclopramide, was unsuccessful, in part because plaintiffs failed to convince the federal court that Kentucky state courts would adopt their vicarious-liability argument under the Kentucky Products Liability Act, KRS 411.300 to 411.340 . Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 657 F.3d 420, 2011 FED App. 0271P, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19393 (6th Cir. Ky. 2011 ), cert. denied, 566 U.S. 974, 132 S. Ct. 2103, 182 L. Ed. 2d 868, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 3319 (U.S. 2012).

2.Breach of Warranty.

This section applies to the same products liability actions covered by KRS 411.182(1); consequently, comparative fault applies to products liability actions based on breach of warranty. Morales v. American Honda Motor Co., 151 F.3d 500, 1998 FED App. 0230P, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 17447 (6th Cir. Ky. 1998 ).

3.Legislative Intent.

The undoubted intent of the Legislature in passing the Products Liability Act was to restrict liability; thus KRS 411.320(3) being clear and unambiguous, and its application according to its terms not yielding an absurd result, must be applied according to its plain meaning, and defendant’s motion for an instruction that contributory negligence is a complete bar in products liability action if supported by the evidence, must be granted. Anderson v. Black & Decker, Inc., 597 F. Supp. 1298, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21679 (E.D. Ky. 1984 ).

4.Strict Liability.

A blood product transaction as the rendition of a service bars plaintiff’s strict liability claims. McKee v. Cutter Laboratories, Inc., 866 F.2d 219, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 722 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

Cited in:

In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, Bryant Electric Co. v. Kiser, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (1983), cert. denied, Bryant Electric Co. v. Kiser, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (1983); Burke Enterprises, Inc. v. Mitchell, 700 S.W.2d 789, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 290 , 57 A.L.R.4th 1167 ( Ky. 1985 ); Reda Pump Co., Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ); Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ); Niehoff v. Surgidev Corp., 950 S.W.2d 816, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 70 ( Ky. 1997 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Application.

Unpublished decision: In a products liability action by an insurer and an operator against a manufacturer under KRS 411.300 et seq., the district court’s selection of a permissive adverse-inference jury instruction after the alleged defective product was destroyed was proper because the instruction was appropriate and adequate under the circumstances; no allegations of bad faith had been leveled against the insurer and operator, the manufacturer was not denied the ability to develop its defenses adequately, and the district court’s finding that the insurer and operator did not knowingly or purposefully cause the destruction was supported by the record and was not clearly erroneous. Arch Ins. Co. v. Broan-Nutone, LLC, 509 Fed. Appx. 453, 2012 FED App. 1307N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26464 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Hayden, An analysis of Selected Portions of the Restatement of Products Liability Law, see pages 10-15 of this article for an overview of existing Kentucky Law regarding products liability and court treatment of its provisions, Vol. 61, No. 4, Fall 1997, Ky. Bench & Bar 7.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Jenkins and Green, Torts, 69 Ky. L.J. 663 (1980-81).

Comments, Design for Challenge: The Kentucky Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property, 73 Ky. L.J. 1143 (1984-85).

Comments, The Liability of Cigarette Manufacturers for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act and Preemption of Strict Liability in Tort Against Cigarette Manufacturers, 76 Ky. L.J. 569 (1987-88).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Notes, Torts — Products Liability — Should Contract or Tort Provide the Cause of Action When a Plaintiff Seeks Recovery Only for Damage to the Defective Product Itself — C & S Fuel, Inc. v. Clark Equip. Co.,10 N. Ky. L. Rev. 489 (1983).

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Comments, Reda Pump, a Division of TRW, Inc. v. Finck: An Update on Kentucky Product Liability Law, 14 N. Ky. L. Rev. 395 (1988).

Note, The Seat Belt Defense in Kentucky: Wemyss v. Coleman, 15 N. Ky. L. Rev. 657 (1988).

Phillips, Crashworthiness in the Commonwealth: An Analysis of the Defectiveness of Tractors Without Rops, 23 N. Ky. Rev. 325 (1996).

Humfleet & Miller-Mitchell, A Survey of Kentucky Products Liability Law., 32 N. Ky. L. Rev. 617 (2005).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Products Liability, §§ 49.01-49.06.

411.310. Presumptions in product liability actions.

  1. In any product liability action, it shall be presumed, until rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence to the contrary, that the subject product was not defective if the injury, death or property damage occurred either more than five (5) years after the date of sale to the first consumer or more than eight (8) years after the date of manufacture.
  2. In any product liability action, it shall be presumed, until rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence to the contrary, that the product was not defective if the design, methods of manufacture, and testing conformed to the generally recognized and prevailing standards or the state of the art in existence at the time the design was prepared, and the product was manufactured.

History. Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 3, effective June 17, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.In General.

The presumption set forth in this section may be rebutted by evidence that the product was defective, even if the product conformed to prevailing industry standards or the current state of the art. Murphy by Murphy v. Montgomery Elevator Co., 957 S.W.2d 297, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 105 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

The purpose of subsection (2) is not to insulate an entire industry just because every member of the industry was manufacturing and distributing a product known to be dangerous; rather it is to protect a manufacturer from liability for failure to anticipate safety features which were unknown at the time the product in question was manufactured and distributed. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

District Court did not err when it did not provide a jury instruction setting forth the presumption embodied in KRS 411.310 ; once the plaintiff had offered proof of a defect, the presumption was no longer applicable. Clark v. Chrysler Corp., 310 F.3d 461, 2002 FED App. 0369P, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 22140 (6th Cir. Ky. 2002 ), vacated, 540 U.S. 801, 124 S. Ct. 102, 157 L. Ed. 2d 12, 2003 U.S. LEXIS 5438 (U.S. 2003).

Where the injured person suffered a ladder accident, the res ipsa loquitur doctrine created merely a permissible inference of negligence, and where the injured person offered no expert testimony to rebut the opinion of the manufacturer’s product safety engineer that the ladder met applicable safety standards, and had no defects, a directed verdict for the manufacturer was proper. Eversole v. Louisville Ladder Group, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 270 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 5, 2003).

Given that the presumption set forth at KRS 411.310(2) is only rebutted when plaintiffs show proof of a defect by a preponderance of the evidence, the presumption would appear to do nothing more than codify what the law has always been, and a plaintiff in a products liability action must still prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the product in question is defective. Estate of Bigham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 462 F. Supp. 2d 766, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83701 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

Where a plaintiff was struck and injured by an automatic revolving door and where she presented expert testimony that the sensors on the door were inadequate, that additional sensors were needed to detect the presence of people and stop the door from moving, and that the door’s lack of adequate and sufficient sensors caused it to strike plaintiff and cause her injuries, plaintiff successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of non-defectiveness. Boon Edam, Inc. v. Saunders, 324 S.W.3d 422, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 191 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

Seller involved in a small claims action against the buyer, who sued it when the generator that the buyer purchased from the seller soon caught fire, could not show that a presumption of the Kentucky Products Liability Act (Act), contained in KRS 411.310(2), applied. Since a small claims action was involved, that Act did not apply and, indeed, the simplified small claims procedure set forth in statutes such as KRS 24A.200 and KRS 24A.300(2) governed such actions. Northern Tool & Equip., Inc. v. Durbin, 392 S.W.3d 424, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 18 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

It was entirely consistent with Kentucky law to instruct the jury that the presumption of nondefectiveness in a products liability case could be overcome only by showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the product was defective. Smith v. Joy Techs., Inc., 828 F.3d 391, 2016 FED App. 0150P, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12051 (6th Cir. Ky. 2016 ).

2.Strict Liability.

Unless a plaintiff in a products liability action can present something more than a conclusion that, with regard to the product in question, it was theoretically probable that a different design would have been feasible and would have prevented his injury, the issue of strict liability should not be submitted to the jury. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Where a plaintiff was struck and injured by an automatic revolving door and filed a products liability suit against the door’s manufacturer, the trial court did not err under KRE. 702 in finding that plaintiff’s expert was qualified to testify as an expert witness because his testimony helped the jury understand the limitations of the sensors in place on the door at issue, the apparent need for additional sensors, and the cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Further, the expert’s extensive knowledge, education, training, and professional experience qualified him as an expert. Boon Edam, Inc. v. Saunders, 324 S.W.3d 422, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 191 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).

Manufacturer was entitled to summary judgment on the patient’s strict liability claim because at the time of the patient’s surgery, there existed no published literature specifically correlating chondrolysis to the prescription implantable medical device, and therefore the manufacturer did not have a duty to warn the patient of the risk of chrondrolysis from the use of the device. Prather v. Abbott Labs., 960 F. Supp. 2d 700, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47511 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

3.Statute of Repose.

This section, though enacted before the enactment of KRS 411.182 , which codified the comparative fault standard, does not contradict the principles underlying the comparative negligence doctrine, rather it acts as a statute of repose, limiting potential liability by limiting the time during which a cause of action can arise. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

4.Conformance to State of the Art.

Plaintiff in suit claiming that death was attributable to defective thermal unit did not have to prove that unit was state of the art when designed, merely that it was defective. Leslie v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero Prods., 961 S.W.2d 799, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Evidence that a manufacturer of asbestos products knew of the health risks associated therewith both before and during the time it placed them in the stream of commerce was sufficient to overcome its motion for a directed verdict on the issue of punitive damages asserting that the products conformed to the state of the art at the time. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Golightly, 976 S.W.2d 409, 1998 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 1998 ).

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.340 precluded a claim based on negligence against the hospital as there was no dispute that the manufacturer was subject to court jurisdiction or that device was sold to one appellant in its original condition. Cales v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. ¶9990, 2017 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 450 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2017).

In a products liability case involving the allegedly defective design of a vehicle’s occupant restraint system, the manufacturer was entitled under KRS 411.310(2) to a presumption that the occupant restraint system was not defective because the vehicle was compliant with federal safety standards. Estate of Bigham v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 462 F. Supp. 2d 766, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83701 (E.D. Ky. 2006 ).

Manufacturer was entitled to summary judgment on the patient’s claim that the prescription implantable medical device was negligently and defectively designed because it appeared that the manufacturer conformed to the state of the art when it manufactured the device as the medical knowledge in existence at the time did not indicate a risk of chondrolysis from the device. Prather v. Abbott Labs., 960 F. Supp. 2d 700, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47511 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

5.Safety Device.

Trial Court erred in granting summary judgment where question of fact remained as to whether thermal unit that allegedly burned patient and caused his death could have incorporated safety valves in existence at the time thermal unit was designed. Leslie v. Cincinnati Sub-Zero Prods., 961 S.W.2d 799, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 5 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Cited in:

Burke Enterprises, Inc. v. Mitchell, 700 S.W.2d 789, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 290 , 57 A.L.R.4th 1167 ( Ky. 1985 ); Reda Pump Co., Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ); Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ); Thornton v. Deere & Co., — F. Supp. 2d —, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15676 (W.D. Ky. 2001 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Hayden, An analysis of Selected Portions of the Restatement of Products Liability Law, see pages 10-15 of this article for an overview of existing Kentucky Law regarding products liability and court treatment of its provisions, Vol. 61, No. 4, Fall 1997, Ky. Bench & Bar 7.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Ashdown and Hoskins, Torts, 67 Ky. L.J. 695 (1978-1979).

Comments, The Liability of Cigarette Manufacturers for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act and Preemption of Strict Liability in Tort Against Cigarette Manufacturers, 76 Ky. L.J. 569 (1987-88).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Notes, Torts — Products Liability — Should Contract or Tort Provide the Cause of Action When a Plaintiff Seeks Recovery Only for Damage to the Defective Product Itself — C & S Fuel, Inc. v. Clark Equip. Co.,10 N. Ky. L. Rev. 489 (1983).

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Comments, Reda Pump, a Division of TRW, Inc. v. Finck: An Update on Kentucky Product Liability Law, 14 N. Ky. L. Rev. 395 (1988).

Phillips, Crashworthiness in the Commonwealth: An Analysis of the Defectiveness of Tractors Without Rops, 23 N. Ky. Rev. 325 (1996).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 137.15.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Products Liability, §§ 49.01-49.06.

411.320. Circumstances under which defendant is liable.

  1. In any product liability action, a manufacturer shall be liable only for the personal injury, death or property damage that would have occurred if the product had been used in its original, unaltered and unmodified condition. For the purpose of this section, product alteration or modification shall include failure to observe routine care and maintenance, but shall not include ordinary wear and tear. This section shall apply to alterations or modifications made by any person or entity, except those made in accordance with specifications or instructions furnished by the manufacturer.
  2. In any product liability action, if the plaintiff performed an unauthorized alteration or an unauthorized modification, and such alteration or modification was a substantial cause of the occurrence that caused injury or damage to the plaintiff, the defendant shall not be liable whether or not said defendant was at fault or the product was defective.
  3. In any product liability action, if the plaintiff failed to exercise ordinary care in the circumstances in his use of the product, and such failure was a substantial cause of the occurrence that caused injury or damage to the plaintiff, the defendant shall not be liable whether or not said defendant was at fault or the product was defective.

History. Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 4, effective June 17, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The Product Liability Act is designed to restrict and limit products liability actions; therefore, the common law concept of foreseeability does not apply to product liability actions. Hines v. Joy Mfg. Co., 850 F.2d 1146, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8914 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

2.Application.

Because transactions involving blood and blood components are considered services, as opposed to sales, they are outside the purview of this Commonwealth's Products Liability Act. McKee v. Miles Laboratories, Inc., 675 F. Supp. 1060, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12025 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), aff'd, 866 F.2d 219, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 722 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

KRS 411.182 , which adopts comparative negligence in products liability cases, overrules subsection (3) of this section. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Plaintiff suing under the Kentucky Product Liability Act could not present any evidence that design of ratchet strap was defective under theories of strict liability and negligence because his use of a ratchet strap intended to tie down items to a vehicle to instead hang a tree stand 21 feet in the air was not a foreseeably probable use or misuse. Hopper v. New Buffalo Corp., 664 Fed. Appx. 530, 2016 FED App. 0634N, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21527 (6th Cir. Ky. 2016 ).

3.Comparative Fault.

The finding that building owner was 20% at fault for a second roof collapse within one (1) month due to defective construction, was a proportionate bar, rather than a complete bar, to his right of recovery which accrued in 1977. Nucor Corp. v. General Electric Co., 812 S.W.2d 136, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 54 ( Ky. 1991 ).

Trial court in asbestosis case by victims against asbestos manufacturer properly allowed the jury to consider the victims’ past history of smoking and failure to wear a protective mask at work since the comparative fault statute does not limit the victims’ fault to the use of a product. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Parrish, 58 S.W.3d 467, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 2001 ).

4.Contributory Negligence.

The undoubted intent of the legislature in passing the Products Liability Act was to restrict liability; thus subsection (3) of this section being clear and unambiguous, and its application according to its terms not yielding an absurd result, must be applied according to its plain meaning, and defendant’s motion for an instruction that contributory negligence is a complete bar in products liability action if supported by the evidence, must be granted. Anderson v. Black & Decker, Inc., 597 F. Supp. 1298, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21679 (E.D. Ky. 1984 ).

Subsection (3) of this section, by its plain meaning, provides that contributory negligence of a claimant which is a substantial cause of the occurrence that caused injury or damage to him is an absolute bar to recovery of damages resulting from such injury, and this subsection is not unconstitutional. Reda Pump Co., Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ).

A plaintiff’s contributory negligence that is a substantial cause of the damage to him or her will absolutely bar the plaintiff from recovering damages under a theory of strict product liability. Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), rev'd, 856 F.2d 780, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12205 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

In a two-party products liability case, where the facts of the case raised a jury issue of whether or not the plaintiff was negligent, and whether such negligence was a substantial factor in causing his death (and perhaps would justify a directed verdict for the defendant), the court should have applied the principle of contributory negligence pursuant to this section and Reda Pump Co., Etc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ), rather than the principle of comparative negligence pursuant to KRS 411.182 . Koching v. International Armament Corp., 772 S.W.2d 634, 1989 Ky. LEXIS 60 ( Ky. 1989 ).

Establishing a prima facie case for racial discrimination in jury selection requires more than a mere stating that the prosecutor struck a number of blacks from the jury panel; the trial judge should consider all the relevant circumstances. Commonwealth v. Hardy, 775 S.W.2d 919, 1989 Ky. LEXIS 66 ( Ky. 1989 ).

Fisherman’s contributory negligence barred his estate’s recovery in a products liability action where the cause of action arose prior to the effective date of KRS 411.182 . Wyke v. Sea Nymph, Inc., 758 F. Supp. 418, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18467 (W.D. Ky. 1990 ).

5.Product Alteration or Modification.

Where reasonable minds could easily conclude from the evidence that defendant manufacturer’s shampoo caused plaintiff’s hair loss, whether or not the product was subsequently modified by a third person was a question of fact for the jury. Wheeler v. Andrew Jergens Co., 696 S.W.2d 326, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 658 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

The plaintiff failed to act in such a way as to contribute to the occurrence of the accident by altering the center bracket by applying repair welds, where, although there was testimony that the better course would have been to replace the center bracket, an expert testified that repair welding would be standard practice for an operation the size of the plaintiff’s, and the defendant did not warn against rewelding the center bracket. Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), rev'd, 856 F.2d 780, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12205 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

Where the court accepted the testimony of the expert witnesses tending to prove that the cause of the failure of the suspension system was insufficient penetration of the original weld on the center bracket, and that a fatigue crack began developing from the first day the trailer was on the road, the plaintiffs satisfied subsection (1) of this section by showing that damage would have occurred if the trailer and the suspension system were used in an unmodified condition. Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), rev'd, 856 F.2d 780, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12205 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

The modification of the product was not impliedly authorized by the manufacturer even though field representatives for the manufacturer were aware of the connection of the continuous miner produced by that manufacturer to the other manufacturer’s continuous haulage system, where there was no question that the manufacturer did not furnish specifications or instructions. Hines v. Joy Mfg. Co., 850 F.2d 1146, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8914 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

Subsection (1) of this section, which absolves manufacturers from liability in certain circumstances, does not require that a product’s alteration or modification be a “substantial cause” of the plaintiff’s injury; rather, it provides for a manufacturer’s liability only for the injury that would have occurred if the product was used in its original unaltered and unmodified condition. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Action by salvage workers for injuries resulting from worker’s coming into contact with PCBs contained in transformers were barred since the transformers were altered and modified during the salvage process at the salvage yard. Monsanto Co. v. Reed, 950 S.W.2d 811, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 1997 ).

A manufacturing company was not liable under the Kentucky Product Liability Act, KRS 411.300 et seq., for injuries resulting from the addition of a stitcher arm to a building machine as the machine was not being used in its original, unaltered, and unmodified condition. Stice v. Bando Chem. Indus., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39930 (W.D. Ky. June 12, 2006).

Because KRS 411.182 superseded KRS 411.320(1) and (2), the manufacturers were not entitled to a jury instruction on the alleged alteration of the miter saw that injured a consumer. Low v. Power Tool Specialist, Inc., 803 F. Supp. 2d 655, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29617 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

6.Substantial Cause of Occurrence.

While there was some indication that owner had altered the center bracket by applying repair welds, given the testimony of expert witness as to the cause of the failure of the suspension system, those repair welds were not a substantial cause of the accident, and the defendants could not avoid liability under subsection (2) of this section. Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), rev'd, 856 F.2d 780, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12205 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

7.Standard of Care.
8.—Unknowledgeable User of Product.

Where plaintiff was working his first day for an oil drilling company, and where he had been working for less than two (2) hours before his crew foreman asked him to ride a rotary head up to paint markers on a derrick, the jury should determine whether plaintiff exercised ordinary care for his own safety as would an ordinarily prudent oil rigger under like circumstances; thus, as plaintiff was an unknowledgeable user of the equipment in question, it cannot be said that he was necessarily negligent as a matter of law in riding on the rotary head. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Rice, 775 S.W.2d 924, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

9.Retroactive Application.

Although this section adopts comparative negligence for all torts, including product liability cases, it was not granted expressed retroactive application and therefore did not supersede this section in a cause of action which arose out of an automobile accident that occurred prior to July 15, 1988. Conley v. American Motors Corp., 769 S.W.2d 75, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

10.Military Equipment.
11.—Design Defect.

In products liability claim of design defect against manufacturers of Army helicopter, given the three (3) conditions under Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500, 108 S. Ct. 2510, 101 L. Ed. 2d 442, 1988 U.S. LEXIS 2880 (1988), for when liability for design defects in military equipment cannot be imposed pursuant to state law (1) the United States approved reasonably precise specifications; (2) the equipment conformed to those specifications; and (3) the supplier warned the United States about the dangers in the use of the equipment that were known to the supplier but not to the United States, the first condition was satisfied because there was a back and forth dialogue between contractor and government culminating in the Army’s approval of the helicopter hook’s design, the second condition was satisfied because the Army inspected and approved the helicopter that crashed, and the third condition was satisfied because the Army was made aware of all the dangers of which the contractors were aware by means of a hazard analysis report and manual. Tate v. Boeing Helicopters, 55 F.3d 1150, 1995 FED App. 0167P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 13503 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

12.— Failure to Warn.

In products liability claim against manufacturers of Army helicopter for failure to warn, although there was no determination by the lower court that Kentucky tort law imposed a duty to warn under the facts, upon remand, the factors which will determine when state law, which would otherwise impose liability for a failure to warn of dangers in using military equipment, is displaced and if the contractor can show: (1) the United States exercised its discretion and approved the warnings, if any; (2) the contractor provided warnings that conformed to the approved warnings; and (3) the contractor warned the United States of the dangers in the equipment’s use about which the contractor knew, but the United States did not. Tate v. Boeing Helicopters, 55 F.3d 1150, 1995 FED App. 0167P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 13503 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

13.Effect of KRS 411.182.

KRS 411.182 , enacted in 1988 and which codified the comparative fault standard, supersedes subsections (1) and (2) of this section, for a statute that forgives the liability of manufacturers is manifestly contradictory to the purpose of the comparative fault system. Smith v. Louis Berkman Co., 894 F. Supp. 1084, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12506 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ).

The comparative fault statute, KRS 411.182 which contains a provision to include products liability actions negates the products liability statute enunciated in subsection (1) of this section. Caterpillar, Inc. v. Brock, 915 S.W.2d 751, 1996 Ky. LEXIS 12 ( Ky. 1996 ).

14.Inconsistent Findings.

In products liability and negligence action brought against tire manufacturer, because proof of a defective product is essential to a products liability or negligence claim and the jury, by its answers to interrogatories, found no defective product for purposes of the strict liability claim, but did find that the product was defective for purposes of the negligence claim, such finding was legally inconsistent. Tipton v. Michelin Tire Co., 101 F.3d 1145, 1996 FED App. 0373P, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31167 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ).

15.Expert Testimony.

Although certified issue unequivocally pronouncing that KRS 411.182(1) repealed subsection (1) of this section meant that subsection (1) of this section did not provide bulldozer manufacturer a complete defense to product liability action, judgment in favor of plaintiff, injured when bulldozer he was operating lost braking power, was reversed because allowing expert testimony as to the comparison between bulldozers that were substantially different or marketed and sold at a considerably later time was error. Brock v. Caterpillar, Inc., 94 F.3d 220, 1996 FED App. 0277P, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 21912 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1166, 117 S. Ct. 1428, 137 L. Ed. 2d 537, 1997 U.S. LEXIS 2240 (U.S. 1997).

16.Foreseeability.

Manufacturer was entitled to summary judgment on a patient’s negligence claim because, after the circuit court excluded much of the testimony and publications of the patient’s expert witness, the patient was unable to identify any admissible evidence tending to show that the manufacturer knew or should have known that an ophthalmologist’s decision to use the manufacturer’s pharmaceutical product in a surgical procedure might have led to medical complications. Stiens v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc., 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 129 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 11, 2020).

Cited in:

Hilen v. Hays, 673 S.W.2d 713, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 261 ( Ky. 1984 ); Burke Enterprises, Inc. v. Mitchell, 700 S.W.2d 789, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 290 , 57 A.L.R.4th 1167 ( Ky. 1985 ); Wemyss v. Coleman, 729 S.W.2d 174, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 210 ( Ky. 1987 ); Hutt v. Gibson Fiber Glass Products, Inc., 914 F.2d 790, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 16421 (6th Cir. 1990); Morales v. American Honda Motor Co., 151 F.3d 500, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 17447 (6th Cir. 1998); Asher v. Unarco Material Handling, Inc., — F. Supp. 2d —, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76850 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Turley, The “New” Doctrine of Comparative Negligence in Kentucky, Volume 49, No. 1, January, 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 8.

Huelsmann, Kentucky Apportionment Law — The Past, the Present and the Future, Volume 52, No. 1, Winter 1987-88 Ky. Bench & B. 19.

Hayden, An analysis of Selected Portions of the Restatement of Products Liability Law, see pages 10-15 of this article for an overview of existing Kentucky Law regarding products liability and court treatment of its provisions, Vol. 61, No. 4, Fall 1997, Ky. Bench & Bar 7.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Ashdown and Hoskins, Torts, 67 Ky. L.J. 695 (1978-1979).

Kentucky Law Survey, Connelly, Torts, 68 Ky. L.J. 709 (1979-1980).

Kentucky Law Survey, Adams, Torts, 73 Ky. L.J. 481 (1984-85).

Comments, The Liability of Cigarette Manufacturers for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act and Preemption of Strict Liability in Tort Against Cigarette Manufacturers, 76 Ky. L.J. 569 (1987-88).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Notes, Torts — No Defense for The Manufacturer — The Supreme Court of Kentucky Restricts The Shifting Responsibility Defense In Strict Products Liability Cases — Montgomery Elevator Co. v. McCullough, 676 S.W.2d 776, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 267 , 45 A.L.R.4th 761 ( Ky. 1984 ).

Notes, After Hilen v. Hays — Kentucky’s New Comparative Negligence, 13 N. Ky. L. Rev. 129 (1986).

Comments, Reda Pump, a Division of TRW, Inc. v. Finck: An Update on Kentucky Product Liability Law, 14 N. Ky. L. Rev. 395 (1988).

Note, The Seat Belt Defense in Kentucky: Wemyss v. Coleman, 15 N. Ky. L. Rev. 657 (1988).

Comment, A Survey of Kentucky Tort Reform, 17 N. Ky. L. Rev. 473 (1990).

Phillips, Crashworthiness in the Commonwealth: An Analysis of the Defectiveness of Tractors Without Rops, 23 N. Ky. Rev. 325 (1996).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

Kentucky Instructions to Juries (Civil), 5th Ed., Products Liability, §§ 49.01-49.06.

411.330. Admissibility of certain evidence. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 5) was repealed by § 92 of Acts 1990, ch. 88 to contingently become effective as provided by § 93 of Acts 1990, ch. 88. However, § 93 of Acts 1990, ch. 88 was repealed by § 30 of Acts 1992, ch. 324, effective July 1, 1992. Therefore the repeal of this section by § 92 of Acts 1990, ch. 88 became effective July 1, 1992. For present law see Kentucky Rules of Evidence, Rule 407.

411.340. When wholesaler, distributor or retailer to be held liable.

In any product liability action, if the manufacturer is identified and subject to the jurisdiction of the court, a wholesaler, distributor, or retailer who distributes or sells a product, upon his showing by a preponderance of the evidence that said product was sold by him in its original manufactured condition or package, or in the same condition such product was in when received by said wholesaler, distributor or retailer, shall not be liable to the plaintiff for damages arising solely from the distribution or sale of such product, unless such wholesaler, distributor or retailer, breached an express warranty or knew or should have known at the time of distribution or sale of such product that the product was in a defective condition, unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer.

History. Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 6, effective June 17, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Applicability.

Where rental center was not a seller and the product in question was not in the same condition as when originally manufactured, this section did not provide a defense and the question of the liability of the original manufacturer, if any, was simply irrelevant. Burke Enterprises, Inc. v. Mitchell, 700 S.W.2d 789, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1985 ).

Where the defendant manufactured trailers incorporating suspension systems purchased from its supplier, the defendant could not escape liability under this section for a trailer with a defective suspension system. Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 662 F. Supp. 131, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4660 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), rev'd, 856 F.2d 780, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 12205 (6th Cir. Ky. 1988 ).

Because transactions involving blood and blood components are considered services, as opposed to sales, they are outside the purview of this Commonwealth's Products Liability Act. McKee v. Miles Laboratories, Inc., 675 F. Supp. 1060, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12025 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ), aff'd, 866 F.2d 219, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 722 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

District Court denied the gun distributor’s motion for summary judgment where the court found that the manufacturer failed to prove that it was entitled to protection under Kentucky law. Koby v. Star Ammunition, Inc., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24310 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 19, 2001).

Court rejected the consumers’ design defect claim against the retail store, finding that not only were the alleged defects open and obvious, but the sled contained a statement concerning the absence of a steering mechanism; so while a jury could have ultimately found that the sled was unreasonably dangerous, the consumers made no allegation that the retail store had any special knowledge to foresee such a danger. Weixler v. Paris Co., 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 444 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 2, 2003).

Plaintiffs’ motion to remand their product liability action to state court was granted because the non-diverse distributors of the dust respirators and masks at issue were not fraudulently joined; as the statutory language and Kentucky case law made clear, the defense of KRS 411.340 was not available under Kentucky law if there was a finding that the distributors “should have known” at the time of distribution or sale of a product that it was defective (whether the distributors had actual or constructive knowledge of any defects in the product was central to the merits of the case and was a question of fact to be resolved by a jury). Baker v. 3M, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27401 (E.D. Ky. May 26, 2005).

District court, in an action where coal miners sued the manufacturers and the retailers of allegedly defective respirator masks, could not dismiss the retailers at any stage of the proceedings before any discovery was conducted merely because one retailer claimed in a self-serving affidavit that he was unaware of the dangers of the masks. Adams v. 3M, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27404 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 27, 2005).

Court granted summary judgment as to a manufacturer on an accident victim’s strict liability and negligence claims based on defective design or manufacture, pursuant to KRS 411.340 , because expert testimony indicated that the most likely cause of a spray paint can explosion was fatigue caused by impacts on the bottom of the can. However, the court found that there was a jury issue concerning the adequacy of the warning on the can. Coleman v. Rust-Oleum Corp., 405 F. Supp. 2d 806, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33265 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

When plaintiff pled that the pharmacies knew or reasonably should have known that there was no indication warranting the long-term use of her prescribed medications and negligently failed to recognize the symptoms of her reaction to the medications, the allegations of negligence were inadequate to apply the second exception set forth in the Kentucky Middleman Statute, KRS 411.340 , which applied when pharmacies knew or should have known at the time of sale that drugs were unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer. Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 488 F. Supp. 2d 625, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34873 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Regardless of whether plaintiff’s allegations of negligence against pharmacies were intended to state a claim that, by preparing a dosage of a prescribed drug and providing it over a long-term basis, the pharmacies altered the condition of the drugs, such a claim was not adequately stated in the complaint when plaintiff alleged only that the pharmacies filled plaintiff’s prescription as it was presented to the pharmacies from health care providers. Plaintiff did not sufficiently allege in her complaint that the pharmacies altered the condition of the drugs. Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 488 F. Supp. 2d 625, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34873 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Retailer that sold a tree stand which allegedly broke and caused the purchaser to fall to his death was not entitled to summary judgment in a product liability case where a question remained as to whether the retailer created an express warranty under KRS 355.2-313 by advertising that it field-tested all of the products it sold before sending them to the customer; thus, a question remained as to whether the retailer was more than a mere seller for purposes of the Kentucky Middleman Statute, KRS 411.340 . Morgan v. Cabela's Inc., 788 F. Supp. 2d 552, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22683 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

2.Immunity From Liability.

Where the distributor could not satisfy the requirements relating to middlemen in products liability cases set forth in this section, there was no immunity from liability, and the trial court correctly denied application of the statute as a defense. Worldwide Equip. v. Mullins, 11 S.W.3d 50, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 34 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).

Where the injured party, who suffered from a liver condition, became sick after eating raw oysters due to a bacteria commonly and naturally found in raw oysters, the restaurant owner was not entitled to summary judgment pursuant to RCr 56 in the injured party’s strict products liability action; KRS 411.340 did not bar strict liability against the restaurant owner, as a jury could have found that raw oysters unaccompanied by a manufacturer’s warning of the serious health risks to certain people were defective. Edwards v. Hop Sin, Inc., 140 S.W.3d 13, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 213 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Lessor who purchased a scissor lift and leased it to a company was not liable to a company employee who was injured while using the lift because the lessor was immune from the employee’s strict liability and negligence claims for defective design under Kentucky’s Middleman Statute, KRS 411.340 ; the lift was not altered by the lessor, there was no allegation that the lessor breached an express warranty, and none of the employee’s evidence proved that the lessor knew or should have known of a design defect. Smith v. Leveelift, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22895 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 6, 2005).

Both requirements of KRS 411.340 were satisfied where the manufacturer of the table at issue had been identified and was a party to the action, and all testimony indicated that no alterations were made to the table, and the table in fact was shipped directly to the contracting employer. Franke v. Ford Motor Co., 398 F. Supp. 2d 833, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26259 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

If the product supplier was responsible under the terms of its agreement with the contracting employer for verifying that the product manufacturer made the contractor’s requested changes, then the supplier would not be immune under KRS 411.340 . Franke v. Ford Motor Co., 398 F. Supp. 2d 833, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26259 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

Reasonable jury could find that lift table supplier was responsible for ensuring compliance with the requested changes to the lift table, and if the resulting breach of an express warranty or the resulting sale of an unreasonably dangerous product caused injury, that would place the supplier outside the scope of KRS 411.340 , which was designed to protect only those distributors, wholesalers, or retailers, who have no independent responsibility over the design or manufacture of a product. Franke v. Ford Motor Co., 398 F. Supp. 2d 833, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26259 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

Where the Kentucky Middleman Statute, KRS 411.340 , did not render the distributors and retailers of the allegedly defective respirators “fraudulent” parties to the coal miner’s suit, the court held that remanding the case filed by a coal miner who claimed that certain respirators caused coal dust to enter his lungs, resulting in black lung disease, back to state court was the proper measure. Adams v. 3M, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29007 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 21, 2005).

When plaintiff pled that the pharmacies had a duty to warn her of the effects of prescribed drugs but failed to allege that an express or implied warranty was made that the drugs were fit for her use, plaintiff could not utilize the first exception set out in the Kentucky Middleman Statute, KRS 411.340 , for breach of an express warranty. Thus, plaintiff’s claims against the pharmacies were barred. Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 488 F. Supp. 2d 625, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34873 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Plaintiff could not seek to recover against distributor under apparent manufacturer doctrine because Kentucky had not recognized that doctrine’s applicability to suits in the Commonwealth, and the court did not predict that a Kentucky court would do so if given the opportunity as it could not peacefully exist with Kentucky’s “middleman” statute, KRS 411.340 . Rushing v. Flerlage Marine Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89009 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 27, 2010).

3.Construction With Other Laws.

The enactment of KRS 411.340 did not preempt the “as is” provision of KRS 355.2-316. Thornton v. Deere & Co., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15676 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 28, 2001).

Circumstantial evidence was not so strong as to overcome a presumption created by KRS 411.310(2) and 411.340 of the Kentucky Products Liability Act, KRS 411.300 to 411.340 , that a spray paint can was not defective where the can, from a technical and performance standpoint, met industry and state of the art standards in design and manufacture. Further, the most likely cause of the explosion of the can was low cycle bending fatigue caused by impacts on the bottom of the can. Coleman v. Rust-Oleum Corp., 405 F. Supp. 2d 806, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33265 (W.D. Ky. 2005 ).

4.Federal Actions.

The “learned intermediary” doctrine did not abrogate the applicability of KRS 411.340 because that doctrine did not function as a rule to impose further liability on the defendant pharmacists but instead functioned as a protection for manufacturers of prescriptions drugs from liability for failure to warn a patient once the manufacturer provided an adequate warning to a prescribing physician; accordingly, because KRS 411.340 barred plaintiff’s claims against the non-diverse pharmacies, those claims did not ruin complete diversity against the remaining diverse drug manufacturer defendants for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 USCS § 1332. Smith v. Wyeth, Inc., 488 F. Supp. 2d 625, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34873 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Cited in:

Webster v. Pfeiffer Eng'g Co., 568 S.W.3d 371, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 296 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Construction with Other Laws

Unpublished decision: Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 411.340 precluded a claim based on negligence against the hospital as there was no dispute that the manufacturer was subject to court jurisdiction or that device was sold to one appellant in its original condition. Cales v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. ¶9990, 2017 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 450 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2017).

2.Immunity From Liability.

Unpublished decision: Summary judgment for a pharmacy was proper in a customer’s tort suit because the evidence showed the pharmacy did not breach its duty to dispense the correct medication according to the prescribing doctor’s instructions, it was authorized by KRS 217.822 to dispense a generic, and it was a “middleman” retailer protected by KRS 411.340 . Flint v. Target Corp., 362 Fed. Appx. 446, FED App. 0037N, U.S. App. LEXIS 1409 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 889, 131 S. Ct. 227, 178 L. Ed. 2d 135, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7051 (U.S. 2010).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Ashdown and Hoskins, Torts, 67 Ky. L.J. 695 (1978-1979).

Kentucky Law Survey, Jenkins and Green, Torts, 69 Ky. L.J. 663 (1980-81).

Comments, The Liability of Cigarette Manufacturers for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act and Preemption of Strict Liability in Tort Against Cigarette Manufacturers, 76 Ky. L.J. 569 (1987-88).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Comments, Reda Pump, a Division of TRW, Inc. v. Finck: An Update on Kentucky Product Liability Law, 14 N. Ky. L. Rev. 395 (1988).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 137.15.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

411.350. Short title.

KRS 411.300 to 411.340 shall be known as the “Product Liability Act of Kentucky.”

History. Enact. Acts 1978, ch. 91, § 1, effective June 17, 1978.

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Comments, The Liability of Cigarette Manufacturers for Lung Cancer: An Analysis of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act and Preemption of Strict Liability in Tort Against Cigarette Manufacturers, 76 Ky. L.J. 569 (1987-88).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Phillips, Crashworthiness in the Commonwealth: An Analysis of the Defectiveness of Tractors Without Rops, 23 N. Ky. Rev. 325 (1996).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

Civil Liability for Theft of Motor Fuel

411.400. Definitions for KRS 411.400 to 411.406.

As used in KRS 411.400 to 411.406 , unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

  1. “Motor fuel” has the same meaning as in KRS 363.900;
  2. “Retailer” means any person, firm, or corporation who sells or offers for sale motor fuel from a retail facility;
  3. “Retail facility” has the same meaning as in KRS 363.900; and
  4. “Vehicle” means a “motor vehicle” as defined by KRS 138.210 or a “motorboat” as defined by KRS 235.010.

History. Enact. Acts 2008, ch. 110, § 1, effective July 15, 2008.

411.402. Civil liability for theft of motor fuel — Penalties — Notice of nonpayment.

  1. The owner of a vehicle that receives motor fuel from a retail facility without making proper payment is liable to the retailer for the price of the motor fuel received, in addition to a service charge of thirty dollars ($30). This service charge may be imposed when notice is mailed under subsection (3) of this section, if the notice of the service charge was conspicuously displayed on the premises from which the motor fuel was received. The notice shall include a statement that civil penalties will be imposed if payment is not received within thirty (30) days. Only one (1) service charge may be imposed under this section for each incident.
  2. If the price of the motor fuel received and the service charge are not paid within thirty (30) days after the retailer has mailed the notice under subsection (3) of this section, the owner is liable to the retailer for:
    1. The price of the motor fuel received;
    2. The service charge as provided in subsection (1) of this section; and
    3. A civil penalty in the amount of the greater of:
      1. The price of the motor fuel received; or
      2. One hundred dollars ($100).
  3. Notice of nonpayment that includes a copy of KRS 411.400 to 411.406 and a description of its penalties shall be sent by the retailer to the owner by certified mail, to the address indicated by records obtained under KRS 411.406 . The notice shall include a signed statement by the retailer or the employee of the retailer who reported the act, surveillance video photographs or other photographic evidence, the date and time of the occurrence, and the license plate number of the vehicle.
  4. If within the thirty (30) day period referred to in subsection (2) of this section the owner sends written notice to the retailer disputing the retailer’s claim that the owner received motor fuel from the retailer without making proper payment, the retailer may collect the price of the motor fuel in accordance with KRS 411.404 . Upon receipt of this notice from the owner, the retailer shall cease all collection efforts.

History. Enact. Acts 2008, ch. 110, § 2, effective July 15, 2008.

411.404. Liability under KRS 411.402 not a bar to other liability.

Civil liability under KRS 411.402 does not preclude civil liability under KRS 411.095 , criminal liability under KRS 514.030 , or liability under any other applicable law.

History. Enact. Acts 2008, ch. 110, § 3, effective July 15, 2008.

411.406. Administrative regulations to implement vehicle owner identification system.

  1. The Transportation Cabinet shall promulgate administrative regulations to implement a system by which a retailer or association of retailers may obtain the name and mailing address of any owner who has been identified as committing an offense under KRS 411.402 . The cabinet may enter into an agreement with a retailer or association of retailers to establish a set fee or other negotiated terms for the release of owner records.
  2. Any information released by the cabinet under this section shall be consistent with its authority under KRS 187.310 and shall be in compliance with 18 U.S.C. secs. 2721 et seq. The cabinet may integrate any system established under KRS 411.400 to 411.406 with its existing programs for the release of information pursuant to KRS Chapter 187.

History. Enact. Acts 2008, ch. 110, § 4, effective July 15, 2008.

Hazardous Materials

411.450. Definitions for KRS 411.460 and 411.470.

As used in KRS 411.460 and 411.470 unless the context indicates otherwise:

  1. “Discharge or disposal” means the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking or placing of any hazardous materials into or on any land or water so that such materials or any constituent thereof may enter the environment or be discharged into any waters, including ground waters.
  2. “Hazardous material” means a substance or material in a quantity and form which may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or property when transported and which has been designated as a hazardous material under the Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Law (49 U.S.C. sec. 5101 et seq.) or by any state law or regulation.
  3. “Person” means any individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, corporation (including a government corporation), partnership, association, federal agency, state agency, city, commission, political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or any interstate body.

History. Enact. Acts 1984, ch. 337, § 1, effective April 9, 1984; 2005, ch. 165, § 11, effective June 20, 2005.

411.460. Person who assists or advises in effort to mitigate effects of hazardous waste disposal or discharge immune from civil or criminal liability.

No person who provides assistance or advice in mitigating or attempting to mitigate the effects of an actual or threatened discharge or disposal of hazardous materials, or in preventing, cleaning up, or disposing of or in attempting to prevent, clean up or dispose of any such discharge, shall be subject to any civil or criminal liabilities or penalties. This immunity shall not apply to any person whose act or omission caused in whole or in part the actual or threatened discharge or disposal and who would otherwise be liable for the discharge or disposal. Also this immunity shall not apply to any person who provides assistance or advice for remuneration or with the expectation of remuneration, except that actual expenses directly incurred due to giving the assistance or advice may be recovered without losing the immunity.

History. Enact. Acts 1984, ch. 337, § 2, effective April 9, 1984.

411.470. Immunity does not extend to gross negligence or reckless, wanton or intentional misconduct.

Nothing in KRS 411.460 shall be construed to limit or otherwise affect the liability of any person for damages resulting from such person’s gross negligence, or reckless, wanton, or intentional misconduct.

History. Enact. Acts 1984, ch. 337, § 3, effective April 9, 1984.

Oil Spills

411.490. Definitions for KRS 411.490 and 411.493.

As used in this section and KRS 411.493 , unless the context otherwise requires:

  1. “Damages” means damages of any kind for which liability may exist under the laws of the Commonwealth resulting from, arising out of, or related to the discharge or threatened discharge of oil.
  2. “Discharge” means any emission, other than natural seepage, whether the emission is intentional or unintentional, which includes, but is not limited to, spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, or dumping.
  3. “Federal on-scene coordinator” means the federal official designated by the lead federal agency or predesignated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the United States Coast Guard to coordinate and direct responses under the National Contingency Plan.
  4. “National contingency plan” means the national contingency plan prepared and published under section 311(d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. sec. 1321(d) ), as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-380, 104 Stat. 484 (1990) or revised under Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 9605 ).
  5. “Oil” means oil of any kind or in any form, including, but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil but does not include petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction thereof, which is specifically listed or designated as a hazardous substance under subparagraph (A) through (F) of Section 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 9601 ).
  6. “Removal” means containment and removal of oil or a hazardous substance from water and shorelines or the taking of other actions as may be necessary to minimize or mitigate damage to the public health or welfare, including, but not limited to, actions to minimize or mitigate damage to fish, shellfish, wildlife, and public or private property, shorelines, and beaches.
  7. “Removal costs” means the costs of removal that are incurred after a discharge of oil has occurred, or, when there is a substantial threat of a discharge of oil, the costs to prevent, minimize, or mitigate the threat.
  8. “Responsible party” means a responsible party as defined under Section 1001 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-380, 104 Stat. 484 (1990).

History. Enact. Acts 1996, ch. 173, § 1, effective July 15, 1996.

411.493. Nonliability for removal costs or damages from actions under national contingency plan for oil spills.

  1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a person is not liable for removal costs or damages which result from actions taken, or not taken, in the course of rendering care, assistance, or advice consistent with the national contingency plan or as otherwise directed by the federal on-scene coordinator or by the secretary of the Energy and Environment Cabinet, or his designee.
  2. Subsection (1) of this section does not apply:
    1. To a responsible party;
    2. To any person who is grossly negligent or who engages in willful misconduct; or
    3. With respect to personal injury or wrongful death.
  3. A responsible party is liable for any removal costs and damages that another person is relieved of under subsection (1) of this section.
  4. Nothing in this section affects the liability of a responsible party for oil spill response under Kentucky law.

History. Enact. Acts 1996, ch. 173, § 2, effective July 15, 1996; 2010, ch. 24, § 1924, effective July 15, 2010.

Nuisances

411.500. Legislative intent.

It is the intent of the General Assembly to restate and codify in KRS 411.500 to 411.570 the common law of nuisance as existing in the Commonwealth on May 24, 1991. As a codification, the common law shall be continued by KRS 411.500 to 411.570 which shall apply to all actions whether now pending or subsequently brought. Matters not specifically addressed in KRS 411.500 to 411.570 shall be governed by common law.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 1, effective May 24, 1991.

Research References and Practice Aids

Journal of Mineral Law & Policy.

Articles, Kentucky’s New Nuisance Statute, 7 J.M.L. & P. 1 (1991-92).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Complaint for Nuisance Asserting Various Defenses, Form 139.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Permanent Private Nuisance Created by Steel Manufacturing Facility, Form 139.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Temporary Private Nuisance, Loud Noise, Seeking Damages and Temporary Injunction, Form 139.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.510. Definitions for KRS 411.500 to 411.570.

As used in KRS 411.500 to 411.570 :

  1. “Claimant” means a person who asserts a claim of private nuisance.
  2. “Fair market value” means the price that a person who is willing but not compelled to buy would pay and a seller who is willing but not compelled to sell would accept for property.
  3. “Fair rental value” means the price a lessee who is willing but not compelled to lease would pay and a lessor who is willing but not compelled to lease would accept.
  4. “Ownership interest” means holding legal or equitable title to property in fee or in a life tenancy.
  5. “Defendant” means a person against whom a claim of private nuisance is asserted.
  6. “Possessory interest” means lawfully possessing property but does not include mere occupancy.
  7. “Property” means real property.
  8. “Value of use” means the value to a person of using property.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 2, effective May 24, 1991.

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.520. Applicability of KRS 411.500 to 411.570 — Character of private nuisance.

  1. Any and all proceedings in the nature of actions for private nuisance as heretofore arising at common law shall be governed by KRS 411.500 to 411.570 .
  2. A private nuisance shall be either a permanent nuisance or a temporary nuisance, but shall not be both.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 3, effective May 24, 1991.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Unreasonable Use of Property.

Where property owners alleged a nuisance on the part of a public works department in violation of KRS 411.520 but did not offer any evidence in response to the department’s argument that there was no evidence that it used its own property unreasonably, the public works department was entitled to summary judgment. Clark v. City of Anchorage, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49744 (W.D. Ky. July 18, 2006).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.530. Permanent nuisance.

  1. A permanent nuisance shall be any private nuisance that:
    1. Cannot be corrected or abated at reasonable expense to the owner; and
    2. Is relatively enduring and not likely to be abated voluntarily or by court order.
  2. A permanent nuisance shall exist if and only if a defendant’s use of property causes unreasonable and substantial annoyance to the occupants of the claimant’s property or unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of such property, and thereby causes the fair market value of the claimant’s property to be materially reduced.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 4, effective May 24, 1991.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Nuisances Defined.

Nuisances are that class of wrongs which arise from the unreasonable, unwarranted, or unlawful use by a person of his own property and produce such material annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort, or hurt to others that the law will presume a consequential damage. Fletcher v. Tenneco, Inc., 816 F. Supp. 1186, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21559 (E.D. Ky. 1993 ), op. withdrawn, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3054 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 22, 1993).

Where property owners alleged that contamination from a uranium enrichment facility interfered with the use and enjoyment of property and decreased their property values, their nuisance claim survived summary judgment because they were not required to show that the contamination constituted a health hazard and they demonstrated a sufficient physical invasion of their property to raise a factual dispute. Smith v. Carbide & Chems. Corp., 507 F.3d 372, 2007 FED App. 0438P, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25644 (6th Cir. Ky. 2007 ).

2.Recovery of Subsequent Landowners.

Where no Kentucky caselaw considered the issue of whether private nuisance should be extended to allow recovery between subsequent landowners of the same parcel, the court held that, were a Kentucky court to consider the issue, it would follow the lead of the majority of the courts, which had consistently rejected allowing a subsequent landowner to recover in private nuisance from a prior landowner. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC., 255 F. Supp. 2d 688, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5272 (W.D. Ky. 2003 ).

Because the court believed that a Kentucky court would not recognize a cause of action in private nuisance between subsequent landowners of the same land, a regional airport authority was not entitled to relief in the form of damages for private nuisance against a previous property owner. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC., 255 F. Supp. 2d 688, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5272 (W.D. Ky. 2003 ).

3.Applicability.

A regional airport authority could not use the theory of private nuisance under Kentucky law to attempt to recover the costs of cleaning up environmental contamination against the prior owner of the parcel of land. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11904 (W.D. Ky. June 19, 2003).

Where a regional airport authority (RAA) acquired real property as part of an airport project, then sued the prior landowner to recover the cost of cleaning up environmental contamination under a public nuisance theory, among other claims, although the RAA alleged the threatened and actual release of contaminants into the environment, it did not allege that such release occurred in a public place, or threatened the public in any way, and thus did not state a claim for public nuisance. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11904 (W.D. Ky. June 19, 2003).

4.Burden of Proof.

Plaintiff property owners’ private nuisance claim failed because they failed to show causation as their expert’s test results did not show that vinyl chloride, the emissions of which allegedly caused a noxious order, was present in sufficient levels to meet the odor thresholds and independent government documentation provided also failed to establish causation. Even assuming that causation was proven, the owners failed to demonstrate harm from the emissions by demonstrating a material reduction in fair market value or rental value of their properties as required by KRS 411.560 . Dickens v. Oxy Vinyls, LP, 631 F. Supp. 2d 859, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57572 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

In property owners’ class suit for personal injuries from the operation of swine barns on nearby property, the barn operators were entitled to summary judgment on permanent nuisance claims against all class members who moved into the class area after the second barn went into operation because these owners could not establish damages. Powell v. Tosh, 929 F. Supp. 2d 691, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32229 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

Commonality prerequisite was lacking in this nuisance action because while some plaintiffs did claim to have experienced substantial annoyance and/or an interference, some clearly did not, making this element of liability incapable of being resolved by common answer. Powell v. Tosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120448 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 2, 2013).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Nuisances Defined.

Unpublished decision: Permanent nuisance claim failed, as there was no rational basis to find that the discharge by a corporation of minute quantities of polychlorinated biphenyls onto the landowners’ properties resulted in any interference with their use and enjoyment of the properties. Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Wilhite, 143 S.W.3d 604, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Permanent Private Nuisance Created by Steel Manufacturing Facility, Form 139.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.540. Temporary nuisance.

  1. Any private nuisance that is not a permanent nuisance shall be a temporary nuisance.
  2. A temporary nuisance shall exist if and only if a defendant’s use of property causes unreasonable and substantial annoyance to the occupants of the claimant’s property or unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of such property, and thereby causes the value of use or the rental value of the claimant’s property to be reduced.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 5, effective May 24, 1991.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Applicability.

A regional airport authority could not use the theory of private nuisance under Kentucky law to attempt to recover the costs of cleaning up environmental contamination against the prior owner of the parcel of land. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11904 (W.D. Ky. June 19, 2003).

2.Recovery of Subsequent Landowners.

Where no Kentucky caselaw considered the issue of whether private nuisance should be extended to allow recovery between subsequent landowners of the same parcel, the court held that, were a Kentucky court to consider the issue, it would follow the lead of the majority of the courts, which had consistently rejected allowing a subsequent landowner to recover in private nuisance from a prior landowner. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC., 255 F. Supp. 2d 688, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5272 (W.D. Ky. 2003 ).

Because the court believed that a Kentucky court would not recognize a cause of action in private nuisance between subsequent landowners of the same land, a regional airport authority was not entitled to relief in the form of damages for private nuisance against a previous property owner. Reg'l Airport Auth. v. LFG, LLC., 255 F. Supp. 2d 688, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5272 (W.D. Ky. 2003 ).

3.Burden of Proof.

Plaintiff property owners’ private nuisance claim failed because they failed to show causation as their expert’s test results did not show that vinyl chloride, the emissions of which allegedly caused a noxious order, was present in sufficient levels to meet the odor thresholds and independent government documentation provided also failed to establish causation. Even assuming that causation was proven, the owners failed to demonstrate harm from the emissions by demonstrating a material reduction in fair market value or rental value of their properties as required by KRS 411.560 . Dickens v. Oxy Vinyls, LP, 631 F. Supp. 2d 859, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57572 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law.

Articles, Common Law Remedies Available for Petroleum Contamination of Soil and Groundwater in Kentucky, 13 J. Nat. Resources & Envtl. L. 1 (1998-99).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.550. Determination of private nuisance.

  1. In determining whether a defendant’s use of property constitutes a private nuisance, the judge or jury, whichever is the trier of fact, shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances including the following:
    1. The lawful nature of the defendant’s use of the property;
    2. The manner in which the defendant has used the property;
    3. The importance of the defendant’s use of the property to the community;
    4. The influence of the defendant’s use of property to the growth and prosperity of the community;
    5. The kind, volume, and duration of the annoyance or interference with the use and enjoyment of claimant’s property caused by the defendant’s use of property;
    6. The respective situations of the defendant and claimant; and
    7. The character of the area in which the defendant’s property is located, including, but not limited to, all applicable statutes, laws, or regulations.
  2. A defendant’s use of property shall be considered as a substantial annoyance or interference with the use and enjoyment of a claimant’s property if it would substantially annoy or interfere with the use and enjoyment of property by a person of ordinary health and normal sensitivities.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 6, effective May 24, 1991.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Interference With Use of Property.

The District Court found that, as a matter of law, the contamination of plaintiffs’ land by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), a substance widely accepted as hazardous, constituted a condition that would substantially annoy or interfere with the use and enjoyment of property by a person of ordinary sensitivity. Fletcher v. Tenneco, Inc., 816 F. Supp. 1186, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21559 (E.D. Ky. 1993 ), op. withdrawn, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3054 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 22, 1993).

2.Nuisance.

Whether a nuisance exists is determined on the basis of two (2) factors: the reasonableness of the defendant’s use of his property, and the gravity of harm to the plaintiff. Fletcher v. Tenneco, Inc., 816 F. Supp. 1186, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21559 (E.D. Ky. 1993 ), op. withdrawn, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3054 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 22, 1993).

Although residents met the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) for a proposed class settlement of nuisance and negligence claims against owners and lessees of a nearby chemical manufacturing facility, an injunction purporting to bind non-parties was unfair and beyond the court’s power to enforce under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)(2); however, the decision to aggregate the settlement proceeds in a scholarship fund for the benefit of current and future residents was reasonable because the only realistic claims sounded in nuisance under KRS 411.550 and 411.560(3) and the residents tendered no reliable evidence of lost property value. Bell v. DuPont Dow Elastomers, LLC, 640 F. Supp. 2d 890, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56636 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Allegations that the appellees had impeded appellants' quiet and peaceful use and enjoyment of their property was an element of a private nuisance claim that was in dispute, precluding summary judgment. Herndon v. Wilson, 524 S.W.3d 490, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 137 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Complaint for Nuisance Asserting Various Defenses, Form 139.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.560. Damages for private nuisance.

  1. Damages allowable for a private nuisance shall be as follows:
    1. If the nuisance is a permanent nuisance, compensatory damages shall be measured by the reduction in the fair market value of the claimant’s property caused by the nuisance, but not to exceed the fair market value of the property;
    2. If the nuisance is a temporary nuisance and:
      1. The claimant occupied the property during the continuance of the nuisance, compensatory damages shall be measured by the diminution in the value of the use of the property which resulted from the nuisance; or
      2. The claimant did not occupy the property during the continuance of the nuisance, compensatory damages shall be measured by the diminution in the fair rental value of the property which resulted from the nuisance.
  2. A defendant who contributes to a nuisance is responsible for damages as provided in this section only to the extent of such defendant’s proportionate contribution to the nuisance as provided in the provisions of KRS 411.182 .
  3. No damages shall be awarded for annoyance, discomfort, sickness, emotional distress, or similar claims for a private nuisance. In the event a claim for injury or damage to a person is asserted in the same proceeding as a claim for damage to the claimant’s property caused by a private nuisance, liability for such personal injury or damage shall be determined on the basis of applicable principles of tort law independent of whether the defendant’s use of property is found to constitute a nuisance.
  4. A claimant may recover punitive damages for a private nuisance if the claimant recovers damages pursuant to this section and the defendant’s conduct in engaging in the specific activity which is alleged to be the nuisance meets or exceeds the standards set forth in KRS 411.184 . All provisions of KRS 411.184 and 411.186 shall apply to claims for punitive damages.
  5. No person shall have standing to bring an action for private nuisance unless the person has an ownership interest or possessory interest in the property alleged to be affected by the nuisance.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 7, effective May 24, 1991.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.In General.

Where property owners alleged that contamination from a uranium enrichment facility interfered with the use and enjoyment of property and decreased their property values, their nuisance claim survived summary judgment because they were not required to show that the contamination constituted a health hazard and they demonstrated a sufficient physical invasion of their property to raise a factual dispute. Smith v. Carbide & Chems. Corp., 507 F.3d 372, 2007 FED App. 0438P, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25644 (6th Cir. Ky. 2007 ).

Although residents met the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) for a proposed class settlement of nuisance and negligence claims against owners and lessees of a nearby chemical manufacturing facility, an injunction purporting to bind non-parties was unfair and beyond the court’s power to enforce under Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d)(2); however, the decision to aggregate the settlement proceeds in a scholarship fund for the benefit of current and future residents was reasonable because the only realistic claims sounded in nuisance under KRS 411.550 and 411.560(3) and the residents tendered no reliable evidence of lost property value. Bell v. DuPont Dow Elastomers, LLC, 640 F. Supp. 2d 890, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56636 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

In property owners’ class suit for injuries suffered from the operation of swine barns on nearby property, the barn operators were entitled to summary judgment on a temporary nuisance claim because the owners did not show a material issue of fact as to whether the nuisance could be altered at a reasonable expense to eliminate the offending condition. Powell v. Tosh, 929 F. Supp. 2d 691, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32229 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

Landowners’ motion to reconsider the court’s prior decision as to the availability of punitive damages was granted where the court failed to recognize that KRS 411.560(4) provided for punitive damages if the landowners recovered for private nuisance and proved that the conduct met the KRS 411.184 standards. Powell v. Tosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63567 (W.D. Ky. May 3, 2013).

2.Burden of Proof.

Plaintiff property owners’ private nuisance claim failed because they failed to show causation as their expert’s test results did not show that vinyl chloride, the emissions of which allegedly caused a noxious order, was present in sufficient levels to meet the odor thresholds and independent government documentation provided also failed to establish causation. Even assuming that causation was proven, the owners failed to demonstrate harm from the emissions by demonstrating a material reduction in fair market value or rental value of their properties as required by KRS 411.560 . Dickens v. Oxy Vinyls, LP, 631 F. Supp. 2d 859, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57572 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Commonality prerequisite was lacking in this nuisance action because there could be no liability for permanent nuisance where a claimant had not suffered a material reduction in the fair market value of his property, let alone suffered no reduction whatsoever. Powell v. Tosh, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120448 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 2, 2013).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

2010 General Law Issue: Article: What’s Sic Utere for the Goose: The Public Nature of the Right to Use and Enjoy Property Suggests a Utilitarian Approach to Nuisance Cases, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2010).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Complaint for Nuisance Asserting Various Defenses, Form 139.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Temporary Private Nuisance, Loud Noise, Seeking Damages and Temporary Injunction, Form 139.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

411.570. Construction of KRS 411.500 to 411.570.

KRS 411.500 to 411.570 shall not be construed as repealing any of the statutes or common law of the Commonwealth relating to nuisance, nor shall be construed to abridge any other rights or remedies available for personal or property damage, but shall be held and construed as ancillary and supplemental thereto.

History. Enact. Acts 1991 (1st Ex. Sess.), ch. 11, § 8, effective May 24, 1991.

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Complaint for Nuisance Asserting Various Defenses, Form 139.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Permanent Private Nuisance Created by Steel Manufacturing Facility, Form 139.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Temporary Private Nuisance, Loud Noise, Seeking Damages and Temporary Injunction, Form 139.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Nuisance, § 139.00.

Commonsense Consumption Act

411.600. Definitions.

For purposes of KRS 411.600 to 411.640 :

  1. “Claim” means any claim by or on behalf of a natural person, as well as any derivative or other claim arising therefrom asserted by or on behalf of any other person;
  2. “Food establishment” means:
    1. Any entity required to hold a permit pursuant to KRS 217.125 ; or
    2. Any other manufacturer, packer, distributor, carrier, holder, seller, marketer, or advertiser of food as defined in KRS 217.015(18) or 21 U.S.C. sec. 321(f) ;
  3. “Generally known condition allegedly caused by or allegedly likely to result from long-term consumption” means a condition generally known to result or to likely result from the cumulative effect of consumption, and not from a single instance of consumption; and
  4. “Knowing and willful violation” means that the conduct constituting the violation was committed with the intent to deceive or injure consumers or with actual knowledge that the conduct was injurious to consumers, and the conduct constituting the violation was not required by regulations, orders, rules, or other pronouncements of, or any statutes administered by, a federal, state, or local government agency.

History. Enact. 2005, ch. 23, § 1, effective June 20, 2005.

Legislative Research Commission Note.

(6/20/2005): 2005 Ky. Acts ch. 23, sec. 6, provides that KRS 411.600 to 411.640 shall be known and may be cited as the “Commonsense Consumption Act.”

411.610. Immunity from liability for conditioning arising due to long-term consumption of food — Exceptions.

A food establishment, or an association of one (1) or more food establishments, shall not be subject to civil liability for any claim arising out of weight gain, obesity, a health condition associated with weight gain or obesity, or other generally known condition allegedly caused by or allegedly likely to result from long-term consumption of food, except where the claim:

  1. Includes as an element of the cause of action a material violation of an adulteration or misbranding requirement prescribed by federal or state statute or regulation, and the claimed injury was proximately caused by the violation. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to create new or expand existing private rights, if any, under adulteration or misbranding statutes or regulations, nor shall this subsection be construed to interfere with any agency’s exclusive or primary jurisdiction to find or declare violations of those statutes or regulations; or
  2. Is based on any other material violation of federal or state law applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, distribution, advertising, labeling, or sale of food, if the violation was a knowing and willful violation, and the claimed injury was proximately caused by the violation.

History. Enact. 2005, ch. 23, § 2, effective June 20, 2005.

411.620. Required contents of complaint — Substantive status of pleadings.

  1. In any action exempted under KRS 411.610(1), the complaint initiating the action shall state with particularity:
    1. The federal or state statute, regulation, or other law that was allegedly violated;
    2. The facts that allegedly constitute a material violation of the statute, regulation, or other law; and
    3. The facts that allegedly demonstrate that the violation proximately caused actual injury to the plaintiff.
  2. In any action exempted under KRS 411.610(2), in addition to the pleading requirements of subsection (1) of this section, the complaint initiating the action shall state with particularity facts sufficient to support a reasonable inference that the violation was a knowing and willful violation.
  3. For the purposes of applying KRS 411.600 to 411.640 , the pleading requirements in this section are deemed part of the substantive law of this Commonwealth and not merely in the nature of procedural provisions.

History. Enact. 2005, ch. 23, § 3, effective June 20, 2005.

411.630. Stay of discovery and other proceedings during pendancy of motion to dismiss — Exceptions — Treatment of documents and other tangible objects during pendency of stay of discovery.

In any action exempted under KRS 411.610 , all discovery and other proceedings shall be stayed during the pendency of any motion to dismiss unless the court finds upon the motion of any party that particularized discovery is necessary to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to that party. During the pendency of any stay of discovery pursuant to this section, unless otherwise ordered by the court, any party to the action with actual notice of the allegations contained in the complaint shall treat all documents, data, compilations, including electronically recorded or stored data, and tangible objects that are in the custody or control of that party and that are relevant to the allegations, as if they were the subject of a continuing request for production of documents from an opposing party under the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure.

History. Enact. 2005, ch. 23, § 4, effective June 20, 2005.

411.640. Affected claims.

The provisions of KRS 411.600 to 411.640 shall apply to all covered claims pending on the June 20, 2005, and all claims filed thereafter, regardless of when the claim arose.

History. Enact. 2005, ch. 23, § 5, effective June 20, 2005.

CHAPTER 412 Suretyship, Joint Obligations and Contribution

412.010. Survival of liability of joint obligor — Right of contribution.

  1. If any person jointly bound with another in any contract, or by judgment, dies in the lifetime of the other obligor, his heir, devisee, or representative may be charged in the same manner as if the contract or judgment had been separate as against the decedent.
  2. The same rights and responsibilities shall continue in favor of, and against, the representatives of a person entitled to or bound to make contribution who dies as if he were living when contribution is demanded. The same principle shall apply when more than one (1) dies.

History. 476, 487.

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action against persons jointly bound, KRS 411.180 .

Authority to bind another as surety to be written, KRS 371.090 .

Liability survives on bonds having effect of judgments, KRS 426.610 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Ham, Kentucky Adopts the Uniform Partnership Act, 43 Ky. L.J. 5 (1954).

412.020. Extent of recovery in contribution is the same at law as in equity.

The extent of recovery, in cases of contribution, shall be the same in a court of law that it is in a court of equity.

History. 484.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Support of Parents.

In order that one child may impose upon the others the burden of contribution for support of parents, notice must be given in order that all the children may have an equal opportunity to provide the service and supply the needs of the indigent parents. Engle v. Terrell, 281 Ky. 88 , 134 S.W.2d 980, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1939 ).

2.Joint Owners of Land.

One of joint owners of land who paid judgment foreclosing mortgage on land was entitled to contribution from other owners, although he did not obtain an assignment of the judgment. Hill v. Hoover, 292 Ky. 548 , 166 S.W.2d 450, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where owner of one of several tracts of land subject to mortgage paid mortgage, he was entitled to contribution from owners of other tracts, based upon appraised value of respective tracts. Hill v. Hoover, 292 Ky. 548 , 166 S.W.2d 450, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1942 ).

3.Governing Principles.

Courts of law, in cases of contribution, should have been governed by the same principles as courts of equity in like cases. Pearson v. Duckham, 13 Ky. 385 , 1823 Ky. LEXIS 92 ( Ky. 1823 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited:

Winston v. Slaton, 267 Ky. 831 , 103 S.W.2d 675, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 403 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Costs in actions at law and in equity, KRS 453.040 .

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Turley, The “New” Doctrine of Comparative Negligence in Kentucky, Volume 49, No. 1, January, 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 8.

412.030. Contribution among negligent wrongdoers.

Contribution among wrongdoers may be enforced where the wrong is a mere act of negligence and involves no moral turpitude.

History. 484a.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

This section provides a remedy for enforcement of contribution between joint tortfeasors. Cornett v. Wilder, 335 S.W.2d 558, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 266 ( Ky. 1960 ).

A third party complaint by the United States against several possible joint tortfeasors in a malpractice case is the type of action the Kentucky General Assembly intended to permit when it enacted this section. Bowling v. United States, 461 F. Supp. 1227, 1978 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7078 (W.D. Ky. 1978 ).

2.Construction.

This section surplants the common-law rule that no right of action for contribution existed between joint tortfeasors who were in pari delicto. Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ). See Louisville R. Co. v. Louisville Taxicab & Transfer Co., 256 Ky. 827 , 77 S.W.2d 36, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 493 ( Ky. 1934 ).

This section does not affect the former rule that a joint tortfeasor who was only technically or constructively at fault might have contribution. Louisville R. Co. v. Louisville Taxicab & Transfer Co., 256 Ky. 827 , 77 S.W.2d 36, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 493 ( Ky. 1934 ); American Auto. Ins. Co. v. Mack, 34 F. Supp. 224, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2771 (D. Ky. 1940 ).

This section does not affect the former rule that one (1) joint tortfeasor might have contribution from another joint tortfeasor when both were at fault, and the fault of the defendant was the primary and efficient cause of the injury. Louisville R. Co. v. Louisville Taxicab & Transfer Co., 256 Ky. 827 , 77 S.W.2d 36, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 493 ( Ky. 1934 ).

An implied contract arises under this section. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. Myers, 288 Ky. 337 , 156 S.W.2d 161, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1941 ).

This section, while abrogating the common-law rule that where the wrong is a mere act of negligence involving no moral turpitude there may be contribution among parties in pari delicto, made no change in the exception which allows the right of indemnity where the person seeking it and the person from whom it is sought are not in pari delicto, as where the party who was compelled to pay the damages was less culpable than the other wrongdoer, although both were equally liable to the person injured. Brown Hotel Co. v. Pittsburgh Fuel Co., 311 Ky. 396 , 224 S.W.2d 165, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1141 ( Ky. 1949 ). See Gish Realty Co. v. Central City, 260 S.W.2d 946, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 992 ( Ky. 1953 ).

This section abrogates the common-law rule that there can be no enforced contribution among joint tortfeasors. Bowling v. United States, 461 F. Supp. 1227, 1978 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7078 (W.D. Ky. 1978 ).

3.Application.

The right of an indemnitor to be subrogated to the rights and remedies of his principal whose liability he has satisfied stands entirely upon principles of equity and is not derived from this section. Silver Fleet Motor Express, Inc. v. Zody, 43 F. Supp. 459, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3230 (D. Ky. 1942 ).

4.Theory of Contribution.

The doctrine of contribution is based upon common liability to the injured party. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Griffin Constr. Co., 280 S.W.2d 179, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1955 ).

The theory of contribution is that a party required to pay more than his pro rata share of a common liability to an injured party has a right of recovery for one half (1/2) the amount paid against a joint tortfeasor in pari delicto, that is, one equally at fault from the standpoint of concurring negligence of substantially the same character, but, on the other hand, a right to total indemnity may exist if the joint tortfeasors are not in pari delicto and the party secondarily negligent asserts a claim against the one primarily negligent. Lexington Country Club v. Stevenson, 390 S.W.2d 137, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Under the doctrine of contribution, the liability of each joint tortfeasor is equal and is not apportioned on the basis of causation whereas if the trier of fact chooses to apportion its award among the joint tortfeasors, each tortfeasor is liable only for the amount apportioned against it by the trier of fact; therefore by reserving the issue of contribution in the judgment of July 3, the trial court did not expressly indicate that the question of apportionment was also reserved. Ohio River Pipeline Corp. v. Landrum, 580 S.W.2d 713, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 398 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

This section requires only that both parties be “wrongdoers” whose “negligence” contributed to cause the injury, not that both be legally liable to the injured person. Burrell v. Electric Plant Bd., 676 S.W.2d 231, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1984 ), overruled, Dix & Assoc. Pipeline Contractors, Inc. v. Key, 799 S.W.2d 24, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1990 ).

5.Liability of Each Tortfeasor to Injured Person.

If one suffers injury as the proximate result of negligence of another combined with that of a third person, each of them is severally liable to the injured person. Lyons v. Southeastern Greyhound Lines, 282 Ky. 106 , 137 S.W.2d 1107, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 137 ( Ky. 1940 ).

6.Right of Contribution.

Where contract between manufacturing company and railroad imposed upon railroad primary duty of guarding crossing leading into manufacturer’s premises, the railroad was active wrongdoer with respect to accident liability at crossing and could not enforce contribution from manufacturing company against whom the person injured had no cause of action. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Clayton & Lambert Mfg. Co., 188 F.2d 68, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2968 (6th Cir. Ky. 1951 ).

The indemnitor having discharged liability of principal succeeds to all rights and remedies principal had to enforce contribution, from wherever derived, and in this respect no distinction is made between compensated and gratuitous indemnitors. Silver Fleet Motor Express, Inc. v. Zody, 43 F. Supp. 459, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3230 (D. Ky. 1942 ).

If two (2) joint tortfeasors are equally guilty, or in pari delicto, then each is fully responsible to the injured person but between themselves each is responsible for only half by virtue of this section. Miller v. Hammary Furniture Co., 299 F. Supp. 238, 1969 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8517 (E.D. Ky. 1969 ).

Jury’s finding that the negligence was equal brought this section into effect so that if one defendant paid plaintiff more than half the assessed damages, he could seek contribution from the other tortfeasor, but the plaintiff was not denied his right to seek satisfaction of the entire judgment from any defendant. Miller v. Hammary Furniture Co., 299 F. Supp. 238, 1969 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8517 (E.D. Ky. 1969 ).

A joint tortfeasor cannot enforce contribution from another against whom the injured person had no cause of action. Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Master and servant could be joined in an action in tort and treated as joint tortfeasors for all purposes and the master’s right to contribution from servant was preserved where master’s only responsibility was under doctrine of respondeat superior. Sherwood v. Huber & Huber Motor Exp. Co., 286 Ky. 775 , 151 S.W.2d 1007, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 329 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Since an employer operating under the workers’ compensation act cannot be a joint tortfeasor with a third party who injures his employee, there can be no right of contribution by employer. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Griffin Constr. Co., 280 S.W.2d 179, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1955 ).

The workers’ compensation act extinguishes the liability of employer to employee for negligence of the former and consequently there can be no common liability of the employer with a third party. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Griffin Constr. Co., 280 S.W.2d 179, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where the careless conduct of employee of junkyard in casting can of burning gasoline onto an invitee was the direct cause of the injury, the employer, who had paid in full judgment obtained by invitee against employer and employee, could maintain an action under this section for contribution against employee. Phelps v. Brown, 295 S.W.2d 804, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 1956 ).

A verdict in such proportion as the participation of the respective defendants in the tortious act is authorized under the statute and is conclusive and a defendant who was held nine-tenths negligent could not recover one-half contribution from his joint tortfeasor. Elpers v. Kimbel, 366 S.W.2d 157, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 5 ( Ky. 1963 ).

The Commonwealth was negligent in failing to put up a guardrail and curve sign at a sharp curve, and driver’s insurer was entitled to contribution of $7,000 from it as joint tortfeasor, that being one half (1/2) of the payment insurer made in settlement of claim for death of passenger in driver’s truck; Commonwealth’s liability was not limited to one half (1/2) of the $10,000 limit of its statutory liability. Commonwealth Dep't Highways v. Automobile Club Ins. Co., 467 S.W.2d 326, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1971 ).

The court erred in failing to adjudicate the right of contribution in an auto accident case after the jury found that the party for whom contribution was sought was negligent. Fryar v. Stovall, 504 S.W.2d 701, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1973 ).

7.— Insurance Carrier of Tortfeasor.

An insurance carrier of one (1) joint tortfeasor may maintain an action against the other joint tortfeasor for contribution after having made settlement with the injured party. Leitner v. Hawkins, 311 Ky. 300 , 223 S.W.2d 988, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1118 ( Ky. 1949 ).

In an action by insurance carrier for contribution, the conflict in the testimony as to how far defendant’s station wagon extended over the hard surface of the highway, the preponderance being that it completely blocked the west lane of traffic, was a question for the jury. Lexington Glass Co. v. Zurich General Acci. & Liability Ins. Co., 271 S.W.2d 909, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1070 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Insurance company which settled a claim for wrongful death arising out of a highway accident was entitled to prosecute its claim for contribution against state highway department before board of claims. Automobile Club Ins. Co. v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Highways, 414 S.W.2d 578, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 360 ( Ky. 1967 ).

8.Service on Nonresident.

A tortfeasor may take advantage of KRS 188.020 , providing that a nonresident owner or operator of motor vehicle makes the secretary of state process agent, to recover contribution from joint tortfeasors. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. Myers, 288 Ky. 337 , 156 S.W.2d 161, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1941 ).

9.Exoneration from Negligence.

Failure of trial court to instruct the jury on the issues of “contribution” and “indemnity” which country club had raised by cross claim against golfer was effectively eliminated by the jury verdict exonerating the golfer. Lexington Country Club v. Stevenson, 390 S.W.2d 137, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where a plaintiff sues two (2) joint tortfeasors who are in pari delicto, there cannot properly be a separate issue of contribution between them and, when jury exonerates one codefendant of negligence, that effectively denies the right of the other to contribution. Lexington Country Club v. Stevenson, 390 S.W.2d 137, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 332 ( Ky. 1965 ).

10.Cross Claims for Contribution Under State Law.

In an action by lessee of building against lessor and cement company to recover damages for injury to plaintiff’s stock in grocery store and household goods when building fell after cement, ordered from company by lessor, was placed on porch, demurer to company’s cross petition against lessor was properly sustained, since, in action against two (2) alleged wrongdoers, neither can cross petition against the other when he has paid nothing, as plaintiff is entitled to a trial without being annoyed by controversy between the two (2) defendants. Pope-Cawood Lumber & Supply Co. v. Dean, 303 Ky. 537 , 198 S.W.2d 227, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 896 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where defendants filed an answer and counterclaim against husband asking that they have contribution against him on any judgment which his wife might recover against them, counterclaim was properly asserted as a third-party complaint and case was properly tried as to all issues and defendant’s liability insurance carrier, not having incurred any liability because no judgment had at that time been entered, was not a real party in interest. Edester v. Heady, 364 S.W.2d 811, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 212 ( Ky. 1963 ).

The right of contribution of one tortfeasor against his cowrongdoer is statutory and exists where there is concurring or combined negligence causing the same injury and the right may be asserted in the same action by a cross claim. Elpers v. Kimbel, 366 S.W.2d 157, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 5 ( Ky. 1963 ).

11.Cross Claims for Contribution Under Federal Rules.

Where cross claim of a defendant in a diversity action arising out of an automobile accident sought reimbursement and indemnity from the other defendants, he might have been entitled to contribution under this section or he might have been liable under the exception to the common-law rule barring contribution among joint tortfeasors in pari delicto, so motions to dismiss his cross claim should have been overruled. Davidson v. Leadingham, 294 F. Supp. 155, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7974 (E.D. Ky. 1968 ).

12.Pleadings and Proof.

Complaint in action by insurer attempting to recover $5,500 on ground of indemnity in performing its obligation to its insured or, in the alternative, $2,750 by way of contribution as joint tortfeasor stated only one cause of action, and jurisdiction existed in the district court to hear and determine entire controversy, regardless of fact that a recovery based on one (1) of the two (2) grounds relied on would be limited to $2,750. American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Owensboro Milling Co., 222 F.2d 109, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5421 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

The plaintiff must allege causes of action against both his joint tortfeasor and himself in favor of the injured person. Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

The plaintiff must show that the injuries were the direct and proximate result of the combined negligence of himself and defendant, and that he has paid the claims for injuries. Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

In actions under this section, it is necessary to plead and prove the happening of the accident, the injuries sustained, the negligence of the defendant, and the reasonableness of the sum paid if paid in compromise of the claim. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. Myers, 288 Ky. 337 , 156 S.W.2d 161, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1941 ).

One seeking contribution under this section must show that the injuries for which he has paid damages were proximately caused by the combined negligence of himself and the defendant against whom the right is claimed and that he has satisfied a judgment or made reasonable payment in a bona fide compromise. Brown Hotel Co. v. Pittsburgh Fuel Co., 311 Ky. 396 , 224 S.W.2d 165, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1141 ( Ky. 1949 ).

One seeking contribution pursuant to this section must show that the injury to the person or property, flowing from an accident and giving rise to the claim for damage, was the proximate result of the concurrent negligence of himself and the defendant against whom the right is asserted and that he has satisfied the claim if it be reduced to judgment or he has made a reasonable settlement of it in a bona fide compromise. Campbellsville Lumber Co. v. Lawrence, 268 S.W.2d 655, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 926 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Pleadings stated a good cause of action for contribution wherein it was alleged that a guest in automobile owned by defendant had received injuries in an accident as a direct result of the joint negligence of plaintiff and defendant, that the guest had recovered damages in a certain sum, which judgment had been satisfied by plaintiff and that plaintiff by reason of these facts was entitled to contribution by defendant of one half (1/2) of the awarded damages with interest. Campbellsville Lumber Co. v. Lawrence, 268 S.W.2d 655, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 926 ( Ky. 1954 ).

In order to make out a claim for contribution, a claimant who has settled must allege: the act of negligence, the incident causing injuries, the injuries that resulted, the existence of a common liability, the reasonableness of the sum paid in settlement of the claim, and sufficient facts to show an enforceable obligation existed against the claimant, not just against the party from whom contribution is sought. Long v. Illinois C. G. R. Co., 660 F. Supp. 469, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15843 (W.D. Ky. 1986 ).

13.Payment as Prerequisite.

An action for contribution between joint tortfeasors may be maintained by the one who has satisfied the claims for injuries, whether such payment is under judgment or pursuant to compromise. Consolidated Coach Co. v. Wright, 231 Ky. 713 , 22 S.W.2d 108, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 349 ( Ky. 1929 ). See Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Wrongdoer paying damages is subrogated to injured person’s rights against second wrongdoer to the extent of one half (1/2) any reasonable amount paid. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. Myers, 288 Ky. 337 , 156 S.W.2d 161, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Payment by a joint tortfeasor is a condition precedent to enforcement of his inchoate right of contribution and motorist who had not made payment could not cross appeal regardless of whether the judgment would be res judicata of her right to contribution. Hargis v. Noel, 310 Ky. 542 , 221 S.W.2d 94, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 969 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Under the evidence, employer who solely defended action by invitee burned by burning gasoline can thrown by employee was not estopped from seeking contribution from employee after employer paid the judgment against both. Phelps v. Brown, 295 S.W.2d 804, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 1956 ).

14.Compromise Settlements.

A compromise made by one joint tortfeasor with the injured person is only prima facie correct as to another joint tortfeasor sued for contribution, and may be attacked by the latter for bad faith or unreasonableness. Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

A joint tortfeasor from whom contribution is sought is not bound by a compromise settlement, if it is shown that the settlement was for an excessive amount, but if the settlement is made in good faith pursuant to an honest compromise, the amount of the settlement is prima facie correct. Lexington Glass Co. v. Zurich General Acci. & Liability Ins. Co., 271 S.W.2d 909, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1070 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where, after collision of motor vehicles, insurer of plaintiff settled claim against plaintiff by paying a certain sum and took a release therefor and later settled claims of passengers in defendant’s vehicle, plaintiff was not estopped to assert claims for contribution against the defendants for the amount paid in settlement of the passengers’ claims. Martin v. Guttermuth, 403 S.W.2d 282, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1966 ). See Leitner v. Hawkins, 311 Ky. 300 , 223 S.W.2d 988, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1118 ( Ky. 1949 ); Edester v. Heady, 364 S.W.2d 811, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 212 ( Ky. 1963 ).

15.Conclusiveness of Judgment Against Codefendants.

A judgment against codefendants is not conclusive as between themselves with respect to their rights and liabilities toward each other unless an issue was made between them, or the parties in the second action were adversary parties in the first action. Brown Hotel Co. v. Pittsburgh Fuel Co., 311 Ky. 396 , 224 S.W.2d 165, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1141 ( Ky. 1949 ). See Gish Realty Co. v. Central City, 260 S.W.2d 946, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 992 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where issue in personal injury action by pedestrian against coal company and hotel was whether either defendant was negligent and issue in subsequent action by hotel against coal company for indemnity was whether negligence of coal company was primary cause of pedestrian’s injury, identity of issue was lacking and judgment in former action, in which defendants were found equally guilty and assessed equal damages, was not res judicata in indemnity action. Brown Hotel Co. v. Pittsburgh Fuel Co., 311 Ky. 396 , 224 S.W.2d 165, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1141 ( Ky. 1949 ).

16.Release Prior to Maturing of Right of Contribution.

Since action of insured in obtaining releases from his guests denied his insurance company the right of contribution from the driver of the other car, the insurer was permitted to cancel automobile liability policy for failure to cooperate. American Auto. Ins. Co. v. Mack, 34 F. Supp. 224, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2771 (D. Ky. 1940 ).

Where insured paid guests in his car to execute a written release to driver of car with which he collided and guests later brought suit against insured’s insurance company, the insurance company was within its rights in bringing suit under declaratory judgment act to determine whether insured’s policy was canceled by insured’s failure to cooperate thus relieving insurance company of duty to defend. American Auto. Ins. Co. v. Mack, 34 F. Supp. 224, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2771 (D. Ky. 1940 ).

A release between owner of automobile and the driver of a second automobile which collided with first automobile while the first automobile was being driven by owner’s brother did not bar subsequently maturing right of insurer of owner of first automobile to contribution against the driver of the second automobile where insurance carrier made settlement with passenger of first automobile for loss of an eye under liability policy covering owner and anyone driving the automobile with his consent. Leitner v. Hawkins, 311 Ky. 300 , 223 S.W.2d 988, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1118 ( Ky. 1949 ).

17.Statute of Limitations.

The statute of limitations runs against a joint tortfeasor from the time of settlement of the claims of the injured party. Consolidated Coach Co. v. Wright, 231 Ky. 713 , 22 S.W.2d 108, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 349 ( Ky. 1929 ). See Consolidated Coach Corp. v. Burge, 245 Ky. 631 , 54 S.W.2d 16, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where a motorist struck a child running after an ice cream vending truck and the motorist settled with the child and then sued the vending company and its driver for contribution, the five-year statute of limitations for liabilities created by statute applied to the suit for contribution. Baker v. Richeson, 440 S.W.2d 272, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1969 ).

18.Court of Appeals.

In an action by insurer for indemnification or, in the alternative, for recovery from defendant for contribution as a joint tortfeasor, the Court of Appeals could not, from the pleadings without development of facts, where suit based on negligence had been filed, hold that insured who was operating a bus was free from negligence in running over a tire which fell from a truck operated by defendant’s employee and that therefore its payment in settlement of the claim of a passenger was the act of a volunteer barring right of indemnification, nor that insured and defendant were in pari delicto or should be placed in separate classifications dealing with primary and secondary liability which would determine whether insured was limited to a right of contribution or had a valid claim for indemnity, but these were issues to be heard and ruled upon by the district court following remand. American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Owensboro Milling Co., 222 F.2d 109, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5421 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

19.Several Liability.

Trial court properly entered a judgment finding defendants severally rather than jointly liable where jury apportioned the damages among tortfeasors on a percentage basis, leaving no room to speculate that jury intended joint liability. Cox v. Cooper, 510 S.W.2d 530, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 553 ( Ky. 1974 ).

20.Indemnity.

In a personal injury action against a fast food restaurant and a security firm for injuries inflicted by a customer, as between the restaurant and the security firm, whose negligence, if any, consisted of failing to prevent the assault, and the customer who perpetrated the assault, the parties were not in pari delicto; therefore, the restaurant and the security firm were entitled to complete indemnity from the customer, and the indemnity agreement between the plaintiff and the customer barred recovery. Crime Fighters Patrol v. Hiles, 740 S.W.2d 936, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 271 ( Ky. 1987 ).

Cited:

Stratton v. Parker, 793 S.W.2d 817, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 60 ( Ky. 1990 ); Degener v. Hall Contr. Corp., 27 S.W.3d 775, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 2000 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Turley, The “New” Doctrine of Comparative Negligence in Kentucky, Volume 49, No. 1, January, 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 8.

Huelsmann, Kentucky Apportionment Law — The Past, the Present and the Future, Volume 52, No. 1, Winter 1987-88 Ky. Bench & B. 19.

Glover, Tort Reform: The Effects of Compulsory Apportionment, Volume 53, No. 1, Winter 1989 Ky. Bench & B. 16.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Oberst, Recent Developments in Torts: Decisions of the Court of Appeals at the 1956-57 Terms, 46 Ky. L.J. 193 (1958).

Weintraub, Finding a Substitute for the Place-of-Wrong Rule: The Kentucky Experience, 61 Ky. L.J. 419 (1973).

Germain, Remedies, 63 Ky. L.J. 777 (1974-1975).

Kentucky Law Survey, Germain, Remedies: Contribution and Apportionment Among “Joint Tortfeasors,” 65 Ky. L.J. 286 (1976-77).

Rogers and Shaw, A Comparative Negligence Checklist to Avoid Future Unnecessary Litigation, 72 Ky. L.J. 25 (1983-84).

Harned and Bachert, Workers’ Compensation, 74 Ky. L.J. 491 (1985-86).

Rogers, Apportionment in Kentucky After Comparative Negligence, 75 Ky. L.J. 103 (1986-87).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Notes, After Hilen v. Hays — Kentucky’s New Comparative Negligence, 13 N. Ky. L. Rev. 129 (1986).

Schwartz, The Myth of Nonapportionment Among Tortfeasors Under Traditional Tort Law and Its Significance for Modern Comparative Fault, 19 N. Ky. L. Rev. 81 (1991).

General Law Issue: Article: Almost a Century and Three Restatements After Green It’s Time to Admit and Remedy the Nonsense of Negligence, 38 N. Ky. L. Rev. 61 (2011).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Stating Release of Wrongdoer, Form 194.21.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Corporate Tortfeasor for Contribution for Amount Paid by it in Settlement of Suit for Personal Injuries, Form 47.04.

ALR

Release of one responsible for injury as affecting liability of physician or surgeon for negligent treatment of injury. 39 A.L.R.3d 260.

Voluntary payment into court of judgment against one joint tortfeasor as release of others. 40 A.L.R.3d 1181.

412.040. Effect of insolvency or nonresidence on right of contribution.

The insolvency or nonresidence of any person liable to contribution shall affect the rights of the others in like manner as the insolvency of one (1) obligor affects the others.

History. 485.

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Turley, The “New” Doctrine of Comparative Negligence in Kentucky, Volume 49, No. 1, January, 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 8.

412.050. Contribution among persons in trust or official capacity.

Contribution shall take place between all persons jointly liable, by civil action, for any act or omission in a trust or official capacity.

History. 486.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Sureties.

The solvent sureties are liable jointly for the entire delinquency. Cobb v. Haynes, 47 Ky. 137 , 1847 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1847 ) (decided under prior law).

The surety of a guardian on his county court bond is entitled to contribution from surety on the bond given in circuit court by the guardian to procure the sale of the ward’s realty for sums collected from him because of the guardian’s misappropriation of the proceeds of the realty. Elbert v. Jacoby, 71 Ky. 542 , 1871 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1871 ) (decided under prior law).

The sureties on two (2) bonds executed by one in a trust or official capacity are liable jointly for delinquencies, and are entitled to contribution. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McGinnis' Adm'r, 147 Ky. 781 , 145 S.W. 1112, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1912 ). See Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Husbands, 174 Ky. 200 , 192 S.W. 51, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 184 ( Ky. 1917 ); Winston v. Slaton, 267 Ky. 831 , 103 S.W.2d 675, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 403 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Sureties on two (2) successive bonds of an officer are liable jointly for delinquencies and are entitled to contribution. Winston v. Slaton, 267 Ky. 831 , 103 S.W.2d 675, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 403 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Bonds having effect of judgments, officer taking and his sureties liable, KRS 426.610 .

Bonds of officers, fiduciaries, KRS 62.060 .

Corporate bonds satisfy legal requirements, KRS 304.21-050 .

Court accepting unsatisfactory surety for guardian, liability, KRS 387.070 .

412.060. Interest.

In all cases of contribution, interest shall be allowed from the time the right accrues.

History. 488.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Contribution by Failure of Testator’s Title.

Where contribution is required by KRS 394.450 due to a failure of testator’s title, the person entitled to such contribution is entitled to interest on the contribution from the date of the testator’s death. Weindl v. Weindl, 359 S.W.2d 333, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Legal rate of interest, KRS 360.010.

412.070. Compensation of party pressing claims in common interest for others — Notice to interested persons.

  1. In actions for the settlement of estates, or for the recovery of money or property held in joint tenancy, coparcenary, or as tenants in common, or for the recovery of money or property which has been illegally or improperly collected, withheld or converted, if one (1) or more of the legatees, devisees, distributees or parties in interest has prosecuted for the benefit of others interested with him, and has been to trouble and expense in that connection, the court shall allow him his necessary expenses, and his attorney reasonable compensation for his services, in addition to the costs. This allowance shall be paid out of the funds recovered before distribution. The persons interested shall be given notice of the application for the allowance, provided, however, that if the court before whom the action is pending should determine that it is impracticable and too expensive to notify all of the parties individually, then by order of said court, personal notice may be dispensed with and in lieu thereof, notice of the application shall be given by an advertisement pursuant to KRS Chapter 424.
  2. The compensation herein provided for shall be authorized in actions now pending as well as actions hereafter instituted; provided, that in actions now pending final orders and judgments have not been ordered and the fund has not come into actual being.

History. 489: amend. Acts 1954, ch. 204; 1966, ch. 239, § 227.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section necessarily implies that even if action is successful and entitles plaintiff to allowance for attorney, such allowance must be paid out of, and only to extent of, “funds recovered,” and hence, where there was no recovery, there could be no allowance. Gernert v. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 284 Ky. 575 , 145 S.W.2d 522, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 544 ( Ky. 1940 ).

As a general rule, an attorney who renders services in recovering a fund in which numerous parties are interested is entitled to a fee out of the fund. This rule of equity is reiterated by this section. King v. Covington, 289 Ky. 695 , 160 S.W.2d 13, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 627 ( Ky. 1942 ).

2.Application.

This section had no application to petition of attorneys for plaintiff for allowances to be paid out of funds received as proceeds from the sale of property in receivership as they were entitled to fees in an amount to be fixed by the court on the basis of the general equity power of court. Bishop & Collins v. Macon Lumber Co., 149 F. Supp. 46, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3818 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

This section applies only to actions brought for the recovery of property by a joint owner, or suits for the settlement of estates. Francis v. Million, 80 S.W. 486, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 42 (1904) (decision prior to the 1954 amendment).

This section does not apply to expenses incurred in defending the joint title in unsuccessful suits brought by others. Francis v. Million, 80 S.W. 486, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 42 (1904) (decision prior to the 1954 amendment).

Taxpayers are not joint tenants, coparceners or tenants in common of county funds and this section is not applicable. Marion County v. Rives & McChord, 133 Ky. 477 , 118 S.W. 309, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 190 ( Ky. 1909 ) (decision prior to the 1954 amendment).

Unless there is a recovery of a fund or property, this statute does not apply. Burley Tobacco Co. v. Vest, 165 Ky. 762 , 178 S.W. 1102, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 617 ( Ky. 1915 ).

This section does not apply to damage suits where there is no joint interest in the recovery. Spinner v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 245 Ky. 519 , 53 S.W.2d 946, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 627 ( Ky. 1932 ), overruled, Charles Seligman Distributing Co. v. Brown, 360 S.W.2d 509, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 221 ( Ky. 1962 ).

This statute applies where the parties have a common interest and a suit is brought for their common benefit and one attorney carries the whole burden. But one jointly interested cannot be compelled to pay counsel employed by others when he is represented by his own counsel. Collins v. Hudson's Adm'x, 282 Ky. 810 , 140 S.W.2d 365, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1939 ).

This section is applicable to allowed attorneys’ fees in such actions where the recovery of property due the estate is sought and must be paid out of the “funds recovered.” Gernert v. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 284 Ky. 575 , 145 S.W.2d 522, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 544 ( Ky. 1940 ).

3.Class Actions.

Where some of the members of a class contracted with an attorney to represent the interests of a class in the recovery of money for the benefit of all and where statutory notice was given, those parties who did not enter into the contract as to fee were also liable for a reasonable fee. Webster County Soil Conservation Dist. v. Shelton, 437 S.W.2d 934, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 462 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Where some members of a class contracted with an attorney to bring an action to recover money and some did not and the class action was successful, the amount of a reasonable attorney’s fee for which the noncontracting members of the class are liable must be determined by the exercise of discretion by the trial court. Shelton v. Simpson, 441 S.W.2d 421, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 318 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Where the trial court did not award attorney fees to be paid by the Commonwealth in addition to the refunds to landowners appealing tax assessment through a class action suit, pursuant to this section the fees were ordered to be prorated and paid out of the refunds or credits obtained. Barrett v. Reynolds, 817 S.W.2d 439, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 1991 ).

4.Will Contest.

The successful propounders of a will are entitled to counsel fees. Turner's Guardian v. King, 98 Ky. 253 , 32 S.W. 941, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 871 , Ky. LEXIS 50 (Ky.), modified, 98 Ky. 253 , 33 S.W. 405 ( Ky. 1895 ).

An unsuccessful litigant in the contest of a codicil increasing the devise given him in the will must bear his part of the contestant’s expense even though he employed counsel, opposed the contest and received less as a result of the contest. Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary v. Botto, 117 Ky. 962 , 80 S.W. 177, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2137 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 266 ( Ky. 1904 ). See Baldwin's Ex'r v. Barber's Ex'rs, 151 Ky. 168 , 151 S.W. 686, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 800 ( Ky. 1912 ).

A trust fund in equity must bear the expenses of its administration and, when one of the owners recovers it, he is entitled to necessary expenses out of what he brought back. Clark v. Pepper's Adm'r, 132 Ky. 192 , 116 S.W. 353, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Baldwin's Ex'r v. Barber's Ex'rs, 151 Ky. 168 , 151 S.W. 686, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 800 ( Ky. 1912 ).

5.Settlement of Estates.

One who was entitled to and successfully did surcharge the settlement of a fiduciary was entitled to his counsel fees. Thirlwell's Adm'r v. Campbell, 74 Ky. 163 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 1874 ). See Taylor v. Minor, 90 Ky. 544 , 14 S.W. 544, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 479 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 125 ( Ky. 1890 ) (decided under prior law).

One entitled to sue for the settlement of an estate was entitled to counsel fees. Taylor v. Minor, 90 Ky. 544 , 14 S.W. 544, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 479 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 125 ( Ky. 1890 ) (decided under prior law).

One who is entitled to and successfully does surcharge the settlement of a fiduciary is entitled to his counsel fees. Mitchell v. Tyler, 49 S.W. 422, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1249 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 632 ( Ky. 1899 ). See Mattingly's Trustee v. Mattingly, 72 S.W. 802, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2029 (1903).

A creditor who has filed suit to settle an estate is not allowed to charge attorney’s fee against the estate. Dougherty v. Cummings' Adm'r, 50 S.W. 551, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1948 (1899). See Sims v. Birdsong's Adm'r, 59 S.W. 749, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1049 (1900).

An administrator with the will annexed is entitled to employ counsel to resist an assault upon the will and such counsel are entitled to payment out of the estate even though unsuccessful. Sims v. Birdsong's Adm'r, 50 S.W. 993, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 75 (1899).

Where party was not represented by attorneys of his own choosing and paid nothing for attorney fees, and was not expected to pay anything, and enjoyed the full benefits of the fund recovered by the litigation of other heirs, he was required under this section to contribute proportionately to the fees and expenses incurred in the recovery. Clark v. Pepper's Adm'r, 132 Ky. 192 , 116 S.W. 353, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1909 ).

A court sitting in equity determines and allows the personal representative of an estate reasonable compensation and necessary expenses, fees, and costs, without the intervention of a jury, except in an advisory role, at the option of the chancellor. Greenway v. Irvine's Ex'r, 234 Ky. 597 , 28 S.W.2d 760, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 457 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Counsel fees are as essentially a part of administration as any other expenses incurred. Greenway v. Irvine's Ex'r, 234 Ky. 597 , 28 S.W.2d 760, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 457 ( Ky. 1929 ).

In settlement suits, the fixing of compensation, expenses, costs and fees is to be determined by the court sitting in equity, and there is no right to jury trial. Greenway v. Irvine's Ex'r, 234 Ky. 597 , 28 S.W.2d 760, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 457 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Compensation for trouble and necessary expenses are to be allowed in actions for settlement of estates as well as in other actions. Smith v. Graham, 274 Ky. 144 , 118 S.W.2d 194, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1938 ).

An heir who unsuccessfully defends action by administrator or other heirs to bring into estate property held adversely may not require his counsel fees to be paid from funds of estate. Gossage v. Gossage, 285 Ky. 725 , 149 S.W.2d 16, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 455 ( Ky. 1941 ).

A widow, in seeking to have the estate settled and her dower rights determined and assigned, is proceeding as a beneficiary and not as a creditor, and is therefore entitled to a reasonable allowance out of the estate for her attorney’s fees where the conditions justify the action and other beneficiaries receive some benefit from the determination of rights for which the suit is instituted. Chalk v. Chalk, 291 Ky. 702 , 165 S.W.2d 534, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 310 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where suit filed by widow against children of her late husband, one of whom was also sued as executor, for settlement of her deceased husband’s estate accomplished a necessary result and the benefits thereof redounded to all devisees and creditors, this section applied and court should have allowed a reasonable fee to plaintiff’s counsel upon proof and consideration being given to the fact that the executor was likewise entitled to have a fee allowed to the extent that his attorney represented the estate. Chalk v. Chalk, 291 Ky. 702 , 165 S.W.2d 534, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 310 ( Ky. 1942 ).

The allowance of reasonable expenses and costs to one or more distributees of an estate who prosecute a suit for its settlement for the benefit of others interested with them, which allowance is to be paid out of the fund recovered, has always been held to be a matter vesting in the discretion of the trial court. Crutcher v. Elliston's Ex'rs, 299 Ky. 613 , 186 S.W.2d 644, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 489 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where widow’s attorney rendered services in connection with settlement of decedent’s estate, such as to justify payment of part of his fee out of the estate, the fact that the only net increase in the assets of the estate attributable to his services was rent collected from a lessee of decedent’s real estate did not require that the fee payable out of the estate be limited to a proportion of the rent paid in. Goodwin's Ex'r v. Goodwin, 301 Ky. 526 , 192 S.W.2d 493, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Owner of 1/630 of one half of estate, who brought action for settlement of estate and failed to indicate in pleadings or otherwise that he represented any of the heirs other than himself as a volunteer and all other heirs and the administrator were represented by attorneys of their own choosing, was not entitled to have his attorney’s fee charged against the general fund where his sole effort was to deprive the heirs of decedent’s wife of any interest in the estate and to obtain the entire estate for the heirs of decedent. Cambron v. Pottinger, 310 Ky. 70 , 219 S.W.2d 401, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1086 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where attorney commenced proceeding to set aside probate of will in good faith in behalf of persons who were of some kinship to intestate and whose claims of heirship were not completely baseless and who represented a real heir when the judgment setting aside the probate was entered, his services did result in substantial benefit to the estate and therefore he was entitled to some allowance for the services in setting aside the will, but he was not entitled to allowance for services in settlement suit which suit accomplished very little that couldn’t have been satisfactorily accomplished by the administrator. Skinner v. Morrow, 318 S.W.2d 419, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1958 ).

It was proper for the chancellor to charge one of the beneficiaries a proportionate part of the attorney’s fee allowed to the attorney who filed the suit for the settlement of an estate. Clay v. Eager, 444 S.W.2d 124, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 202 ( Ky. 1969 ), overruled in part, Ky. Bar Ass'n v. Calvert, 607 S.W.3d 700, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 2020 ).

6.Sale of Jointly Owned Property.

Where no conflict of interest existed between parties to suit for sale of realty jointly owned by them and judgment of sale was agreed upon, there was no impropriety in the chancellor’s determination that the entire attorneys’ fees be charged against the fund in court and allocated on basis of services performed as against contention of each party that fees of other party’s counsel should be charged only against other party’s share. Croley v. Adkins, 305 Ky. 765 , 205 S.W.2d 332, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 895 ( Ky. 1947 ).

7.Setting Aside Fraudulent Conveyance.

The attorneys of a creditor who secures the setting aside of a fraudulent conveyance of the debtor and having it held for the benefit of all creditors are entitled to a fee from the estate. Davis v. H. Feltman Co., 112 Ky. 293 , 65 S.W. 615, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1510 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 312 ( Ky. 1901 ).

8.Stockholder’s Suit.

In a stockholder’s suit, the corporation is liable for the stockholder’s attorney fee only when the suit was one which the corporation should have filed but refused to file. Burley Tobacco Co. v. Vest, 165 Ky. 762 , 178 S.W. 1102, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 617 ( Ky. 1915 ).

9.Representation by Own Attorneys.

It cannot be said that a party is represented by an attorney in such a case unless that attorney is seeking the same end as the party who instituted the suit. Taylor v. Taylor, 223 Ky. 799 , 4 S.W.2d 752, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 444 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where some of defendants, in action by one heir to determine rights in estate, to compel sale of realty and distribution of proceeds, and for appointment of receiver to manage and sell property, contested action and objected to sale, took position that administrator with will annexed had sufficient authority to handle matter, and employed counsel of their own selection to represent them, court erred in allowing plaintiff’s attorney a fee to be taxed as costs and payable out of the estate. Bettes v. Rogers, 281 Ky. 118 , 135 S.W.2d 74, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 25 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The court will not allow attorney fees of one party to be charged against the recovery where other parties on the same side are represented by their own attorneys in the same litigation; each party must pay his own attorney. Cambron v. Pottinger, 310 Ky. 70 , 219 S.W.2d 401, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1086 ( Ky. 1948 ).

10.Benefit to Others Interested.

One having a common interest who successfully prosecuted a suit for the joint benefit of himself and others having a common interest was entitled, upon notice and motion made prior to distribution, to charge his counsel fees against the general fund except as against parties who had employed their own counsel or who opposed the relief sought by him. Thirlwell's Adm'r v. Campbell, 74 Ky. 163 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 1874 ) (decided under prior law).

The statute providing for compensation of party pressing claims in common interest did not apply in favor of a litigant whose successful efforts benefited only himself. Taylor v. Minor, 90 Ky. 544 , 14 S.W. 544, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 479 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 125 ( Ky. 1890 ). See Calloway v. Calloway, 39 S.W. 241, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 870 (1897) (decided under prior law).

The attorneys of a creditor who secured the setting aside of a fraudulent conveyance of the debtor and who had it held for the benefit of all creditors was entitled to a fee from the estate. Trobel v. Boresig, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 398 (1891) (decided under prior law).

One having a common interest who successfully prosecutes a suit for the joint benefit of himself and others having a common interest is entitled, upon notice and motion made prior to distribution, to charge his counsel fees against the general fund except as against parties who have employed their own counsel or who oppose the relief sought by him. Abert v. Taylor, 37 S.W. 676, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 615 (1896). See Sims v. Birdsong's Adm'r, 59 S.W. 749, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1049 (1900); Bailey's Adm'rs v. Barclay, 109 Ky. 636 , 60 S.W. 377, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 124 4 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1901 ); Nichols v. King, 68 S.W. 133, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 124 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 258 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902), modified, 68 S.W. 1114 ( Ky. 1902 ); Weller v. Hull's Assignee, 74 S.W. 172, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2185 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 519 (Ky. Ct. App. 1903); Fristoe v. Gillen, 80 S.W. 823, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 149 (1904); Estill's Trustee v. Francis, 89 S.W. 172, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 225 (1905); Pepper v. Pepper, 98 S.W. 1039, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 460 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 367 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907); Clark v. Pepper's Adm'r, 132 Ky. 192 , 116 S.W. 353, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1909 ); Baldwin's Ex'r v. Barber's Ex'rs, 151 Ky. 168 , 151 S.W. 686, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 800 ( Ky. 1912 ); O'Doherty & Yonts v. Bickel, 166 Ky. 708 , 179 S.W. 848, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 773 ( Ky. 1915 ); Johnston v. Stephens, 206 Ky. 83 , 266 S.W. 881, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 257 ( Ky. 192 4 ); Hart v. Hardin, 217 Ky. 660 , 290 S.W. 475, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1927 ); Taylor v. Taylor, 223 Ky. 799 , 4 S.W.2d 752, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 444 ( Ky. 1928 ); Howard v. Carmichael, 237 Ky. 462 , 35 S.W.2d 852, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 622 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A bank reorganization committee which would have been successful on the merits was entitled to contribution for counsel fees when its opponents who won through delay and improper tactics had been accorded that privilege. Dorman v. Baumlisberger, 271 Ky. 806 , 113 S.W.2d 432, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Under this statute, attorney’s fees and expenses may be recovered where some of the parties have prosecuted the action for the benefit of others interested with themselves. Collins v. Hudson's Adm'x, 282 Ky. 810 , 140 S.W.2d 365, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Right to charge counsel fees in action by certain of decedent’s nearest relatives and heirs to recover certain property allegedly omitted from inventory and constituting assets of estate does not necessarily follow right to maintain action, since services must be necessary, benefit the estate and all the distributees. Gernert v. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 284 Ky. 575 , 145 S.W.2d 522, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 544 ( Ky. 1940 ).

When a fund is recovered for the benefit of several parties in interest, each should bear its share of the burden incident to recovery in proportion to the benefits derived therefrom. Howell v. Highland Cemetery Co., 297 Ky. 659 , 181 S.W.2d 44, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Attorney’s fee for plaintiff’s attorney and expenses against unknown bondholders in an action to foreclose mortgage securing bonds was allowable where bonds on their face authorized such a suit for the benefit of all the bondholders. McBride v. Dewey Portland Cement Co., 297 Ky. 662 , 181 S.W.2d 46, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 790 ( Ky. 1944 ).

In proceedings in connection with decedent’s estate, where determination of rights of parties, collection of rentals due estate, allotment of dower, and sale of property all were involved, trial court properly ordered that portion of widow’s attorney fee be paid out of estate as against contention of executor that attorney’s services were primarily for benefit of widow and only indirectly of benefit to the estate. Goodwin's Ex'r v. Goodwin, 301 Ky. 526 , 192 S.W.2d 493, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Estate was not benefited but services were rendered solely for heir’s benefit and heir was not entitled to charge any part of her costs, fees or expenses incurred in unsuccessfully resisting a claim of administrator’s daughter and son-in-law against her father’s estate, to the estate where the administrator, who was her brother, was in favor of paying the claim, but heir objected and, on heir’s motion to remove administrator, court ordered administrator to defend the claim, which was more than the estate, and, contrary to the court order, administrator was represented by his own attorney, offered no affirmative defense and testified in favor of claimants leaving the brunt of the defense to be carried by the heir and her attorney. Barrick v. James, 258 S.W.2d 1, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 817 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Although approximately two (2) years had elapsed between appointment of administrator and filing of equitable suit against him for settlement of estate, there was no showing of unreasonable delay on the part of the administrator and the major portion of the assets had been distributed so the action was fruitless and wholly unnecessary and chancellor correctly denied the claim of plaintiff for expenses of prosecuting the action. Johnson v. Ducobu, 258 S.W.2d 509, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where no benefit is shown either to the estate or beneficiaries, no allowance of costs, attorney fees or expenses should be made unless there appears some good reason for filing the suit. Johnson v. Ducobu, 258 S.W.2d 509, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Grandchild who intervened in a declaratory judgment action to challenge an agreed settlement judgment was not required to pay the attorney who represented his father in the settlement a percentage of his share of an inheritance as attorney fees. The attorney did not perform any services for the grandchild, and it appeared that it was unintentional on the attorney’s part that the grandchild benefited at all from the terms of the settlement agreement. Raisor v. Burkett, 214 S.W.3d 895, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 402 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Law firm that was retained by certain of the beneficiaries of a trust fund was entitled to collect additional fees from the remaining beneficiaries upon the law firm obtaining a settlement agreement, even though the remaining beneficiaries did not contract with the law firm, because the remaining beneficiaries realized a benefit from the law firm's efforts in obtaining the settlement. The law firm was not entitled to collect additional fees from an advisory committee to the trustee of the trust fund. Kincaid v. Johnson, True & Guarnieri, LLP, 538 S.W.3d 901, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 593 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

11.Persons Who May Sue.

Only the persons named in the statute may sue. Pepper v. Pepper, 98 S.W. 1039, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 460 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 367 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907). See Burley Tobacco Co. v. Vest, 165 Ky. 762 , 178 S.W. 1102, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 617 ( Ky. 1915 ).

12.Motion for Allowance of Fees.

A motion for allowance of fees need not contain averments such as would be necessary in a petition, nor is it necessary to allow such time for response as is usual in actions. Greenway v. Irvine's Ex'r, 234 Ky. 597 , 28 S.W.2d 760, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 457 ( Ky. 1929 ).

13.Fees Payable When Funds Received.

An attorney suing to establish fund out of which school district would pay its bondholders could not recover his entire fee before his clients were entitled to a recovery, even though he had made available the fund out of which they were to be paid in the future, when the bonds were due, for, in the absence of a contract, he had no right to expect his fee to be paid out of any money except that which had actually been recovered for distribution to his clients. Howell v. Highland Cemetery Co., 297 Ky. 659 , 181 S.W.2d 44, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Attorney fees owed to a law firm that was retained by certain of the beneficiaries of a trust fund were payable within 45 days of final judgment based upon the law firm obtaining a settlement agreement. Kincaid v. Johnson, True & Guarnieri, LLP, 538 S.W.3d 901, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 593 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

14.Costs.

If plaintiff who sued as next friend was entitled to an attorney’s fee, then he was also entitled to have the other costs paid by the estate as expressly provided in this section. Crutcher v. Elliston's Ex'rs, 299 Ky. 613 , 186 S.W.2d 644, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 489 ( Ky. 1945 ).

15.Attorney Fees.

Trial court properly denied attorney fees where suit challenging the constitutionality of a taxing district created for mosquito control was not for the benefit of all taxpayers, but only those prosecuting it, and where the taxing district was not then withholding the funds collected or diverting them to a use other than mosquito control. Reid v. Allinder, 504 S.W.2d 706, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 828 ( Ky. 1974 ).

Where both lienholder and mortgage holder appeared with counsel contesting superiority of their respective claims in a suit for collection of debts by the individual parties, lienholder, who brought suit, was not entitled to award of attorney fees paid from proceeds of sale since lienholder had not effected any benefit to mortgage holder. Kentucky State Bank v. AG Services, Inc., 663 S.W.2d 754, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 447 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

Under circumstances in which estate beneficiaries won a jury verdict against the estate’s executrix based on a claim that the executrix wrongfully spent estate monies, the trial court properly limited attorney fees awarded to the beneficiaries to be paid only from funds recovered from the executrix pursuant to the judgment because KRS 412.070(1) allowed the award of attorney fees only from recovered funds. Cummings v. Covey, 229 S.W.3d 59, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 202 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

When it was held that the legislature violated Ky. Const. § 51 by transferring funds from workers’ compensation accounts to the general fund, and a trial court erroneously ordered the governor to restore fund previously transferred, it was also error to award attorneys’ fees on the theory that a common fund was created because no funds were recoverable against the Commonwealth. Beshear v. Haydon Bridge Co., 416 S.W.3d 280, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 582 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Circuit court correctly denied a burial fund member’s motion for statutory attorneys’ fees because the settlement between the fund and the member did not result in a recovery that benefitted the fund or the other members of the fund or result in a common benefit, especially where the settlement resulted in an agreement that the members be allowed to withdraw from the fund—essentially to the detriment of the fund. Cassady v. Wolf Creek Collieries Emple. Burial Fund, Inc., 390 S.W.3d 151, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 320 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

16.Notice.

The notice requirement of this section may be fulfilled by taking out an advertisement pursuant to KRS 424.110 . Barrett v. Reynolds, 817 S.W.2d 439, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 1991 ).

17.Unsuccessful Party.

A nominated executor was entitled to his expenses and costs in an unsuccessful attempt to probate the will, provided he acted in good faith and upon reasonable grounds. Phillips' Ex'r v. Phillips' Adm'R, 81 Ky. 328 , 5 Ky. L. Rptr. 270 , 1883 Ky. LEXIS 69 (Ky. Ct. App. 1883) (decided under prior law).

An unsuccessful party who was under no duty to litigate the matter in issue was generally not entitled to the benefit of the statute. Taylor v. Minor, 90 Ky. 544 , 14 S.W. 544, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 479 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 125 ( Ky. 1890 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited:

Shelter Mutual Ins. Co. v. McCarthy, 896 S.W.2d 17, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 12 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Mapother, Attorneys’ Fees Recoverable in Kentucky Litigation, Vol. 44, No. 4, October 1980, Ky. Bench & Bar 28.

412.080. Action by surety who pays, against principal — Against cosurety.

If a surety pays any part of a debt or liability for which he is bound as surety, he may recover the amount, with interest from time of payment, from the principal by action at law or by motion, after ten (10) days’ notice in writing. He may also sue a cosurety, separately or as a joint defendant with the principal, in such proceeding, and in like manner recover judgment against him, separately or jointly, at the same time, for his proper part of the debt or liability so paid, as if the sureties were the sole obligors. If one (1) or more of several cosureties is insolvent, or resides out of the state, the recovery against the solvent and resident sureties shall also be for a proper part of the share of liability pertaining to the insolvent or nonresident surety. If the surety afterwards makes further payment on the debt or liability, he may again have like remedy therefor. But nothing in this section shall preclude the party sued from making any defense that might have been made against the original demand, unless the payment was made after and in consequence of a judgment in an action of which he had notice.

History. 4665.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

This section was intended to enlarge the common-law doctrines of contribution. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ).

2.Reimbursement from Principal.

Upon motion for reimbursement, the principal could plead any defense that would have been available to him in a common-law action. Tennell v. Dozier, 3 Ky. 47 ( Ky. 1806 ) (decided under prior law).

When a surety who had paid the debt released a cosurety, the liability of the principal for reimbursement was not affected. Crowdus v. Shelby, 29 Ky. 61 , 1831 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1831 ) (decided under prior law).

The liability of the principal to his surety could not exceed the amount paid on the debt by the surety. Hickman v. McCurdy, 30 Ky. 555 , 1832 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1832 ) (decided under prior law).

In an action for reimbursement, the surety might show payment in any medium equivalent to money. Stone v. Porter, 34 Ky. 207 , 1836 Ky. LEXIS 54 ( Ky. 1836 ). See Burns & McConnoughy v. Parish, 42 Ky. 8 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1842 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety on the note of a partner executed to obtain funds for the partnership might have had reimbursement from the partnership. Burns & McConnoughy v. Parish, 42 Ky. 8 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1842 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety who had been released could not thereafter pay the debt and require the principal to reimburse him. Kimble v. Cummins, 60 Ky. 327 , 1860 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1860 ) (decided under prior law).

The petition of a surety relying on implied assumpsit alleging that he was surety, the payment of the money by him to the obligee, and the failure to pay by the defendant stated a good cause of action. Bridges v. Reed, 72 Ky. 329 , 1872 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1872 ) (decided under prior law).

The right to reimbursement is barred in five (5) years in the absence of a prior assignment of or subrogation to the creditors’ rights. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Patton's Ex'r v. Smith, 130 Ky. 819 , 114 S.W. 315, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 327 ( Ky. 1908 ); Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

As between principal and sureties, the principal alone is bound for the whole of it. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ).

A surety paying a judgment may proceed against his principal by motion even though the judgment has not been assigned to him. Davis v. Kinnard, 271 Ky. 428 , 112 S.W.2d 412, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 256 ( Ky. 1937 ).

This section limits the surety’s right of recovery to the amount paid by him in satisfaction of the principal’s obligation, even where the surety takes an assignment of the obligation and sues the principal thereon. Napier v. Duff, 281 Ky. 779 , 136 S.W.2d 1083, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where insolvent bank applied surety’s deposit to pay note of principal, surety’s right of indemnity extended only to the actual value of the deposit so applied, as determined by the percentage paid by the bank in liquidating dividends to its depositors, and not the face amount of the note. Napier v. Duff, 281 Ky. 779 , 136 S.W.2d 1083, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A surety who has been compelled by judgment to pay his principal’s obligation has the right to obtain a judgment against principal by a motion after due service of process. Grubbs v. Slater, 266 S.W.2d 85, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 1276 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).

Where principal merely objected to the filing of an unverified motion by surety for a judgment against principal in an action by creditor against principal and surety wherein surety had been compelled to pay principal’s debt instead of requesting a rule to require proper verification of the pleading, his failure to require verification waived any complaint he might have had and the failure to verify did not render the filing invalid. Grubbs v. Slater, 266 S.W.2d 85, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 1276 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).

Where a litigant pays an adverse judgment, he does not thereby impair his right to appeal, nor may a surety be required to elect between an appeal and the enforcement of any derivative right he may have against the principal; thus, where surety has paid the recovery rendered against him and then under this section has recovered such sum from the principal, he may still appeal the adverse judgment. Moss v. Smith, 361 S.W.2d 511, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Sureties on employer’s self-insurer’s bond who had paid claims under workers’ compensation law in full was entitled to subrogate to rights of claimants against estate of insolvent employer. Non-Marine Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Carrs Fork Coal Co., 421 S.W.2d 852, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1967 ).

3.Contribution from Cosureties.

The notice and motion could be joint in form, although the liability was several. Lampton v. Bruner, 12 Ky. 141 , 1822 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1822 ) (decided under prior law).

The surety’s property was sold under execution to his father-in-law who before his death devised it to the surety’s wife for life. These facts did not exonerate the cosurety from making contribution. Caldwell v. Roberts, 31 Ky. 355 , 1833 Ky. LEXIS 88 ( Ky. 1833 ) (decided under prior law).

When the original debt was for the benefit of the paying surety, he could not have contribution from his cosurety. Daniel v. Ballard, 32 Ky. 296 , 1834 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1834 ) (decided under prior law).

Demand for contribution was not a prerequisite to suit for same. Morrison v. Poyntz, 37 Ky. 307 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1838 ) (decided under prior law).

Under some circumstances the contributing surety would not be held liable until the commencement of contribution proceedings. Goodloe v. Clay, 45 Ky. 236 , 1845 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1845 ) (decided under prior law).

A paying surety was not deprived of his right to contribution by having granted time to the insolvent principal in which to reimburse him or by having taken a new covenant from him for reimbursement. Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ) (decided under prior law).

When two (2) of the four (4) creditor plaintiffs indemnified one (1) of the debtor’s two (2) sureties, said indemnifying plaintiffs could be enjoined by the unindemnified surety from collecting from him the amount due them under the decree. Johnson v. Givens, 60 Ky. 91 , 1860 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1860 ) (decided under prior law).

The right of action between cosureties or co-obligors for contribution accrued when one (1) of them paid more than his portion of the liability. Cochran v. Walker's Ex'rs, 82 Ky. 220 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 184 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1884). See Chenault v. Bush, 84 Ky. 528 , 2 S.W. 160, 8 Ky. L. Rptr. 490 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1886 ) (decided under prior law).

In equity contribution is based on the principle of distributing a common burden among those who are able to bear it. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McGinnis' Adm'r, 147 Ky. 781 , 145 S.W. 1112, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The principles of contribution are not affected by the fact that one (1) of the two (2) cosureties is a compensated surety while the other is an accommodation surety. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McGinnis' Adm'r, 147 Ky. 781 , 145 S.W. 1112, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The principles of contribution are not affected by the fact that one (1) surety had signed three (3) bonds and the other only one. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McGinnis' Adm'r, 147 Ky. 781 , 145 S.W. 1112, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1912 ) (decided under prior law).

A paying surety may estop himself from securing contribution if, at a time when the principal was solvent, he induced his cosurety not to take legal steps to have himself exonerated. Morgan v. Morgan, 158 Ky. 830 , 166 S.W. 602, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 716 ( Ky. 1914 ).

A paying surety is not deprived of his right to contribution by having granted time to the insolvent principal in which to reimburse him or by having taken a new covenant from him for reimbursement. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ).

At law, contribution is based on an implied contract. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Sureties paying a judgment which is unenforceable against the principal are not volunteers. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

That there will be contribution among sureties is a legal presumption and implication. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

4.— Insolvency or Nonresidency of Principal.

Contribution could not be had from a cosurety unless the principal was insolvent. Lampton v. Bruner, 12 Ky. 141 , 1822 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1822 ). See Pearson v. Duckham, 13 Ky. 385 , 1823 Ky. LEXIS 92 ( Ky. 1823 ); Poignard v. Vernon, 17 Ky. 45 , 1824 Ky. LEXIS 134 ( Ky. 1824 ); Daniel v. Ballard, 32 Ky. 296 , 1834 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1834 ); Morrison v. Poyntz, 37 Ky. 307 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1838 ); Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ); Crow v. Murphy, 51 Ky. 444 , 1851 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1851 ); Lee v. Forman, 60 Ky. 114 , 1860 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1860 ); Bolling v. Doneghy, 62 Ky. 220 , 1864 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1864 ); Oldham v. Price, 5 Ky. Op. 95, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 213 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 20, 1872); Million v. Newby, 6 Ky. Op. 76, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 426 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 10, 1872); Gilmore v. Guenther, 4 Ky. L. Rptr. 522 ; Brown v. Gillespie, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 634 (1888); Brann v. Monroe, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 324 .

It was not necessary to sue the principal to insolvency. Caldwell v. Roberts, 31 Ky. 355 , 1833 Ky. LEXIS 88 ( Ky. 1833 ). See Brown v. Gillespie, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 634 (1888).

When some cosureties were insolvent or nonresidents, the debt, as between the sureties, had to be borne equally by the solvent ones. Breckinridge v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 110 , 5 Dana 110, 1837 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1837 ). See Bosley v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 157 , 5 Dana 157, 1837 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1837 ); Morrison v. Poyntz, 37 Ky. 307 , 7 Dana 307, 1838 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1838 ); Cobb v. Haynes, 47 Ky. 137 , 8 B. Mon. 137, 1847 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1847 ). For rule as between coobligors, see Kincaid v. Hocker, 30 Ky. 333 , 1832 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1832 ).

Contribution could not be had from a nonresident. Bosley v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 157 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1837 ) (decided under prior law).

A principal would be deemed insolvent when his only estate was of a contingent nature and doubtful value. Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ) (decided under prior law).

A petition for contribution had to allege the insolvency of the principal. Bolling v. Doneghy, 62 Ky. 220 , 1864 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1864 ). See Mitchell v. Phelps, 4 Ky. Op. 102, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 281 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 21, 1870); Oldham v. Price, 5 Ky. Op. 95, 1872 Ky. LEXIS 213 (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 20, 1872) (decided under prior law).

A petition for contribution had to allege the insolvency of the principal but the failure to do so could be waived. King v. Nichols, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 293 (1890) (decided under prior law).

Contribution cannot be had from a cosurety unless the principal is insolvent. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ). See Kelley v. Ramsey, 176 Ky. 584 , 195 S.W. 1111, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1917 ); Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ) (decided under prior law).

Insolvency of the principal and payment of the debt must concur before a right of contribution accrues. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ).

A petition for contribution must allege the insolvency of the principal. Kelley v. Ramsey, 176 Ky. 584 , 195 S.W. 1111, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

It is not necessary to sue the principal to insolvency. Kelley v. Ramsey, 176 Ky. 584 , 195 S.W. 1111, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

When the principal is insolvent, the paying surety can have contribution from his cosureties only after the principal’s assets have been liquidated and their value ascertained. Kelley v. Ramsey, 176 Ky. 584 , 195 S.W. 1111, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Insolvency of the principal may be proven by any competent evidence. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

5.— Payment as Prerequisite.

In an action for contribution, the surety or coobligor could show payment in any medium equivalent to money. Robertson v. Maxcey, 36 Ky. 101 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1838 ). See Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ); Stubbins v. Mitchell, 82 Ky. 535 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 768 , 1885 Ky. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1885) (decided under prior law).

A surety could sue for contribution as often as he made payments. Robinson v. Jennings, 70 Ky. 630 , 1870 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1870 ) (decided under prior law).

The right to contribution arose upon payment by the surety to the creditor. Robinson v. Jennings, 70 Ky. 630 , 1870 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1870 ). See Cochran v. Walker's Ex'rs, 82 Ky. 220 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 184 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1884); Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ) (decided under prior law).

The obligation to contribute was in equity deemed to arise when the relationship was entered into, though not consummated until payment by one (1) coobligor. Chenault v. Bush, 84 Ky. 528 , 2 S.W. 160, 8 Ky. L. Rptr. 490 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1886 ) (decided under prior law).

In an action for contribution, the surety or coobligor may show payment in any medium equivalent to money. Greene v. Anderson, 102 Ky. 216 , 43 S.W. 195, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1187 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1897 ).

A surety is not entitled to contribution until he has paid the debt. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ).

The mere fact that the paying sureties delivered the money to the principal for payment to the creditor does not make the transaction a loan to the principal rather than a payment to the creditor. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ).

The right to contribution arises upon payment by the surety to the creditor. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where one (1) of several sureties pays a judgment entered against the sureties, he may, in an action brought under subsection (1) of KRS 426.381 after a return of no property found on an execution issued against the other sureties, join all of the other sureties as defendants and proceed against them jointly. Pope v. Cawood, 293 Ky. 389 , 168 S.W.2d 985, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1943 ).

6.— Different Instruments.

Sureties who were bound to the same extent for the same person and thing, though on a different instrument, were entitled to contribution. Hutchcraft v. Shrout's Heirs, 17 Ky. 206 , 1824 Ky. LEXIS 190 ( Ky. 1824 ). See Bosley v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 157 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1837 ); Withers v. Hickman, 45 Ky. 292 , 1845 Ky. LEXIS 121 ( Ky. 1845 ); Cobb v. Haynes, 47 Ky. 137 , 1847 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1847 ); Taylor v. Nunn, 59 Ky. 199 , 1859 Ky. LEXIS 78 ( Ky. 1859 ); Elbert v. Jacoby, 71 Ky. 542 , 1871 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1871 ); Kellar v. Williams, 73 Ky. 216 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1874 ) (decided under prior law).

Sureties on different obligations for the same person and thing were deemed cosureties as to defaults after the date of the last obligation. Breckinridge v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 110 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1837 ) (decided under prior law).

Sureties who were bound to the same extent for the same person and thing, though on a different instrument, were entitled to contribution whether bound jointly or severally. Breckinridge v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 110 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1837 ) (decided under prior law).

Sureties who are bound, whether separately or jointly, to the same extent for the same person and thing, though on a different instrument, are entitled to contribution. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McGinnis' Adm'r, 147 Ky. 781 , 145 S.W. 1112, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Sureties on successive bonds of an officer who are bound, whether jointly or separately, to the same extent for the same person and thing, though on a different instrument, are entitled to contribution. Winston v. Slaton, 267 Ky. 831 , 103 S.W.2d 675, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 403 ( Ky. 1937 ).

7.— Amount.

Liability for contribution was based upon the amount paid on the debt. Incidental sacrifices and expenses were not elements for consideration. Hickman v. McCurdy, 30 Ky. 555 , 1832 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1832 ) (decided under prior law).

The right to contribution of a surety who had transferred property in satisfaction of the debt was measured by the actual value of the property, but not exceeding the amount of the debt. Hickman v. McCurdy, 30 Ky. 555 , 1832 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1832 ). See Robertson v. Maxcey, 36 Ky. 101 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1838 ) (decided under prior law).

A contributing surety was liable for interest on his proportion from date of payment by his cosurety to date of decree. Breckinridge v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 110 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1837 ). See Bosley v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 157 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1837 ) (decided under prior law).

Where the liability of the sureties was a collateral one requiring a suit to determine extent of liability, the contributing surety was liable for his share of the costs incurred by his cosurety. Breckinridge v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 110 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1837 ). See Bosley v. Taylor, 35 Ky. 157 , 1837 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1837 ) (decided under prior law).

Any contract between the sureties as to their proportion of liability would be enforced by the courts. Chapeze v. Young, 87 Ky. 476 , 9 S.W. 399, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 465 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 100 ( Ky. 1888 ) (decided under prior law).

Any contract between the sureties as to their proportion of liability will be enforced by the courts. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ). See Rogers v. Hazel, 147 Ky. 333 , 144 S.W. 49, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 246 ( Ky. 1912 ); Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ) (decided under prior law).

Sureties may be bound as among themselves in different measures of liability. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ).

When some cosureties are insolvent or nonresidents, the debt must, as between the sureties, be borne equally by the solvent ones. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 93 S.W. 14, 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 , 5 L.R.A. (n.s.) 1072 ( Ky. 1906 ). For rule as between co-obligors see Greene v. Anderson, 102 Ky. 216 , 43 S.W. 195, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1187 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1897 ).

A surety holding security from the principal must resort to the security before seeking contribution from his cosureties unless such security be of a contingent nature, of doubtful value and presently unenforceable. Hall v. Gleason, 158 Ky. 789 , 166 S.W. 608, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 719 ( Ky. 1914 ).

If the principal can be made to satisfy a portion of the debt, a cosurety is required to contribute to the payment of the unpaid remainder. Kelley v. Ramsey, 176 Ky. 584 , 195 S.W. 1111, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1917 ).

A mere request by a surety to another to sign with him is presumably a request to be bound equally. But the rule is otherwise if there is a definite contract as to a different liability or if the second surety signs for the benefit of the first. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Except as to the relative liability between the sureties, a defendant in a suit for contribution is bound by the judgment in the suit on the original obligation when he has participated therein. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The relative liability of sureties may be proven by parol. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

8.— Statute of Limitations.

The right to contribution is barred in five (5) years. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

In suits for contribution, the statute of limitations will be applied in equity as it is at law. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

9.— Jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction of the circuit court was to be determined by the total amount of contribution sought, and not the amount chargeable to each cosurety. Lampton v. Bruner, 12 Ky. 141 , 1822 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1822 ).

The jurisdiction of courts of law and equity in contribution proceedings between sureties was concurrent. Hickman v. McCurdy, 30 Ky. 555 , 1832 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1832 ). See Robertson v. Maxcey, 36 Ky. 101 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1838 ).

10.— Security from Principal.

A surety who held security from the principal was required to resort to the security before he sought contribution from his cosureties. Morrison v. Poyntz, 37 Ky. 307 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1838 ).

A surety who held security from the principal was required to resort to the security before he sought contribution from his cosureties unless such security was of a contingent nature, of doubtful value and presently unenforceable. Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ).

A secured surety suing for contribution was liable for any loss or waste of the security and, if he permitted the principal to retain possession thereof, he was also liable for the value of the use of the security during such time. Goodloe v. Clay, 45 Ky. 236 , 1845 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1845 ).

11.— Defenses.

A defendant cosurety could, upon motion for contribution, plead any defense that would have been available to him in a common-law action. Tennell v. Dozier, 3 Ky. 47 ( Ky. 1806 ).

The mere fact that the principal had property subject to execution sufficient to pay the debt was not a good defense. Brann v. Monroe, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 324 .

12.— Release of Cosurety.

Where one of the secured sureties paid part of the debt and released part of the security, his cosurety, when sued for contribution, could set off the value of the released property. Roberts v. Sayre, 22 Ky. 188 , 1827 Ky. LEXIS 268 ( Ky. 1827 ).

When a surety who had paid the debt released a cosurety, the liability of the other cosureties for contribution was not affected. Crowdus v. Shelby, 29 Ky. 61 , 1831 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1831 ).

A surety who had been released or exonerated pursuant to law was not liable for contribution. Letcher's Adm'r v. Yantis, 33 Ky. 160 , 1835 Ky. LEXIS 62 ( Ky. 1835 ).

A cosurety was not released from his liability to contribute by an unsatisfied accord. Atkinson v. Stewart, 41 Ky. 348 , 1842 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1842 ).

A surety paying pursuant to judgment against himself and the principal could not secure contribution from a cosurety released by limitations prior to judgment in the first suit. Shelton v. Farmer, 72 Ky. 314 , 1872 Ky. LEXIS 52 ( Ky. 1872 ). See Cochran v. Walker's Ex'rs, 82 Ky. 220 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 184 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1884).

13.Contribution from Indorser.

A surety of an acceptor of a bill of exchange in a replevin or injunction bond given to stay judgment against the acceptor could not, after paying the debt, claim contribution from an indorser. Bohannon v. Combs, 51 Ky. 563 , 1851 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1851 ) (decided under prior law).

14.Sureties on Replevin Bonds.

A surety in an injunction bond enjoining a replevied judgment who did so at the instance of the principal alone could not claim contribution from a surety on the replevin bond. Brandenburg v. Flynn's Adm'r, 51 Ky. 397 , 1851 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1851 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety on a bond replevying judgment on the principal’s debt was not entitled to contribution from a surety on the original debt. Hoskins v. Parsons, 58 Ky. 251 , 1858 Ky. LEXIS 44 ( Ky. 1858 ). See Hammock v. Baker, 66 Ky. 208 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 166 ( Ky. 1867 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety on a replevin bond executed by one (1) of two (2) judgment defendants was not entitled to reimbursement from a defendant who did not join the bond and whose liability as to his codefendant was secondary. Hoskins v. Parsons, 58 Ky. 251 , 1858 Ky. LEXIS 44 ( Ky. 1858 ) (decided under prior law).

15.Statute of Limitations.

The right to reimbursement was barred in five (5) years in the absence of a prior assignment of or subrogation to the creditors’ rights. Joyce v. Joyce's Adm'r, 64 Ky. 474 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1867 ). See Bridges v. Reed, 72 Ky. 329 , 1872 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1872 ) (decided under prior law).

The right to contribution was barred in five (5) years. Robinson v. Jennings, 70 Ky. 630 , 1870 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1870 ) (decided under prior law).

Limitations ran in favor of a surety against whom the action had been dismissed or abated. Cochran v. Walker's Ex'rs, 82 Ky. 220 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 184 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1884) (decided under prior law).

16.Surety’s Right to Profit.

A surety who discharges the obligation of its principal even under an assignment from the principal’s creditor or obligee, may not thereafter realize a profit from its assignment. Otherwise, a surety could enforce its rights under the assignment with the obligee against the principal, over and above its indemnification rights as a surety, as a means of realizing a profit from the assignment. Howell Constr. v. United Pac. Ins. Co., 819 F. Supp. 597, 824 F. Supp. 105, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10192, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5721 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ) (withdrawn).

Government contractor was entitled to accounting of surety’s transaction under government contract and was entitled to any amounts retained by surety in excess of surety’s loss even though surety did undertake a substantial new risk by contracting directly with the government to complete contractor’s contract, for surety’s choice must be exercised consistent with its fiduciary duties to contractor; the principle limiting a surety’s right against loss, forecloses a surety’s right to profit on a new assignment from the obligee. Howell Constr., Inc. v. United Pac. Ins. Co., 819 F. Supp. 597, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5721 (W.D. Ky.), op. withdrawn, sub. op., 824 F. Supp. 105, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10214 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ).

Where contractor who had government contract paid consideration to surety for assuming duty to guarantee performance of contract, once surety became obligated to and did perform under the bond it was still acting as surety and remained entitled only to an amount occasioned in the event of its loss or expense; its rights to any profit pursuant to a takeover agreement entered into with government was of no consequence to the suretyship; surety realized its gain in the form of premiums paid at the onset of the contract for suretyship and as surety held other amounts in excess of its liability as a fiduciary for the benefit of contractor, for to hold otherwise would bestow upon surety an undeserved windfall gain. Howell Constr. v. United Pac. Ins. Co., 819 F. Supp. 597, 824 F. Supp. 105, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10192, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5721 (W.D. Ky. 1993 ) (withdrawn).

Cited:

Sparkman’s Guardian v. Huff, 266 Ky. 183 , 98 S.W.2d 484, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Motion by Surety Paying Debt for Judgment Against Principal, Form 201.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Principal and Surety, § 201.00.

412.090. Assignment of right of action to surety paying judgment.

If the surety pays any part of a judgment he shall have a right to an assignment of the judgment from the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney, in whole or in part. When the plaintiff has been fully satisfied, the assignment shall give the surety the right to sue out or use any existing execution or otherwise control the judgment for his own benefit, against the other defendants, so far as to obtain satisfaction from the principal for the whole amount so paid by him, with interest, or from any cosurety his proper part of such payment, according to KRS 412.080 . This assignment shall also transfer to the sureties so paying the benefit of any lien existing under or by virtue of the judgment, and the right of assignment shall exist, though the money was made or secured by sale of the property of the surety under execution.

History. 4666.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

This section was intended to enlarge the equity doctrine of substitution and the common-law doctrine of contribution. Wiedemann v. Crawford, 149 Ky. 202 , 147 S.W. 951, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 1912 ).

2.Construction.

This section is an exception to the requirements of KRS 426.050 requiring joint executions on joint judgments. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ).

This section provides a summary remedy. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ).

This section was intended to enlarge the legal and equitable rights of sureties. Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ). See Wiedemann v. Crawford, 149 Ky. 202 , 147 S.W. 951, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 1912 ); Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section does not require that the assignment of a judgment shall be in writing or be made a matter of record, or that the assignment shall be entered on the record book in which the judgment is entered. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Statutory subrogation is a cumulative remedy and does not bar an action for contribution. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

This section does not affect the equitable doctrine. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ). See Davis v. Kinnard, 271 Ky. 428 , 112 S.W.2d 412, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 256 ( Ky. 1937 ).

3.Limitations.

After a lapse of five (5) years from date of payment, an order subrogating a surety to the creditors’ rights in the judgment had to be on notice to the principal who was entitled to an opportunity to defend and show cause against it. Veach v. Wickersham, 74 Ky. 261 , 1875 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1875 ) (decided under prior law).

The 15-year statute of limitations is applicable to statutory subrogation. Patton's Ex'r v. Smith, 130 Ky. 819 , 114 S.W. 315, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 327 ( Ky. 1908 ).

After a lapse of five (5) years from date of payment, an order subrogating a surety to the creditors’ rights in the judgment must be on notice to the principal who is entitled to an opportunity to defend and show cause against it. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The statutory assignment must be secured within five (5) years from time of payment and extends to 15 years the period in which the surety may have reimbursement from his principal. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

4.Persons Entitled.

On acknowledgement by plaintiff or his attorney of payment by the surety, the latter was entitled to an assignment. Alexander v. Lewis, 58 Ky. 407 , 1858 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1858 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety for an incompetent who paid a judgment secured by the creditor’s administrator was entitled to be subrogated to the latter’s priority against the incompetent’s estate. Salter v. Salter's Creditors, 69 Ky. 624 , 1869 Ky. LEXIS 230 ( Ky. 1869 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety who paid a judgment, replevin bond or execution was entitled to an assignment thereof. Lear v. Ray, 4 Ky. Op. 380, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 383 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 1, 1870). See Veach v. Wickersham, 74 Ky. 261 , 1875 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1875 ); Newman v. Johnson, 9 Ky. Op. 17, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 295 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1876); Stubbins v. Mitchell, 82 Ky. 535 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 768 , 1885 Ky. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1885) (decided under prior law).

A surety on a replevin bond who was required to pay the debt was entitled to subrogation to the creditor’s rights against the surety on a subsequent injunction bond the execution of which resulted in the first surety losing his right of reimbursement against his principal. Kellar v. Williams, 73 Ky. 216 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1874 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety who paid the debt during the action could ask that judgment be rendered for him instead of the creditor. Perkins v. Scott, 13 Ky. Op. 931, 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 589 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 596 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 608 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 147 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 13, 1886) (decided under prior law).

A surety paying a judgment, replevin bond or execution is entitled to an assignment thereof. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ); Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ); Robertson's Guardian v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 227 Ky. 114 , 12 S.W.2d 298, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 482 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The vendee of a surety making a fraudulent conveyance of property, which conveyance was set aside and the property subjected to the principal’s debt, is entitled to subrogation to the surety’s rights of reimbursement and contribution. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ).

Compensated as well as accommodation sureties are entitled to subrogation. Lewis' Adm'r v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 144 Ky. 425 , 138 S.W. 305, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The inducement to the surety to become such is immaterial. Lewis' Adm'r v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 144 Ky. 425 , 138 S.W. 305, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The legal presumption is that payment of a judgment by a surety does not extinguish it so as to deprive him of a right to an assignment of it. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

In action by surety claiming to be subrogated to rights of corporation to whom surety had paid obligation resulting from breach of employee’s fidelity bond, it was sufficient to allege that plaintiff was surety, that bond was breached, and that plaintiff had discharged the obligation, and it was not necessary to set forth the terms of the bond. National Surety Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank, 278 Ky. 273 , 128 S.W.2d 766, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 435 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Surety on fidelity bond of corporation employee, who paid obligation of employee resulting from breach of bond by wrongfully diverting proceeds of check payable to corporation, was subrogated to rights of corporation against bank that participated in diversion. National Surety Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank, 278 Ky. 273 , 128 S.W.2d 766, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 435 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The right of subrogation will not be denied merely because the surety is a compensated corporate surety, although this fact may be considered in balancing the equities. National Surety Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank, 278 Ky. 273 , 128 S.W.2d 766, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 435 ( Ky. 1939 ).

5.Rights Acquired.

An assignment of a replevin bond carried with it the creditor’s legal remedies and any lien arising out of the bond, but did not transfer any equity or lien merged or waived by the bond. Bank of Hopkinsville v. Rudy, 65 Ky. 326 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1867 ) (decided under prior law).

The subrogee has full control of the assigned judgment, replevin bond or execution, with all the rights and remedies of the creditor. Lear v. Ray, 4 Ky. Op. 380, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 383 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 1, 1870) (decided under prior law); Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Veach v. Wickersham, 74 Ky. 261 , 1875 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1875 ) (decided under prior law); Newman v. Johnson, 9 Ky. Op. 17, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 295 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1876) (decided under prior law); Stubbins v. Mitchell, 82 Ky. 535 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 768 , 1885 Ky. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1885) (decided under prior law); Sanders & Walker v. Herndon, 122 Ky. 760 , 93 S.W. 14, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 322 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1906 ); Patton's Ex'r v. Smith, 130 Ky. 819 , 114 S.W. 315, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 327 ( Ky. 1908 ); Wiedemann v. Crawford, 149 Ky. 202 , 147 S.W. 951, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 1912 ); Sisk's Adm'r v. Sisk's Adm'r, 192 Ky. 672 , 234 S.W. 296, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1921 ).

The surety is entitled to an execution for the amount paid by him with interest, even though this does not conform to the judgment. Patton's Ex'r v. Smith, 130 Ky. 819 , 114 S.W. 315, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 327 ( Ky. 1908 ).

The statute contemplates that the cosurety or coobligor should be liable only for his proper part. While the person issuing the execution may designate the sum for which it may be issued, such designation is subject to review by the court. Wiedemann v. Crawford, 149 Ky. 202 , 147 S.W. 951, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 585 ( Ky. 1912 ).

An assignment of a judgment passes only the interest of the assignor. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Assignment of a judgment does not carry with it a right of appeal for insufficiency, nor does it prejudice the assignor’s right to appeal on said ground. Robertson's Guardian v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 227 Ky. 114 , 12 S.W.2d 298, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 482 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where surety on performance bond of road contractor paid claims of materialmen, and surety contract contained provision assigning to surety all sums due from department of highways under road contract, surety was entitled to an equitable lien on balance due from department of highways, which lien dated from date of surety contract, and lien was superior to attachment lien acquired by general creditor of contractor. National Surety Corp. v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., 280 Ky. 785 , 134 S.W.2d 611, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 201 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where one of several sureties pays a judgment entered against the sureties, he may, in an action brought under subsection (1) of KRS 426.381 , after a return of no property found on an execution issued against the other sureties, join all of the other sureties as defendants and proceed against them jointly. Pope v. Cawood, 293 Ky. 389 , 168 S.W.2d 985, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1943 ).

6.Demand.

Statute providing for assignment or right of action to surety paying judgment entitled the surety to an assignment on demand, but it did not, per se, make it. Joyce v. Joyce's Adm'r, 64 Ky. 474 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1867 ) (decided under prior law).

This section entitles the surety to an assignment on demand, but it does not, per se, make it. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ). See Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

7.Right of Surety to Compel.

If the creditor refused to assign, the surety entitled to assignment could by proper proceedings compel it. Veach v. Wickersham, 74 Ky. 261 , 11 Bush 261, 1875 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1875 ) (decided under prior law); Robertson's Guardian v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 227 Ky. 114 , 12 S.W.2d 298, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 482 ( Ky. 1928 ).

8.Cumulative Rights.

Law that provided for assignment of right of action to surety paying judgment did not affect the equitable doctrine. Kellar v. Williams, 73 Ky. 216 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1874 ).

Law that provided for assignment of right of action to surety paying judgment was intended to enlarge the legal and equitable rights of sureties. Kellar v. Williams, 73 Ky. 216 , 1874 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1874 ). See Perkins v. Scott, 13 Ky. Op. 931, 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 589 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 596 , 7 Ky. L. Rptr. 608 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 147 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 13, 1886).

Cited:

Sparkman’s Guardian v. Huff, 266 Ky. 183 , 98 S.W.2d 484, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Assignment of Judgment to Surety on Supersedeas Bond After Judgment Affirmed and Paid off by Said Surety, Form 201.08.

412.100. Rights of co-obligors and cocontractors.

Co-obligors and cocontractors shall, as between each other, have the full benefit of KRS 412.080 and 412.090 as if they were cosureties.

History. 4667.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Contribution.

An obligor replevying or paying a debt is entitled to contribution from his co-obligors. Jackson & Bro. v. Gillen, 9 Ky. Op. 64, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 321 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 8, 1876) (decided under prior law); Greene v. Anderson, 102 Ky. 216 , 43 S.W. 195, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1187 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1897 ). See Graziani v. Hall, 67 S.W. 9, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2351 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 429 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902).

One of joint owners of land who paid judgment foreclosing mortgage on land was entitled to contribution from other owners, although he did not obtain an assignment of the judgment. Hill v. Hoover, 292 Ky. 548 , 166 S.W.2d 450, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where owner of one of several tracts of land subject to mortgage paid mortgage, he was entitled to contribution from owners of other tracts based upon appraised value of respective tracts. Hill v. Hoover, 292 Ky. 548 , 166 S.W.2d 450, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1942 ).

412.110. Person jointly liable may require suit or execution issued — Notice.

A surety, co-obligor, or cocontractor, or one (1) of several defendants to a judgment may, by notice in writing served in person within the state on the creditor or plaintiff, or, if the plaintiff is a nonresident or absent from the place of his residence for the period of thirty (30) days consecutively, upon his agent or his attorney, require him to sue or issue execution. If the creditor does not in good faith prosecute the suit with reasonable diligence, or if the plaintiff does not, within ten (10) days after judgment, sue out execution and in good faith prosecute the collection, the cosurety, co-obligor, cocontractor, or defendant shall be discharged from all liability, except for his proper share according to the then existing condition of the several obligors, contractors, or defendants. In any joint suit against the whole, or separate suit against him, judgment shall be rendered against him separately, and only for such proper share. The written notice required in this section shall not be waived, unless the waiver is in writing. No waiver of the notice shall be pleaded as a defense or given in evidence, unless it is in writing.

History. 4668: amend. Acts 1976 (Ex. Sess.), ch. 14, § 415, effective January 2, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section does not apply to a case in which suit has been brought or in which execution has been issued against the principal. National Surety Co. v. Arterburn, 110 Ky. 832 , 62 S.W. 862, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 281 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 137 ( Ky. 1901 ).

A surety in a note expressly waiving diligence in bringing suit is not entitled to the benefit of this statute. Owensboro Sav. Bank & Trust Co.'s Receiver v. Haynes, 143 Ky. 534 , 136 S.W. 1004, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 450 ( Ky. 1911 ).

2.Notice.

Where notice was given three (3) days before term time and all parties lived within three miles of the courthouse, failure to sue at that term released the surety. Weir v. Dicker's Adm'r, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 523 (1889) (decided under prior law).

A notice to “collect” the debt was a sufficient notice. Stevens v. Chorn, 8 Ky. Op. 679, 1876 Ky. LEXIS 198 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 1876) (decided under prior law). See Weir v. Dicker's Adm'r, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 523 (1889).

To be effective the notice must be given after the maturity of the note. Baker v. Whittaker, 177 Ky. 197 , 197 S.W. 644, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Surety could not complain that bank, in setting off assets of maker of note, benefited relatives where surety did not utilize this section and continued to sign renewal note for several years, since there was no duty of payee bank to exercise its power of setoff in favor of surety or to inform the surety of the disposition the principal was making of his assets. Meredith v. First Nat'l Bank, 271 S.W.2d 274, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1039 ( Ky. 1954 ).

3.— Form.

The notice to sue had to be in writing. Hibler v. Shipp, 78 Ky. 64 , 1879 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1879 ) (decided under prior law).

A suggestion that the debt be placed in an attorney’s hands is not sufficient to constitute notice. Benge's Adm'r v. Eversole, 156 Ky. 131 , 160 S.W. 911, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1913 ).

The notice must be clear, explicit and unambiguous. It must be, in effect, a demand to sue. Benge's Adm'r v. Eversole, 156 Ky. 131 , 160 S.W. 911, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1913 ). See Baker v. Whittaker, 177 Ky. 197 , 197 S.W. 644, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1917 ).

A notice to “collect” the debt is a sufficient notice. Baker v. Whittaker, 177 Ky. 197 , 197 S.W. 644, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1917 ).

The notice to sue must be in writing. Benge's Adm'r v. Garrison, 198 Ky. 447 , 248 S.W. 1050, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1923 ).

A surety’s oral statement to the payee of a note that he will not renew the note or be responsible for it, and asking payee to sue the maker, is of no legal effect. Goodloe v. Anderson, 275 Ky. 460 , 121 S.W.2d 958, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 449 ( Ky. 1938 ).

4.— Service.

It was not necessary that the notice be served by an officer or disinterested party and a return made. A letter was sufficient when its receipt and time of receipt was admitted. Weir v. Dicker's Adm'r, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 523 (1889) (decided under prior law).

The burden of proving the giving of notice is upon the surety. Benge's Adm'r v. Eversole, 156 Ky. 131 , 160 S.W. 911, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where receipt of notice is denied, the surety must show personal receipt of same by the obligee. Benge's Adm'r v. Eversole, 156 Ky. 131 , 160 S.W. 911, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1913 ). See Benge's Adm'r v. Garrison, 198 Ky. 447 , 248 S.W. 1050, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1923 ).

5.Waiver.

Surety’s execution promissory note which waived, as to debt, any and all exemptions permitted by law to be waived did not constitute a waiver of his rights under this section. Coombs v. Beneficial Finance Co., 549 S.W.2d 327, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 665 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

6.Failure to Comply.

The law providing that persons jointly liable could require suit or execution issue on notice was imperative and the obligee had to comply or the surety would be released. Crowdus v. Commercial Bank, 4 Ky. Op. 376, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 381 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 12, 1870). See Hibler v. Shipp, 78 Ky. 64 , 1879 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1879 ) (decided under prior law).

After release of the surety by failure of the obligee to sue pursuant to written notice, the liability of the surety was not revived by an oral request not to sue. Medley v. Tandy, 85 Ky. 566 , 4 S.W. 308, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 168 , 1887 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1887 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited:

Meade v. Goldberg, 249 F.2d 957, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4102 (6th Cir. 1957), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 941, 78 S. Ct. 430, 2 L. Ed. 2d 421, 1958 U.S. LEXIS 1577 (1958), cert. denied, Meade v. Goldberg, 355 U.S. 941, 78 S. Ct. 430, 2 L. Ed. 2d 421, 1958 U.S. LEXIS 1577 (1958).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Drake, Kentucky Lawyers and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 51 Ky. Bench & B. 32 (1987).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Notice by Surety to Collect, Form 201.07.

412.120. Release of surety on bond for delay in execution.

If the plaintiff in any bond having the force of a judgment fails, at any time for the space of a year during which he is entitled to have execution, to issue execution and in good faith prosecute the collection, the surety in the bond shall be released from all liability. Any execution thereafter issuing on the bond shall be so endorsed.

History. 4669.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This is not a statute of limitation that must be pleaded, but operates of itself to release the surety when the facts warrant. Bridgewater v. England, 62 S.W. 882, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 338 (1901).

2.Application.

This section applies to replevin bonds and sureties are discharged by failure to issue execution for the space of a year. Louis Snider's Sons Co. v. Armendt, 105 Ky. 317 , 49 S.W. 10, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1203 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1899 ).

This section applies only to bonds to beneficial creditors who alone may control the collection by execution. It cannot be constructively applied to judicial bonds the collection of which the court alone could control. Turner v. Eastin, 51 S.W. 567, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 380 (1899).

This section does not apply to bonds executed to an officer of the court for the loan of money in litigation under order of the court. Turner v. Eastin, 51 S.W. 567, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 380 (1899).

3.Running of Limitation.

Filing of a bill of discovery does not interrupt the running of the statute. Louis Snider's Sons Co. v. Armendt, 105 Ky. 317 , 49 S.W. 10, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1203 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1899 ).

The operation of the statute will be interrupted by a written agreement between plaintiff and surety to postpone sale of property of the principal under an execution until other property can be substituted therefor and sold, it appearing that the subsequent execution was issued promptly after the sale under the first one. First Nat'l Bank v. Gabbard, 55 S.W. 548, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1441 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 518 ( Ky. 1900 ).

4.Issuance of Execution.

Issuance of three (3) executions by the commissioner warrants assumption that he had authority to do so. Bridgewater v. England, 62 S.W. 882, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 338 (1901).

5.Discharge.

Sureties in a replevin bond were discharged by failure to issue execution for the space of a year. Newman v. Hazelrigg, 64 Ky. 412 , 1866 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 1866 ) (decided under prior law).

It was the duty of the clerk to indorse such discharges upon the execution when issued. Bell v. Cross, 7 Ky. Op. 523, 1874 Ky. LEXIS 187 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 24, 1874) (decided under prior law).

It is the duty of the clerk to indorse such discharges upon the execution when issued. Bridgewater v. England, 62 S.W. 882, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 338 (1901).

6.Sale After Discharge.

A sale under execution against a surety released by this section to the plaintiff passed no title, since the plaintiff was presumed to know of the defect, and caused the void sale to be made. Bell v. Cross, 7 Ky. Op. 523, 1874 Ky. LEXIS 187 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 24, 1874) (decided under prior law).

When execution was void and levy and sale illegal, no title passed to purchaser who, by issuing the execution, caused sheriff to make illegal sale. Bell v. Cross, 7 Ky. Op. 523, 1874 Ky. LEXIS 187 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 24, 1874) (decided under prior law).

7.Bonds Not Within Statute.

A sale bond executed to an officer of the court and attempted to be collected before an adjudication of ownership was not within the statute. Barbee v. Pitman, 66 Ky. 259 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1867 ). See Haddix v. Chambers & Little, 68 Ky. 171 , 1868 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1868 ) (decided under prior law).

Statute providing for release of surety on bond for delay in execution applied only to bonds to beneficial creditors who alone could control the collection by execution and could not be constructively applied to judicial bonds the collection of which the court alone could control. Barbee v. Pitman, 66 Ky. 259 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1867 ) (decided under prior law). See Rankin v. White, 68 Ky. 545 (1868); Wintersmith v. Tabor, 68 Ky. 105 , 1868 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 1868 ); Haddix v. Chambers & Little, 68 Ky. 171 , 1868 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1868 ); Turner v. Rankin, 80 Ky. 179 , 3 Ky. L. Rptr. 660 , 1882 Ky. LEXIS 37 (Ky. Ct. App. 1882).

Statute providing for release of surety on bond for delay in execution did not apply to bonds executed to an officer of the court for the loan of money in litigation under order of the court. Rankin v. White, 68 Ky. 545 (1868) (decided under prior law). See Turner v. Rankin, 80 Ky. 179 , 3 Ky. L. Rptr. 660 , 1882 Ky. LEXIS 37 (Ky. Ct. App. 1882).

8.Continuation of Liability.

A written consent of sureties on a replevin bond, at plaintiff’s request, to a stay of an execution then held by the sheriff so long as plaintiff might direct did not, where the plaintiff had fixed no time for the stay, continue the liability of the sureties beyond one year. The plaintiff, not being bound to postpone collection of his debt, could have had a new execution issued at any time. McCauley v. Offutt, 51 Ky. 386 , 1851 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1851 ) (decided under prior law).

A written request by the surety to a stay of execution would continue his liability beyond the statutory period. Furber v. Bassett, 63 Ky. 433 , 1866 Ky. LEXIS 30 ( Ky. 1866 ) (decided under prior law).

A written request by the sureties to stay collection of the debt and agreeing to remain bound therefor so long as plaintiff might desire would continue their liability beyond the one year. Prather v. Harlan & Thompson's Adm'r, 69 Ky. 185 , 1869 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1869 ) (decided under prior law).

A surety on a bond replevying a fine which was respited by the governor beyond the statutory period was not released. The time embraced by the respite did not go to make up the period of limitation. Nall v. Springfield, 72 Ky. 673 , 1873 Ky. LEXIS 25 ( Ky. 1873 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

General Assembly to provide for release of sureties, Const., § 238.

Surety for fiduciary discharged after five years, KRS 413.230 , 413.240 .

Surety in bond discharged after seven years, KRS 413.220 , 413.240 .

Surety in contract discharged after seven years, KRS 413.220 , 413.240 .

Surety in judgment discharged after seven years, KRS 413.220 , 413.240 .

412.130. Release of surety on lost or destroyed judgment or bond.

No surety shall be released from his obligation on any lost or destroyed judgment, or bond having the force of a judgment, because of any failure to sue out execution thereon for twelve (12) months, unless the failure was for twelve (12) months after the reentry of judgment or order of execution. However, this section shall not apply to a surety who was released by law at the time of the destruction or loss of the record or bond, nor unless proceedings to have a reentry of the judgment or order of execution had been commenced as provided in KRS 422.210 and 422.220 .

History. 4670: amend. Acts 1976 (Ex. Sess.), ch. 14, § 416, effective January 2, 1978.

412.140. Action by surety against principal or cosurety after maturity of debt.

After the maturity of a debt or liability, an equitable action may be brought by a surety against his principal to compel payment of it, or by one who is jointly liable therefor with another to compel him to pay so much of it as he may be equitably liable for as between him and the plaintiff.

History. C.C. 661: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Surety Against Principal.

A payee and first indorser of a bill of exchange was liable to the second indorser, who took up the bill, for the full amount of the bill, unless there was an agreement for a different degree of responsibility; such an action was substantially an action by a surety against his principal to obtain indemnity against the debt for which he was liable. Scott v. Doneghy, 56 Ky. 321 , 1856 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1856 ) (decided under prior law).

Where a father signed a son’s note as surety and a judgment was obtained against both and execution levied against the father’s real estate which was partitioned between the son and the father’s other heirs on the father’s death, the other heirs could maintain an action to have son’s portion of the property sold to satisfy the lien on all the property and, since the land descended to the son with a lien upon it, he had no homestead as against the lien. Meader v. Meader, 88 Ky. 217 , 10 S.W. 651 ( Ky. 1889 ) (decided under prior law).

In an action by the administrator of a decedent and the present guardian of an infant, of whom the decedent was guardian at the time of his death, against a surety on the guardian’s bond, cross action by the surety, seeking to recover for the ward part of a trust fund belonging to the estate of the ward, which had been wrongfully received, was not one against cosureties for contribution but an action against the insolvent estate of a deceased principal and others, who are quasi principals, having in their hands, impliedly in trust, funds of the cestui qui trust, and relief sought was property allowed. In order to maintain such action, surety need not have discharged the debt. Taylor v. Harris' Adm'r, 164 Ky. 654 , 176 S.W. 168, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 436 ( Ky. 1915 ).

A grantee in a deed who assumes the payment of a debt of the grantor secured by a mortgage on the property conveyed becomes the principal and the grantor becomes the surety; therefore, when grantee defaults in payment, the grantor cannot maintain a suit against the grantee for the amount due without himself having paid the debt and, if the property is sold at foreclosure sale, the grantor cannot sue grantee for a deficiency unless grantor actually pays the deficiency. White v. Upton, 255 Ky. 562 , 74 S.W.2d 924, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 261 ( Ky. 1934 ).

Where it was obvious from the petition as a whole as well as all other pleadings that the purpose of action of surety against the maker was to recover for the benefit of herself and the payee of the note, which was three (3) months past due and unpaid, surety could maintain the action without having first paid the indebtedness. Lincoln Bank & Trust Co. v. Arnold, 256 Ky. 80 , 75 S.W.2d 751, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1934 ).

2.Surety Against Cosurety.

As between sureties, a discharge of their joint obligation by the acceptance in lieu of it, by the holder, of the promissory note of one of them was equivalent to a payment of money therefor and the surety who paid the obligation could maintain an action against his cosurety for contribution. Stubbins v. Mitchell, 82 Ky. 535 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 768 , 1885 Ky. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1885).

In an action instituted by a surety against his cosurety, to pay an obligation for which they were jointly liable, in which it was averred that the defendant had transferred property to his son, the only consideration being love and affection, after process was served upon him, the court determined that such a conveyance as to antecedent creditors of the donor was fraudulent and without sufficient consideration. Franklin v. Cooper, 44 S.W. 976, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1976 (1898).

In an action against two (2) sureties on a note, one surety against whom judgment went for the whole amount, after satisfying it, may maintain an equitable action against his cosurety for contribution or he may proceed at law by cross petition. Fritts v. Kirchdorfer, 136 Ky. 643 , 124 S.W. 882, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 525 ( Ky. 1910 ).

One joint obligor may maintain an action in equity to require another to pay to the creditor the portion of the debt which, as between themselves, the other ought to equitably pay, but he cannot recover a judgment, in his own name and for himself, for any portion of the debt, which he has not himself first paid. Lawson v. Davis, 194 Ky. 67 , 238 S.W. 402, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 130 ( Ky. 1922 ).

3.Subrogation to Sureties’ Rights.

In an action by the payee on a note against the payor and sureties, the payee on proper allegations would have been entitled to subrogation to the rights of the sureties under a note and mortgage given them by the payor, but the sureties were not entitled to judgment on their note in the absence of an allegation that they paid the plaintiff on the original note. Fields v. Letcher State Bank, 246 Ky. 229 , 54 S.W.2d 910, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 739 ( Ky. 1932 ).

4.Parties.

Under this section the creditor must be made a defendant in an action by a surety against his principal to foreclose a mortgage to satisfy indebtedness paid by surety but, where the question of defect of parties was not raised in the proper way and at the proper time and the creditors subsequently became parties and filed their answers and cross petitions setting up their claims and electing to take their share of the proceeds, the failure to make them parties was necessarily cured. Hurm v. Collignon, 202 Ky. 807 , 261 S.W. 602, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 824 ( Ky. 1924 ).

5.Pleadings.

It was not error, being not only permissible but eminently proper, for Circuit Court to allow plaintiffs to file an amended petition just before submission of the cause to cure defects and perfect the cause of action allowed by this section and also to make pleadings conform to the proof in an action to recover judgment for an indebtedness it was claimed defendant owed them which involved a settlement of all matters of account between them, including payment as maker of certain past-due notes upon which plaintiffs were sureties and to enforce for that purpose the mortgage given plaintiffs by defendant as security. Quigley v. Beam's Adm'r, 137 Ky. 325 , 125 S.W. 727, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 575 ( Ky. 1910 ).

6.Security.

Where three (3) sureties were bound and two (2) of them had taken a mortgage from the principal to indemnify them against the debt and other liabilities and one of them paid the debt and brought assumpsit against the third surety, who had no indemnity, for his third part, the action could not be maintained without showing that the mortgaged property had been properly disposed of without having satisfied the debt for which contribution was demanded. Morrison v. Poyntz, 37 Ky. 307 , 1838 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1838 ) (decided under prior law).

A security given by a principal to his surety is a security for the debt, as well as ultimate protection of the surety, and operates for the benefit of the creditor so that after maturity of the debt the creditor may be subrogated to the rights of the surety therein, either on his own application or that of the surety. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

7.Attorney’s Fee.

The bank was not liable for the attorney’s fee of the surety even though the surety brought the action, with the consent of the bank holding the note, against the principal and the bank for the benefit of the bank, since the services rendered by the attorney were for the benefit of the surety. Viall v. Pepples, 274 Ky. 599 , 119 S.W.2d 860, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1938 ).

8.Statute of Limitations.

A surety who had paid a judgment could not enforce contribution against his cosurety if, when the debt was paid, the statute of limitations ran as between the original obligee and the cosurety for his executor. Cochran v. Walker's Ex'rs, 82 Ky. 220 , 6 Ky. L. Rptr. 184 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1884).

9.Insolvency of Principal.

One joint indorser, who had paid the whole amount of a note negotiated at bank, could not recover from another joint indorser for ratable part without proving the insolvency of the payor. Pearson v. Duckham, 13 Ky. 385 , 1823 Ky. LEXIS 92 ( Ky. 1823 ) (decided under prior law).

Money paid by a surety was, prima facie, deemed to have been paid to the use of the principal obligor, and the liability of a cosurety was altogether contingent, depending on the insolvency of the principal. Lee v. Forman, 60 Ky. 114 , 1860 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1860 ) (decided under prior law).

In an action against representatives of the plaintiff’s cosurety for a judgment for money paid for their principal, the court, in dismissing the complaint, stated that an action could not be maintained by one surety against a cosurety unless the principal was insolvent, and the failure of the petition to allege such insolvency rendered it fatally defective. Bolling v. Doneghy, 62 Ky. 220 , 1864 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1864 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited:

Noe v. Brock, 263 Ky. 37 , 91 S.W.2d 546, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Judgment upon motion, KRS 418.005 .

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint in Action by Surety Against a Co-Surety for Contribution, Form 201.02.

412.150. Creditor to be made defendant — Provisional remedies allowed.

  1. The creditor must be made defendant to an action brought pursuant to KRS 412.140 , but shall not be liable for costs.
  2. The provisions of KRS 425.301 to 425.316 and KRS 425.501 to 425.526 shall apply to such action.

History. C.C. 662: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953; 1980, ch. 188, § 287, effective July 15, 1980; 1982, ch. 118, § 3, effective July 15, 1982.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Pleadings.

It was immaterial that surety, in the affidavit for attachment issued under KRS 425.195 (now repealed), stated the sum she ought to recover instead of stating the sum the defendant should pay as provided in subsection (2) of this section where it was obvious and undisputed by any party to the record that the purpose of the suit was for her benefit as surety and for benefit of payee of note and not for her sole benefit. Lincoln Bank & Trust Co. v. Arnold, 256 Ky. 80 , 75 S.W.2d 751, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1934 ).

While strict compliance with the law is required as to attachments and other summary proceedings, the exact words of the law need not always be used. Lincoln Bank & Trust Co. v. Arnold, 256 Ky. 80 , 75 S.W.2d 751, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1934 ).

2.Attachment Before Debt Due.

Where surety brought an action against principal, before debt was due, for indemnity and obtained an attachment as permitted by KRS 425.375 but did not make creditor a defendant, the failure to make creditor a party did not render the attachment void. Bamberger v. Moayon, 91 Ky. 517 , 16 S.W. 276, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 102 , 1891 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1891 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Oaths and bonds, KRS ch. 62.

Surety, authority of agent as, KRS 371.090 .

412.160. Proceedings against surety after bankruptcy of principal.

In an action for the recovery of money in which the defendant may have given bond with sureties, or for whom sureties may have given bond, pursuant to the provisions of subsection (1) of KRS 425.116 ; or in which an appellant may have given bond with sureties, or for whom sureties may have given bond, for the purpose of appeal from an inferior court to a circuit court or for the purpose of a supersedeas pending an appeal to the Court of Appeals — if such defendant or appellant have thereafter become a bankrupt under the laws of the United States, upon notice thereof from his adversary being served on the sureties, by summons, the court shall decide whether or not anything, and, if anything, how much, should have been adjudged against the defendant or appellant, but for the bankruptcy; and such decision shall be conclusive as to the liability of the sureties; but they shall not be liable upon a bond given pursuant to subsection (1) of KRS 425.116 , if property released from an attachment by reason thereof, or its proceeds, have lawfully come to the defendant’s or appellant’s assignee in bankruptcy.

History. C.C. 693: trans. and amend. Acts 1952, ch. 84, §§ 1, 28; 1980, ch. 188, § 288, effective July 15, 1980.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Property in Hands of Trustee in Bankruptcy.

Where the property attached and released under a forthcoming bond in accordance with KRS 425.280 (now repealed) had passed into the hands of the debtor’s trustee in bankruptcy, the surety on the forthcoming bond was not liable. Royal Collieries Co. v. Picklesimer, 240 Ky. 686 , 42 S.W.2d 907, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 465 ( Ky. 1931 ).

CHAPTER 413 Limitation of Actions

Actions Relating to Real Property

413.010. Action for recovery of real property — Fifteen year limitation.

Subject to KRS 411.190(8), an action for the recovery of real property may be brought only within fifteen (15) years after the right to institute it first accrued to the plaintiff, or to the person through whom he claims.

History. 2505: amend. 2002, ch. 306, § 1, effective July 15, 2002.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

It is a well-established policy of this state to fix in every case a limit of time for bringing actions or proceedings for relief. Foster v. Jordan, 130 Ky. 445 , 113 S.W. 490, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1908 ).

The statute of limitations is intended to close the door of the courts to the bringing of suits on stale claims and is intended to be used as a blanket to smother any faint respiration of moribund claims of plaintiffs in regular causes of action or those of defendants asserted by counterclaim. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

2.Construction.

Unless equitable relief is sought, the statute of limitation fixes the limit and establishes the applicable principle. State Mut. Life Assurance Co. v. Heine, 141 F.2d 741, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3786 (6th Cir. Ky. 1944 ).

The repeal of a statute of limitation cannot act retrospectively so as to disturb rights acquired thereunder so the repeal of a provision in a city charter that a right of action against the city was barred by six-month limitation did not revive the right of action under the general statute of limitation. Lawrence v. Louisville, 96 Ky. 595 , 29 S.W. 450, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 672 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Where a statute of limitation is repealed, a new statute substituted therefor applies to an action thereafter brought upon a cause of action as to which the bar of the old statute was not complete when it was repealed. Fish v. Genett, 56 S.W. 813, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 177 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 442 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Our limitation laws are statutes of repose. Foster v. Jordan, 130 Ky. 445 , 113 S.W. 490, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1908 ).

Limitation is entirely a matter of statute and the statute that creates a bar may provide an exception to the statute. Knight's Adm'r v. Illinois C. R. Co., 143 Ky. 418 , 136 S.W. 874, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 423 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Periods of limitations are graduated mainly with reference to the nature and quality of the evidence by which the contract must be established. Homire v. Stratton & Terstegge Co., 157 Ky. 822 , 164 S.W. 67, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 367 ( Ky. 1914 ).

It is competent for the Legislature to change the period of limitations as to all claims not already barred and in doing so it may give the statute a retrospective effect provided that it does not impair the obligation of a contract or a vested right; yet it cannot remove a bar of limitation which has already become complete and no limitation shall be made affecting existing claims without allowing a reasonable time for parties to bring actions before their claims are absolutely barred by the new statute. Heath v. Hazelip, 159 Ky. 555 , 167 S.W. 905, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 851 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Where, by the enactment of a new statute, the period of limitation is shortened before a cause of action is barred, the reasonable time thereafter in which an action may be brought thereon is to be determined by the court in which it is instituted but in no event should it be extended beyond the length of time in which the action could have been brought under the old statute, nor to exceed the time allowed by the new statute. Heath v. Hazelip, 159 Ky. 555 , 167 S.W. 905, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 851 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Where a statute creates a new legal liability, with a right to a suit for its enforcement, provided the suit is brought within a designated period, the time within which a suit must be brought operates as a limitation of the liability itself as created and not of the remedy alone. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Tafel Electric Co., 262 Ky. 792 , 91 S.W.2d 42, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 798 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Statutes of limitation are construed strictly and the court will not read into them exemptions which are not expressly put there. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

It is the object rather than the form of action which controls in determining the limitation period. Carr v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 344 S.W.2d 619, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1961 ).

3.Application.

The statute of limitations applies to all actions, whether at law or in equity, and the chancellor can exercise no discretion on the subject but must apply the statute when properly pleaded although the jurisdiction over the subject matter belongs exclusively to a court of equity. Hargis v. Sewell's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 63 , 7 S.W. 557, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 920 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1888 ).

Limitations are as available in equity as at law. Hughes v. Wallace, 118 S.W. 324, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 494 ( Ky. 1909 ).

Statutes of limitation apply only to rights of action. Potter-Matlock Trust Co. v. Myers, 239 S.W.2d 949, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 1107 ( Ky. 1950 ).

4.Commonwealth.

In view of KRS 413.150 , limitations run against the Commonwealth for the purpose of acquiring title by adverse possession, as against an individual, and the issuance of a patent will not stop the statute from running, as the patentee would occupy no better position than the Commonwealth. Whitley County Land Co. v. Powers's Heirs, 146 Ky. 801 , 144 S.W. 2, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1912 ).

5.Lost Deeds.

The statute of limitations as to actions for the recovery of real estate by analogy was applicable and should be applied to actions to supply lost deed to real estate claimed to have been recorded in county clerk’s office and to have been destroyed. Brandenburg v. McGuire, 105 Ky. 10 , 44 S.W. 96, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1598 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1898 ).

6.Servient Estate.

Action by owner of servient estate which was in the main for the recovery of land or, alternately, for its value is controlled by this section, establishing 15 years as the period of limitations in such cases. Buck C. R. Co. v. Haws, 253 Ky. 203 , 69 S.W.2d 333, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1934 ).

7.Corporate Real Estate Bonds.

Where corporate real estate bonds are involved, the 15-year statute of limitations under this section and not the five-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 controls actions on the bonds. McBride v. Dewey Portland Cement Co., 297 Ky. 662 , 181 S.W.2d 46, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 790 ( Ky. 1944 ).

8.Taking of Real Property.

While the five-year statute of limitations would have barred abutting property owner’s cause of action for damages had the railroad constructed only one (1) track as authorized by the legislative and municipal authorities, where the railroad constructed two (2) tracks, it was an unlawful taking of the abutting property owner’s property to which the 15-year statute of limitations applied as of the time the unauthorized track was constructed and damaged the abutting property. Klosterman v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 114 Ky. 426 , 71 S.W. 6, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1183 , 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1233 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1902 ). See Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

9.Escheat.

An action to escheat real property under the Ky. Const. is not only one for relief not provided for which can only be commenced within ten (10) years next after the cause of action accrues but is an action to recover real estate which is barred after 15 years under this section. Louisville Banking Co. v. Commonwealth, 142 Ky. 690 , 134 S.W. 1142, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 262 ( Ky. 1911 ).

10.Actions Not Covered.

This section did not apply and the 15-year statute of limitations was no defense where defendant had held land adversely since the date he obtained his tax deed, but it was less than 15 years prior to the date an action was brought seeking to cancel the deed. Rose v. Rose, 296 Ky. 18 , 176 S.W.2d 122, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1943 ).

11.—Defenses.

The statute of limitations applies alone to the plaintiff’s cause of action, and not at all to the defense for, so long as the courts will hear plaintiff’s case, time cannot bar the defendant’s answer. Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Meade, 121 Ky. 241 , 89 S.W. 137, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 208 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1905 ).

Statutes of limitation apply only to actions, and not to defenses, and do not apply as against claimants of land in action by Commonwealth to dispossess them on ground land had escheated to Commonwealth from railroad for nonuser, defense being that railroad was guilty of fraud in acquiring land. Commonwealth v. Middleton, 205 Ky. 570 , 266 S.W. 37, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 163 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The general rule is that statutes of limitation are not applicable to defenses, at least where the defense grows out of a transaction connected with the plaintiff’s claim. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

12.—Liens.

The statute of limitations does not apply to liens for, when the debt or claim is barred, the lien is barred. Clift v. Williams, 105 Ky. 559 , 49 S.W. 328, 1899 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Under KRS 446.010 , defining “real estate,” “personal estate,” and “land,” the right of action to enforce the lien acquired by an execution creditor purchasing at a sale of encumbered real property would pass to his personal representatives, and hence was not an action affected by the limitation of this section as to actions to recover land. Due v. Bankhardt, 151 Ky. 624 , 152 S.W. 786, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 556 ( Ky. 1913 ).

When mortgage foreclosure sale was declared void, the statute of limitations did not run against the purchaser at the sale who was in possession after his purchase as to the mortgage liens paid and discharged by him and the land was subject to their payment. Brown v. Brown, 157 Ky. 804 , 164 S.W. 70, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 368 ( Ky. 1914 ).

13.—Actions to Quiet Title.

Since persons claiming under a patent, in one call of which there is a mistake, may have the patent boundary run so as to include the tract claimed without reforming the patent as to such call, a suit by them to quiet their title is not barred by the fact that the statute of limitations has run against the right to have the patent reformed. Hendrickson v. Boreing, 32 S.W. 278, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 737 (1895).

Actions to quiet title do not come within the statute of limitations fixing time for bringing actions for recovery of real property. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Statute fixing time within which action for recovery of realty must be brought could not be invoked by plaintiff in quiet title action where no adverse possession by him had been shown. Hale v. Horn, 265 Ky. 560 , 97 S.W.2d 402, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 533 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Since a cloud upon title continues to operate during period of its existence, the right to maintain action to quiet title is a continuing one to which limitation is not applicable. Williams v. Thomas, 285 Ky. 776 , 149 S.W.2d 525, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1941 ).

14.—Counterclaim Connected with Suit.

Plea of limitations will not prevail against the rights of the defendant to assert, by way of counterclaim, transactions connected with and growing out of the matter that was the basis of the suit. Lewis v. Kash, 239 Ky. 117 , 38 S.W.2d 978, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 736 ( Ky. 1931 ). But see Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

15.—Position of Trust.

There was sufficient evidence to support finding that defendant in action for accounting occupied a position of trust toward his sister and failed to keep complete and accurate records and that mortgages he executed to her against real estate in his name was evidence of his indebtedness to her and enforceable, although he contended the mortgages were unenforceable because they were not accepted by the plaintiff and were barred by the statute of limitations. Savage v. Adams, 299 S.W.2d 597, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 45 ( Ky. 1956 ).

16.—Loss of Profits.

An action in tort by an assignee of the first coal mining lease against the lessors and lessee under a subsequent coal mining lease to recover damages for loss of profits because of an eviction almost seven years before the action was brought was not a suit to recover realty or its value within the meaning of this section. Creson v. Scott, 275 S.W.2d 406, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 350 ( Ky. 1955 ).

17.—Compelling Conveyance.

Statute of limitations was not applicable to action by vendees of mineral rights under title bond, to compel conveyance of legal title to the mineral rights, where equitable title had been perfected by the recording of title bond and full payment of the consideration. Hamilton v. Harkins, 302 Ky. 340 , 194 S.W.2d 646, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 668 ( Ky. 1946 ).

18.—Building.

Failure to comply with the requirements of procedural statutes did not render the construction of a power plant and dam unlawful where a permit had been obtained from the proper authorities to erect them so as to make the five-year statute of limitations inapplicable and the 15-year statute applicable to an action for damages from flooding. Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

19.Shortening of Period.

The shortening of the statutory period of limitation, provided always that the period is not unreasonably short, is in the public interest and not against it and, so long as the parties are dealing at arm’s length, contracts for a shorter period will be enforced. Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 276 Ky. 132 , 122 S.W.2d 990, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 521 , 121 A.L.R. 751 ( Ky. 1938 ), overruling Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Spinks, 119 Ky. 279 , 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 325 , 84 S.W. 1160 (1904), to the extent of conflict. See Maryland Casualty Co. v. Dickerson, 213 Ky. 305 , 280 S.W. 1106, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 503 ( Ky. 1926 ); Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. United States Gypsum Co., 239 Ky. 247 , 39 S.W.2d 234, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 751 ( Ky. 1931 ).

It is not contrary to public policy for parties to contract for a reasonably shorter period than that fixed by the statute of limitations and the contractual limitation is not available to one who by his own acts has deceived, misled, or by fraudulent representations led the complainant to believe that the defense would be waived or not used to advantage. Johnson v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co., 298 Ky. 669 , 183 S.W.2d 941, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1071 ( Ky. 1944 ).

20.“Action” Defined.

The word “action,” as employed in the statute of limitations, is not restricted in its signification to what is technically an action, but includes all civil proceedings in courts of justice for the enforcement of legal or equitable rights, whether by action, suit, or special proceeding. The statute applies to the cause of action, the case presented by the plaintiff, and whether a particular case is embraced by the statute is to be determined by ascertaining whether it is included in the causes of action to which the statute is made applicable; and neither the form of the proceeding nor the name by which it may be called can have any influence on the question whether the statute applies. Auditor v. Halbert, 78 Ky. 577 , 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 253 , 1880 Ky. LEXIS 65 ( Ky. 1880 ).

As regards limitation, quia timet is not cause of action, but right of action of continuing nature. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

21.—Accrual.

A cause of action to escheat real estate not necessary for its business which was held by a banking corporation for more than five (5) years during the time it was in business accrued at the time its charter expired where it existed only to wind up its business. Louisville Banking Co. v. Commonwealth, 142 Ky. 690 , 134 S.W. 1142, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 262 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The statute of limitations runs against the right of action of an execution creditor who purchases at a sale of encumbered real property to foreclose his lien, thereby acquired, from the time of his purchase. Due v. Bankhardt, 151 Ky. 624 , 152 S.W. 786, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 556 ( Ky. 1913 ).

A cause of action accrues when a party has the right and capacity to sue, and his right of action is not suspended until he ascertains that he has a cause of action. Commonwealth v. Sammons, 180 Ky. 403 , 202 S.W. 885, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1918 ). See Philpot v. Stacy, 371 S.W.2d 11, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1963 ).

The accrual of a cause of action means the right to institute and maintain a suit, and whenever one person may sue another, a cause of action has accrued and the statute of limitations begins to run. Henderson v. Fielder, 185 Ky. 482 , 215 S.W. 187, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Where the grantor has previously conveyed the fee or severed therefrom a separate estate such as mineral rights, the covenant as to such part is broken when made and the action accrues at once. Pioneer Coal Co. v. Asher, 226 Ky. 488 , 11 S.W.2d 116, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 116 ( Ky. 1928 ).

A cause of action accrues when the right to institute and maintain a suit arises, and it is not dependent upon the capacity of the person in whose favor the right exists. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Limitations never run against a man unless he can put a stop to it, which is when the cause of action accrues, but, when he can put a stop to it and does not, limitations continue to run. Harlan v. Buckley, 268 Ky. 148 , 103 S.W.2d 946, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 774 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Owner of real property is not required to bring action to quiet title until someone asserts title against the property. Williams v. Thomas, 285 Ky. 776 , 149 S.W.2d 525, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Failure of wife to bring action to quiet title did not start running of statute of limitations against her title, which she had conveyed to husband without having him join in conveyance, since cloud upon title continues to operate during its existence, statute of limitations is not applicable and right to maintain such action continues. Howard v. Turner, 287 Ky. 206 , 152 S.W.2d 589, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Predecessor of defendant in quiet title action became an adverse holder in 1914 when widow joined her son in conveyance of homestead tract to predecessor of defendant and, if widow’s daughter, who knew of the 1914 conveyance, had any right in the property, she should have asserted it then or within the period of limitation. Burchett v. James, 246 S.W.2d 461, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 633 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Statute of limitations began to run to determine whether purchaser was owner of land by adverse possession for 15 years as soon as purchaser of land at tax sale took possession and claimed title thereto, even though purchaser did not receive tax deed from sheriff until three (3) years later. Walters v. Watson, 247 S.W.2d 368, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 689 ( Ky. 1952 ).

22.— —To Recover Dower.

A mere averment that more than 15 years had elapsed and that 32 years had elapsed since the death of the husband does not meet the requirements and is insufficient to support the plea of statute of limitations, since the statute of limitations does not run against a right of dower where the widow has been continuously in possession of the land owned by her husband at the date of his death. O'Bryan v. Langley, 59 S.W. 523, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1030 (1900).

Where judgment creditors did not bring an action until 1911 to recover a lot deeded to them in an equitable action in 1881 and the wife of the judgment debtor had a dower interest in the lot until her death in 1905, the right of action to recover possession of her undivided one third (1/3)did not accrue until her death and the plea of statute of limitations did not present a good defense as to it, although the plea presented a good defense to the recovery of the other undivided two thirds (3/4) of the lot. Garrison v. Clark, 151 Ky. 565 , 152 S.W. 581, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 536 ( Ky. 1913 ).

In an action to recover and have dower rights assigned which action was commenced within 15 years of execution of a deed of the unassigned dower rights by a married woman in the land of her first husband after she was married to her second husband and without the joinder of her second husband, the defense of limitation was unavailable to the grantee since the deed was void and the grantor’s right of entry arose upon execution of the deed and her cause of action arose simultaneously with her right of entry and it would have required 15 years’ possession by grantee to ripen his title even against one who was laboring under no disability. Potter v. Stanley, 187 Ky. 292 , 219 S.W. 167, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1920 ).

23.— —Class.

Where a cause of action accrues to a class, part of whom are sui juris and part of whom are under disability, the disability of the part does not prevent the statute from running as to the whole. Combs v. Grigsby, 200 Ky. 31 , 252 S.W. 111, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 7 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Where some of children and grandchildren, who were entitled to immediate possession when widow abandoned her homestead by selling in fee, were infants and others were married women under disability of coverture but a number of them were sui juris, the statute of limitations started running as to all of them. Settle v. Simpson, 204 Ky. 470 , 264 S.W. 1092, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 506 ( Ky. 1924 ).

An action filed in 1920 by three (3) children of an adopted daughter of an intestate who died in 1897, their mother having predeceased her adopted father in 1895, was not barred as to any of the heirs by the 15 year statute of limitations where two (2) heirs alone were laboring under the disability of infancy when the cause of action arose upon partition of the land among intestate’s blood children in 1901, 1902, or 1903, which disability was removed in 1904 and 1909, respectively, and the third child of the adopted daughter was under the disability of coverture, having been married at the age of 17 in 1899 at the time the cause of action accrued and still was in 1920 at the time the suit was brought and had been at all times after 1899. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

If part of heirs are not then under disability, the disability of the other does not prevent the statute of limitations from running against all. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

When the right of entry descends to heirs who are all under disability at the time their right of action accrues, the statute of limitations does not begin to run against any of them until the disability is removed from all. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Where nothing was done by children born in wedlock to prevent discovery by heirs of adopted child of their right of inheritance which, being a matter of public record, could and should have been discovered by the exercise of any kind of diligence upon the part of the heirs of adopted child, who also knew that intestate had always recognized their mother as his natural child and them as his grandchildren, lack of knowledge of their rights was insufficient to prevent the operation of statute of limitations. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

24.— —Remaindermen.

The general rule of construction that when a trustee holds the legal title to real estate which is barred by the statute of limitations, the equitable interests dependent upon it will also be defeated, notwithstanding the cestui que trust is an infant, applies, where the trustee has joined in the conveyance under which the vendee claims, and estops the trustee from any proceeding to recover; thus, where trustee sold land in which mother had a life estate and infant children were remaindermen and the vendee held adversely to the trustee and cestui que trust for 32 years, the children were barred by the statute of limitations, regardless of when the life estate terminated. Willson v. Louisville Trust Co., 102 Ky. 522 , 44 S.W. 121, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1590 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Neither this section nor KRS 413.030 applies to a remainderman until the death of the life tenant when the cause of action to the remainderman first accrues. Jeffries v. Butler, 108 Ky. 531 , 56 S.W. 979, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 226 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 75 ( Ky. 1900 ).

The statute of limitations does not begin to run against a remainderman until the termination of the life estate, when the right of entry accrues to the remainderman. Penn v. Rhoades, 124 Ky. 798 , 100 S.W. 288, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 997 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 243 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907). See Ratterman v. Apperson, 141 Ky. 821 , 133 S.W. 1005, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 110 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The statute did not begin to run against the remaindermen under a parol constructive trust of real estate that equity would enforce until the death of the life tenant. Becker v. Neurath, 149 Ky. 421 , 149 S.W. 857, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 639 ( Ky. 1912 ).

In an action of ejectment by remaindermen where grantee of life tenant set up defense of adverse possession, the 15-year statute of limitations began to run against all remaindermen immediately upon the death of the life tenant under a well-established rule that where part of the heirs are of full age and not under disability at the time the right of entry descends to them, the disability of the others does not prevent the statute from running against all, but if all of the cotenants to whom the right of action descends be under disability at the time the right of action accrues, the statute does not start running until the disability is removed from all, even the youngest. May v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 184 Ky. 493 , 212 S.W. 131, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1919 ).

The defense of limitation under this section was not available to the life tenants in an action by remainderman to enjoin the commission of waste on a certain tract of land, for remainderman’s cause of action to prevent waste did not accrue until the waste was either committed or its commission was so threatened as to give the plaintiff reasonable grounds to believe it would presently be committed. Salyer's Guardian v. Keeton, 214 Ky. 643 , 283 S.W. 1015, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 397 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Where decedent conveyed realty to certain children under deeds retaining liens to equalize other children on final settlement of estate and his will devised life estate to widow, cause of action to compel equalization did not accrue until widow’s death. McPherson v. Black, 215 Ky. 92 , 284 S.W. 413, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 655 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Where there was a question as to whether grantors had vested remainder by descent or only life estate with contingent remainder by devise, deed in which grantors referred to themselves as “heirs at law” was not such a repudiation of life estate as to start the running of the statute of limitations against the other remaindermen or to give them notice that the grantee was claiming title adverse to them. Murphy v. Boling, 273 Ky. 827 , 117 S.W.2d 962, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 716 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Since the remainderman has no right of possession until the particular estate is terminated, the general rule is that laches, estoppel, or the statute of limitations will not run against a remainderman prior to the termination of the life tenancy. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where mortgagor conveyed mortgaged realty to daughter-in-law for life with remainder to son’s heirs and then the mortgagee foreclosed, bought in land at sale, ousted life tenant and remaindermen and took possession under a commissioner’s deed, there was a “falling in” of the life estate at that time and action by remaindermen to recover land 49 years later was barred by the statute of limitations even though the life tenant had died only seven years before. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

The remainderman does not have to bring an action to protect his interest until he is entitled to possession, and it follows that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until that time. McDonald v. Burke, 288 S.W.2d 363, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1955 ).

25.— —Infants.

The statute of limitation began to run against infant, notwithstanding his infancy, at the death of his grandmother, at which time he was by law entitled to possession of the real estate; but, under KRS 413.020 , he had three (3) years after he arrived at full age within which to assert his claim to the land and the statute having begun to run against the infant at the death of his grandmother continued to run against his heir. Call v. Phelps' Adm'r, 45 S.W. 1051, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 507 (1898).

In an action for recovery of land by infants, claim of adverse possession would not avail without actual possession and, if defendant had had actual possession, the statute of limitations would not run against infants. Vincent v. Blanton, 85 S.W. 703, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 489 (1905).

26.— —Covenant of General Warranty.

A covenant of general warranty is a real covenant running with the land for the benefit of remote vendees and a cause of action accrues thereon when there has been an eviction from the land, and not when the deed is made, and limitation begins when an eviction occurs. Pioneer Coal Co. v. Asher, 226 Ky. 488 , 11 S.W.2d 116, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 116 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where the grantor does not own the land but holds only a mortgage thereon and attempts to convey a title to a vendee who is aware of the facts, the cause of action on general warranty accrues at once. Pioneer Coal Co. v. Asher, 226 Ky. 488 , 11 S.W.2d 116, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 116 ( Ky. 1928 ).

27.Running of Statute.

The rule that demand for performance of obligation must be made within reasonable time to postpone running of limitations until refusal thereof is applicable to ordinary contract, bailment and negotiable instrument situations but not to covenants running with the land. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Pierce, 313 Ky. 189 , 230 S.W.2d 430, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 812 ( Ky. 1950 ).

The 15-year limitation period begins to run when the right to institute an action for recovery of real property first occurs and this is true, notwithstanding the holder of the right is under the age of majority, in which case, he can avail himself of the saving provision of KRS 413.020 , if need be; but if the 15-year period extends beyond the three-year grace period, the saving provision is rendered inconsequential. Pendleton v. Centre College of Kentucky, 818 S.W.2d 616, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 122 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

28.—Commencement.

The statute begins to run from the time a cause of action accrues and a suit may be maintained. Chatterson v. Louisville, 145 Ky. 485 , 140 S.W. 647, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 873 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Covington v. Patterson, 191 Ky. 370 , 230 S.W. 542, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 329 ( Ky. 1921 ).

The misappropriation of the use of a lot by an orphan asylum by renting it for business purposes instead of maintaining its institution thereon was sufficient to notify those interested in the enforcement of the covenant contained in the deed of the adverse user and the statute of limitations started running against the right of action by heirs of the original grantor. National Finance Corp. v. Robinson, 193 Ky. 649 , 237 S.W. 418, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1922 ).

While a lack of knowledge of one’s rights is often, if not always, an important consideration upon the question of laches, it ordinarily is insufficient to prevent the operation of statutes of limitation. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

There must be a present right or demand upon which a remedy is available before it can be said that a cause of action has accrued or the statute of limitations commenced to run. Smith v. Smith, 231 Ky. 229 , 21 S.W.2d 246, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1929 ).

All statutes of limitations begin to run from accrual of cause of action. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Conveyance under deed of general warranty by tenant by curtesy was not enough to start the statute of limitations running against remaindermen, nor was the suit of the grantee which did not allege the source of his grantor’s title or that grantor was holding by adverse possession or make any other allegation to show grantor was holding otherwise than as a tenant for life, as there was nothing in it that would afford the remaindermen any notice grantor had repudiated his life tenancy, was holding under a different and adverse title, that the remainder had been accelerated or that would give the remaindermen a right of entry. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Statutes of limitation are based on the accrual of a right of action and, therefore, begin to run from the time the cause of the foundation of the right comes into existence. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

A demand and refusal or a tender of performance by covenantor is a prerequisite to the running of limitation against an action to enforce an affirmative covenant running with the land. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Pierce, 313 Ky. 189 , 230 S.W.2d 430, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 812 ( Ky. 1950 ).

No limitation begins to run on the intestate inheritance of real property until there has been an “ouster” or “taking away,” after which the 15-year limitation period of this section applies. Wood v. Wingfield, 816 S.W.2d 899, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 70 ( Ky. 1991 ), modified, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 147 (Ky. Sept. 26, 1991).

29.—Ending.

When suit was brought for recovery of land, it stopped the running of the statute of limitations, although it wasten (10)years before the issues were formed and 20 years had passed before the judgment was rendered and the 15 year statute of limitations could not apply. Phillips v. American Ass'n, 259 Ky. 402 , 82 S.W.2d 456, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 320 ( Ky. 1935 ).

When a man can sue, he must and, if he does not, the statute keeps running. Watts v. Chreste, 270 Ky. 407 , 109 S.W.2d 803, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 80 ( Ky. 1937 ).

30.Defense of Limitations.

The first subdivision of the schedule of the Ky. Const. of 1891, continuing as valid all rights and actions not inconsistent therewith, was intended to and does continue as valid the right already accrued to a defendant of pleading the bar of a statute of limitations as a defense to an action. Lawrence v. Louisville, 96 Ky. 595 , 29 S.W. 450, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 672 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 1895 ).

The defense of the statute is personal and can only be availed of by the party for whose use the statute inures, or the privies of such party. Baker v. Begley, 155 Ky. 234 , 159 S.W. 691, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1913 ). See West v. W. T. B. Williams & Sons, 202 Ky. 382 , 259 S.W. 1015, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1924 ); Pool v. Pool, 214 Ky. 267 , 283 S.W. 111, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1926 ).

The defense of limitations may be waived. Potter v. Stanley, 187 Ky. 292 , 219 S.W. 167, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1920 ). See Lilly v. O'Brien, 224 Ky. 474 , 6 S.W.2d 715, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 644 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where action was based on constructive trust growing out of conversion of chattel mortgage, plea that chattel mortgage was barred by limitations did not constitute a good defense, since action was not one to recover on the chattel mortgage as such. Fresh v. Dunakin, 306 Ky. 87 , 206 S.W.2d 203, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 960 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where the defense of statute of limitations was never pleaded by defendant and was raised for the first time on appeal, during the oral argument, the defense was not properly raised and was not a bar to plaintiff’s action. Hutchings v. Louisville Trust Co., 276 S.W.2d 461, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1255 ( Ky. 1954 ).

The plea of statute of limitations must be based upon date when original claim was filed and not on date when the proceedings were continued in the form of a new suit under order of the trial court which order, according to the affidavit of the trial judge, was to have the same effect as a severance. Marr v. Falls City Stone Co., 353 S.W.2d 390, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1962 ).

31.Estopped from Asserting Title.

As a general proposition, aside from a question of adverse possession, title to real property can be transferred only by a written instrument and likewise only in rare instances has one vested with title been estopped to assert his claim thereto, and only then when the rights of innocent parties have been affected adversely by the conduct of the titleholder. Huddleston v. Huddleston, 265 S.W.2d 942, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 773 ( Ky. 1954 ).

32.Grants Through Estoppel.

The right of revocation of a license is subject to the qualification that where licensee has exercised the privilege given him and erected improvements or made substantial expenditures on the faith or strength of license, it becomes irrevocable and continues for so long a time as nature of license calls for since under this condition the license becomes in reality a grant through estoppel. McCoy v. Hoffman, 295 S.W.2d 560, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 167 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Where, in action to enjoin obstruction and interference with plaintiff’s use of a road over defendant’s land based on adverse possession rather than irrevocable easement, evidence showed plaintiff had obtained permission from the owner to build the road, had used it for more than 15 years, had spent a considerable sum in building his residence and improving his lot to which the license or easement was appurtenant although the road had been graded by the county authorities or state highway department in consideration of plaintiff foregoing a claim for taking of his property by cutting off his way of ingress and egress, defendant acquired servient estate with the obvious notice of the roadway and the license or easement which had become a grant through estoppel was irrevocable to him. McCoy v. Hoffman, 295 S.W.2d 560, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 167 ( Ky. 1956 ).

33.Laches.

Plaintiffs were not barred by laches from maintaining an action to establish their title and eject defendants from farm and defendants could not obtain title to the farm by laches. Havens v. Clem, 275 S.W.2d 70, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1244 ( Ky. 1954 ). See Huddleston v. Huddleston, 265 S.W.2d 942, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 773 ( Ky. 1954 ).

34.Mistake in Patent or Deed.

In construing a patent or a deed that follows the patent and fixing the proper location of the land involved, a mistake in a call of the patent or deed may be corrected at any time without reforming the patent or deeds, and the statute regulating the time in which actions for mistake may be brought does not apply. Fordson Coal Co. v. Bowling, 238 Ky. 221 , 37 S.W.2d 69, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 228 ( Ky. 1931 ).

This section constituted an effectual bar to an action for recovery of real estate 22 years after plaintiff first asserted an alleged mistake in defendant’s deed to him. Francis v. Francis, 288 Ky. 685 , 157 S.W.2d 289, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1941 ).

35.Prescriptive Easements.

In an action to recover damages to residence caused by city in maintaining inadequate ditches, the burden was on the city to allege and prove that the ditches were permanent and could not be repaired or remedied so as to avoid recurring injuries at a reasonable expense and, when it failed to do this and had reconstructed the ditches after suit had been brought, the court properly refused to give the city’s offered instructions covering its prescriptive right to the ditches for more than 15 years. Covington v. McKinney, 263 Ky. 131 , 92 S.W.2d 1, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The easement right acquired, when completed under the law, is based upon a presumption that the continued enjoyment of the easement, in such manner for the statutory period under the claim of right, was agreed to by the owner of the servient estate, and that it will be presumed that the right had its beginning in the grant. Mann v. Phelps, 269 Ky. 493 , 107 S.W.2d 288, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 614 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where testimony indicated that when a railroad fill was constructed some 20 years previously ditch was filled up and there had been no artificial drainage since that time, any action for the original filling up of the artificial drainage ditch had long since been barred by the statute of limitations where there was nothing in the evidence which would indicate the existence of any prescriptive right to artificial drainage by plaintiff. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Daniels, 271 Ky. 321 , 111 S.W.2d 666, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Period for acquiring an easement in lands corresponds by analogy to statute of limitations as to land. Pickel v. Cornett, 285 Ky. 189 , 147 S.W.2d 381, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 359 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Where owner of two (2) lots laid a pipe in about 1900 to take care of the natural drainage of the higher lot over the lower lot and defendant’s parents and predecessors in title bought the upper lot in 1904, the statute of limitations started running against the original owner of the lower lot at date of purchase of the upper lot and ripened into a prescriptive right in 1919 which was 18 years before plaintiffs purchased the lower lot, so the pipe had been in use for more than 15 years and defendant acquired a prescriptive right to run water through it in the manner and quantity she was doing when action was brought. Riggs v. Ketner, 299 Ky. 754 , 187 S.W.2d 287, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 770 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945).

In many particulars, the elements necessary to be proved in order to establish the right to a prescriptive easement are similar to those that must be shown by one who attempts to acquire title to property by adverse possession, but it should be borne in mind during the consideration of such cases that estates sought to be fixed in the two (2) instances are different. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

If a company has used a stream for the drainage of water from its mines for the statutory period of 15 years, it has acquired the right to continue to use the stream for the same purpose, to the same extent, and under the same circumstances and conditions but the right is not unqualified and if the nuisance is progressive in character, or has been enlarged during the prescriptive period relied upon to establish the easement, the defense of prescriptive easement is not available. W. G. Duncan Coal Co. v. Jones, 254 S.W.2d 720, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 611 ( Ky. 1953 ).

The use of property by express or implied permission or license, no matter how long continued, cannot ripen into easement by prescription, for there is no presumption of a grant and such a license or permissive right is revocable at pleasure of owner of servient estate, but this rule of law is subject to qualification that there has been no subsequent distinct and positive assertion of adverse claim of right to easement which is clearly brought to the notice of the owner of the servient estate. McCoy v. Hoffman, 295 S.W.2d 560, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 167 ( Ky. 1956 ).

36.—Passways.

Any and all right of the unobstructed use of a passway is such a right as to be obtained by prescription and is to be determined by proof of such existing conditions running uninterruptedly throughout the statutory period under this section. Mann v. Phelps, 269 Ky. 493 , 107 S.W.2d 288, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 614 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In the absence of a grant in writing, or an oral agreement reserving or not reserving rights, the presumption prevails that the grant is such as has been shown by the use of the passway for the statutory period. Mann v. Phelps, 269 Ky. 493 , 107 S.W.2d 288, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 614 ( Ky. 1937 ).

A private passway may be acquired by prescriptive use, although a right of way is not strictly a subject of continuous, exclusive and adverse possession. Pickel v. Cornett, 285 Ky. 189 , 147 S.W.2d 381, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 359 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Easements in the nature of passways may be acquired either by grant, where there is a regularly executed agreement by which the right to the easement is created, or by prescription based on the presumption of a grant arising from continuous use for 15 years. Clark v. Cunning, 302 Ky. 779 , 196 S.W.2d 609, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where owners of dominant estate had used passageway over servient estate as means of ingress and egress for more than 29 years, a presumption of grant was created in favor of owners of the dominant estate, and the burden rested upon owners of servient estate to prove that the use of the passageway was all the while permissive or in the nature of a gracious indulgence on the part of the servient land toward the people of the dominant land. Clark v. Cunning, 302 Ky. 779 , 196 S.W.2d 609, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1946 ).

An unexplained use of a passway over land of another for the statutory period creates presumption of grant, but such presumption creates only a prima facie case, which is rebuttable by facts and circumstances. Wilkins v. Nieberger, 303 Ky. 622 , 303 Ky. 662 , 198 S.W.2d 986, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The quality of an easement presupposes two (2) distinct tenements, the dominant to which the right belongs and the servient upon which the easement is imposed, but the dominant is carved out of the servient estate only to the extent of and according to the nature of the use during the prescriptive period. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

When an easement is acquired by prescription, it may be conditional and restricted according to the use and purpose of its enjoyment during the prescriptive period and it will not ripen into a greater estate after the period of limitation has passed. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

While an “easement” is property of the nature of land, it is an incorporeal right, always separate and distinct from the right to occupy and enjoy the land itself. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where plaintiff sought a prescriptive easement over a roadway on property owners’ land which had been used for decades by hunters and fishermen to access a creek, that plaintiff had no interest in any real property adjacent to the owners’ land did not preclude him from claiming a presciptive easement, since he sought an easement in gross, not an easement appurtenant to the land. Allen v. Thomas, 209 S.W.3d 475, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

37.— —Establishment.

If the use of a passway by one landowner over the land of another originates in permission, the character of such use cannot become adverse until something is said or done by the dominant landowner to bring notice to servient owner that the use is changing or has changed from one of grace to one of legal right. Clark v. Cunning, 302 Ky. 779 , 196 S.W.2d 609, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In order to establish passway by prescription, the use exercised by the owner of the dominant estate must be shown to have been unobstructed, open, hostile, continuous and of right for the statutory period. Mathews v. Arvin, 306 Ky. 840 , 209 S.W.2d 494, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 664 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Slight evidence is sufficient to show that use of passway over a long period of years was enjoyed as a matter of right, but it must appear that the use exercised by the owner of the dominant estate was unobstructed, open, hostile, continuous, and as of right for the prescribed statutory period. Mathews v. Arvin, 306 Ky. 840 , 209 S.W.2d 494, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 664 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The uninterrupted, continuous, and unexplained use of a passway by a claimant thereto for a period of as much or more than 15 years will raise a presumption that the use was under a claim of right which became absolute at expiration of 15 years, when claimant would become vested with title to the passway, which owner of the servient estate must acknowledge and respect. Lambert v. Huntsman, 306 Ky. 862 , 209 S.W.2d 709, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 669 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where use of a passway at its inception is shown to have been permissive, no length of time may ripen it into a right, unless in the meantime there has been a distinct and positive assertion of a claim of right to the easement, and which assertion is brought home to the owner of the servient estate. Lambert v. Huntsman, 306 Ky. 862 , 209 S.W.2d 709, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 669 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The fact that owner for consideration permitted hauling of logs across his land was merely a specific instance falling within the period after he purchased the land and that one instance could not be persuasive or controlling as to whether there was a prescriptive right of passway since the hauling of logs is a heavy undertaking. Haynes v. Dennis, 308 Ky. 483 , 214 S.W.2d 1005, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The general law is that there is a presumption of a grant of right of way by prescription following an uninterrupted, unexplained, adverse use of such right of way, and the burden is upon the landowner to show that the use was merely permissive, and further, such uninterrupted, unexplained use of a passway on another’s land creates the presumption that the use is adverse. Haynes v. Dennis, 308 Ky. 483 , 214 S.W.2d 1005, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The presumption of a grant does not arise from use of passway where beginning of use is permissive but, where there was no evidence that beginning of use of passway was permissive, the rule did not apply. Haynes v. Dennis, 308 Ky. 483 , 214 S.W.2d 1005, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where a passway has been used continuously and uninterruptedly for 15 years or more, the burden is upon the party denying the right to prove that it was used only by consent or permission. Lee v. Martin, 311 Ky. 571 , 224 S.W.2d 637, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1166 ( Ky. 1949 ).

A private passway may be acquired by prescriptive use although a right of way is not strictly a subject of continuous, exclusive and adverse possession and it is sufficient if the use exercised by the owner of the dominant estate is unobstructed, open, peaceable, continuous and as of right for the prescribed statutory period. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

The establishment of a prescriptive use in a private way must be under a claim of right or adverse but where the claimant has shown long continued use, it will be presumed the use was under a claim of right, and the burden is upon the owner of the servient estate to show that the use was merely permissive. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

A way of necessity may be established as in the case of other easements, where a passway has been used for a period of 15 years, as well as by express or implied contracts and under KRS 381.580 (now repealed). Baker v. Maggard, 255 S.W.2d 45, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 639 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In order to establish that passway had ripened into a private or public way, owner of adjoining lot must show it was used adversely by him and his predecessors in title or by the public generally in an open, continuous and uninterrupted manner for 15 years. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

One of the essentials of the establishment of a road by prescription is the use of the land in question by the public and such use must be by the public generally as a way common to all; the mere use by a few individuals, from time to time, as distinguished from the public generally, does not constitute such use as creates title in the public by prescription. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

The permissive use of contested property is insufficient to establish a prescriptive title therein. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

38.— — —Failure.

There was no convincing evidence that passway had been used by the public generally nor so adversely by subsequent owners as to create a right of user by prescription. Westerfield v. Kessinger, 314 Ky. 429 , 235 S.W.2d 1015, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 670 ( Ky. 1951 ).

A prescriptive easement was not created across adjoining farm by the continuous use of a passageway by the dominant landowner of 30 years where the use was shown to be permissive for more than 27 years and only openly adverse for three (3) years. Clark v. Cunning, 302 Ky. 779 , 196 S.W.2d 609, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where defendant opened up passway on his realty for use in his own business and others used it sporadically without objection from him but there was a total absence of proof that there was any assertion of a claim of right to the easement by anyone using it, circumstances attending the use of the passway clearly demonstrated that its enjoyment by others was but a mere favor and that it was never claimed as a right but on the contrary was treated as a privilege that could be withdrawn at pleasure and plaintiff did not have an easement over the passway. Lambert v. Huntsman, 306 Ky. 862 , 209 S.W.2d 709, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 669 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where person claiming private passway by prescription, and his predecessors in title, had not used passway for as long as 15 years and, although various other persons had used the passway over a longer period than 15 years, their use had been sporadic and without claim of right, prescriptive right to passway was not established. Lambert v. Huntsman, 306 Ky. 862 , 209 S.W.2d 709, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 669 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The easement established was not one for the public generally where the proof established only that it was a private way for the use of plaintiff and those to whom he sold and delivered tobacco during a determinable period of each year. It was for use in connection with plaintiff’s business and, resulting from its functional necessity, became a part of it. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Proof in action to establish a passway, both public and private, over an adjoining tract of land was that the passway, during its entire existence, had been enjoyed only in a permissive capacity by the various owners of the funeral home, including plaintiff. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

The acceptance by plaintiff, who was owner of adjoining lot seeking to establish a passway over vacant lot, of a lease contract from the owner of the vacant lot could not be satisfactorily explained otherwise than that it was an overt act by which plaintiff acknowledged owner had absolute title to the passway over his lot, which fact alone militated against any claim that there was a passway of a private nature. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Where plaintiff’s evidence disclosed some trucks, automobiles and pedestrians traveled across the entire length of the passway going to and from streets but that the travel was of a casual or sporadic character, it was insufficient to establish either a private or a public thoroughfare. Rominger v. City Realty Co., 324 S.W.2d 806, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Defendants to an action in trespass, by their own evidence, failed to establish that the road had been continually used by the public for 15 years. Stamper v. Caudill, 336 S.W.2d 362, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Plaintiff and the general public were not entitled to a prescriptive easement over land owners’ property, because sporadic use of a roadway over the owners’ land by hunters and fishermen was not equivalent to use by the “general public” for purposes of creating a public easement. Allen v. Thomas, 209 S.W.3d 475, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

39.— — —Successful.

Evidence showed plaintiffs were entitled to a passway leading from their home to a public road by prescription, that is, a right to the passway founded on the prescription of a grant, such presumption arising from the adverse, uninterrupted, and continuous use of the passway by them for the statutory period of limitation, namely, 15 years. Kimble v. Warren, 158 Ky. 384 , 165 S.W. 403, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 625 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Any objection to the use of, or permission to use the passway, relating to a period subsequent to that within which the statutory time had already run, could not affect the right of easement, since the right had been fully established before that time. Wilkins v. Nieberger, 303 Ky. 622 , 303 Ky. 662 , 198 S.W.2d 986, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where testimony in suit to enjoin defendants from using a passway showed that passway had been there for a period of 75 years or more and there had been a continued and uninterrupted use throughout that period of time or until plaintiffs and their immediate grantors acquired title, the right had been fully established and could not be lost by attempted interruption. Wilkins v. Nieberger, 303 Ky. 622 , 303 Ky. 662 , 198 S.W.2d 986, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1947 ).

In action to require a defendant to remove gate barring passway over his land, evidence that passway had been used by the public for 75 years without question sustained decree granting plaintiff a prescriptive easement and right to use passway. Smith v. Smith, 304 Ky. 562 , 201 S.W.2d 720, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1947 ).

As passway over defendant’s land was shown to have existed for a long number of years, there was a presumption that the use by the public was a matter of right and the burden was upon the owner of the servient estate to show that the use was permissive which he failed to do. Lovins v. Denney, 311 Ky. 48 , 223 S.W.2d 352, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1048 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Evidence justified chancellor’s finding that passway had been used by the public as a matter of right for more than 15 years; therefore, the use had ripened into a grant. Lovins v. Denney, 311 Ky. 48 , 223 S.W.2d 352, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1048 ( Ky. 1949 ).

In action to enjoin defendants from obstructing a road leading to the plaintiff’s farm through the defendants’ farm, evidence preponderated in favor of plaintiff: that use of the road was not permissive and that he had acquired a prescriptive right to use the road or passway by adverse use of the road for a period of 15 years or more. Lee v. Martin, 311 Ky. 571 , 224 S.W.2d 637, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1166 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Although passway was blocked for limited periods by persons who temporarily utilized the space, the right of tobacco trucks to use the right of way during the market period was never questioned; therefore, the particular use of the easement was not interrupted for a period of over 20 years. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where trucks belonging to purchasers of tobacco used alley during the tobacco season for ingress and egress to tobacco warehouse, the easement was the subject of continuous, exclusive and adverse possession when defined in conformity with the nature of its use. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

37.— —Establishment.
39.— — —Successful.

Court of Appeals erred in holding that the neighbor failed to prove a prescriptive easement for ingress and egress over the owner's property because the neighbor and his predecessors-in-interest had used the road in a hostile, open, notorious, exclusive, and continuous manner for at least 15 years and abandonment of the easement could only be established by 15 years of non-use. Ellington v. Becraft, 534 S.W.3d 785, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 2017 ).

40.— —Erection of Bars or Gates.

Proof showed that during the statutory period of 15 years, both parties exercised the right to erect and maintain obstructions in the passway up and until the erection of the two (2) gates by owners which gave owners the right to maintain such gates as were necessary for the reasonable enjoyment of their property. Mann v. Phelps, 269 Ky. 493 , 107 S.W.2d 288, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 614 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where proof showed public had used creek bed road for many years, a right by prescription to an unobstructed passway was established, so owner of farm through which road ran had no right to erect bars across roadbed in absence of showing he had acquired a prescriptive right to do so by keeping them up for more than 15 years. McGlone v. Maynard, 303 Ky. 415 , 197 S.W.2d 918, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 865 ( Ky. 1946 ).

The erection of gates across passway, at its termini, was not inconsistent with the acquiring of an easement over the passway. Wilkins v. Nieberger, 303 Ky. 622 , 303 Ky. 662 , 198 S.W.2d 986, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1947 ).

In an action to require removal of an obstruction and to enjoin interference with uninterrupted use of a passway where evidence decidedly showed that the use was not permissive in the beginning and that the road in question had been used by the public generally without interruption from 1897 until 1946 when defendants obstructed the road by placing gates at the ends of the passway, such acts of defendants did not serve notice to all users of the passway that thereafter any use of it must be by defendant’s permission, did not revoke any permissive use theretofore granted or constitute adverse possession by the defendants which would remove any prescriptive right which had theretofore been acquired over the land. Haynes v. Dennis, 308 Ky. 483 , 214 S.W.2d 1005, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where a passway, on entering and leaving defendant’s land, was obstructed by gates, a presumption was raised that any use of the passway by the public was permissive; however, this presumption could be overcome by showing that such use was actually adverse. Lovins v. Denney, 311 Ky. 48 , 223 S.W.2d 352, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1048 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Plaintiff and general public were not entitled to a prescriptive easement over land owners’ property, because the owners’ efforts to keep trespassers from using a roadway over their land by erecting barriers interrupted the running of the 15-year prescriptive period in KRS 413.010 . Allen v. Thomas, 209 S.W.3d 475, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

41.—Extinguishment.

An easement acquired by prescription may be extinguished by a nonuser under circumstances indicating an intention of abandonment whenever such nonuser has extended over that period of time sufficient to have created the prescriptive right at its origin. Jones v. Dunn, 305 Ky. 562 , 205 S.W.2d 156, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 875 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Evidence, though conflicting, was sufficient to show plaintiff’s prescriptive easement over defendant’s land had been lost by complete disuse of the easement for 15 years or more. Jones v. Dunn, 305 Ky. 562 , 205 S.W.2d 156, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 875 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The essential elements of such an adverse possession as would extinguish an easement are similar to those necessary for its original emergence as a legal right under prescriptive process at its creation. Jones v. Dunn, 305 Ky. 562 , 205 S.W.2d 156, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 875 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The presumption that a use is under a claim of right which became absolute at the expiration of 15 years, when the claimant would become vested with the title to the passway, which the owner of the servient estate must acknowledge and respect is not a conclusive one, but is only a rebuttable one, under and by virtue of which the owner of the servient estate may show in a controversy involving the right to the easement that use was in fact permissive only, in which case use would be but the exercise of a license which owner of the servient estate might revoke at pleasure. Lambert v. Huntsman, 306 Ky. 862 , 209 S.W.2d 709, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 669 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The subsequent closing of the passway over a farm for less than 15 years could not defeat the right theretofore acquired by adverse use of the passway by the public for more than 15 years. Lovins v. Denney, 311 Ky. 48 , 223 S.W.2d 352, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1048 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Evidence that easement for roadway over adjoining land had been allowed to fall into disrepair for some four (4) or five (5) years and had become overgrown and difficult for vehicular traffic, but that it could be made reasonably passable without much expense, was not sufficient to prove abandonment of easement. Chitwood v. Whitlow, 313 Ky. 182 , 230 S.W.2d 641, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 846 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Forfeitures of easements, like other forfeitures, are not favored, and a temporary suspension of use without adverse possession is not along sufficient to show abandonment. Chitwood v. Whitlow, 313 Ky. 182 , 230 S.W.2d 641, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 846 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Generally, mere nonuser of easement for a relatively short period of time will not constitute an abandonment; there must be other acts or circumstances which indicate that owner of dominant estate intended to give up the rights in the land he had acquired. Chitwood v. Whitlow, 313 Ky. 182 , 230 S.W.2d 641, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 846 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In an action to quiet title to a passway and to enjoin defendant from obstructing it, where there was ample proof that for 30 or 40 years the plaintiffs and members of the public used a roadway passing through defendant’s property to a road which joined the main highway at two (2) points, plaintiffs acquired a prescriptive right to use of the road and temporary disuse and disrepair of the passway did not constitute abandonment. Chitwood v. Whitlow, 313 Ky. 182 , 230 S.W.2d 641, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 846 ( Ky. 1950 ).

42.Adverse Possession.

According to the settled doctrine of this section and KRS 413.030 , when applied to lands in a community where fences are not customary, a person, by entering upon a part of a tract of uninclosed land in the name of the whole, may gain title to all of it by adverse possession. Gillis v. Curd, 117 F.2d 705, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4308 (6th Cir. Ky. 1941 ).

If there was an unreasonable delay amounting to laches in the prosecution of a creditor’s suit to subject real estate to payment of debts, then a purchaser pendente lite who entered into possession of land for a period of 15 years prior to being dispossessed acquired land by adverse possession and could rely upon the statute of limitations. Roberts v. Cardwell, 154 Ky. 483 , 157 S.W. 711, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1913 ).

After there has been 15 years of adverse possession, the bar falls and the adverse possessor is often said to have a perfect title; the true titleholder cannot molest him; he can then allow the property to be vacant and do just as he pleases; and his title will not be affected unless someone moves onto the property and initiates an adverse possession against him. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

To make an adverse possession definite, the adverse possessor must have either some color of title that will show the extent of his claim or a definite boundary often referred to as a well-marked line. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

A suit to quiet title to land may be maintained upon a title acquired by 15 years’ adverse possession, and the defendant may by answer and counterclaim, setting up title acquired by such required adverse holding of the land of the owner, also maintain a defense to the quia timet action brought against him. Whitaker v. Shepherd, 280 Ky. 713 , 134 S.W.2d 604, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 1939 ).

If one enters land under a paper title, the paper may be looked to as showing extent of his claim and possession, or, if he enters without a paper, but claiming to a marked boundary, that fact may be shown as indicating extent of his possession. Madon v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 586 , 198 S.W.2d 320, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 907 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Generally, a conveyance of land adversely held is champertous only when someone other than the grantor is in possession and is claiming adversely to grantor; consequently, to avoid a deed, adverse possession must exist at the time of the deed, without regard to the length of time the adverse possession has existed prior thereto, and this adverse possession must be of the same nature and character, excepting the period required by the statute of limitations, as the adverse possession which results in title by prescription. Deaton v. Morris, 308 Ky. 754 , 215 S.W.2d 854, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1038 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In the adverse possession cases, the disseisor attempts to assert absolute and unqualified ownership of the entire property and he must be relentless in his insistence that the land belongs to him and no one else has any right in connection with it. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

One may obtain a perfect title by adverse possession which means that no one else has any right in connection with the land. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where a widow abandons her homestead, the owner of the fee is entitled to immediate possession, and, that being true, the purchaser from the widow, while taking nothing under his purchase, becomes an adverse holder from the time he took possession. Burchett v. James, 246 S.W.2d 461, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 633 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Adverse possession cannot be rested upon claim alone, but must be evidenced by such physical acts as will give true owner constant notice of claimant’s possession. D. B. Frampton & Co. v. Saulsberry, 268 S.W.2d 25, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 890 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Adverse possession, even when held by mistake, may ripen into a prescriptive right after 15 years. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

There are five (5) elements of adverse possession: (1) possession must be hostile and under claim of right; (2) it must be actual; (3) it must be open and notorious; (4) it must be exclusive; and (5) it must be continuous. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where claimant, by the nature of his claim, does not concede that there may be a mistake as to location of true line and evinces no intention of surrendering any land held by him, but claims it as his own, such holding is adverse. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

If a party’s paper title does not embrace the land he claims, he must establish title by prescription arising from adverse possession for the term prescribed by the statute. Aluminum Co. of America v. Frazer, 328 S.W.2d 142, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Where adverse possessor erected a billboard sign on the property approximately 35 years before the record title holder initiated action and in 1967 adverse possessor purchased the property from a third party so that it could continue to maintain its sign on the property, the physical nature of the property and the past use of the property both indicated that there could be no more practical use for this land and in addition, adverse possessor’s use of the land was an “open and notorious” one; further, the record title holder had actual notice of adverse possessor’s possession and this was evidenced by the fact that record title holder sought permission from adverse possessor to place its sign on the property. Appalachian Regional Healthcare, Inc. v. Royal Crown Bottling Co., 824 S.W.2d 878, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Surface owner, holding severed mineral estate acquired from common grantor as trustee, can only acquire title by adverse possession by unequivocal repudiation of the trust, given in such a way as to unmistakably place mineral estate owner on notice. Great W. Land Mgmt. v. Slusher, 939 S.W.2d 865, 1996 Ky. LEXIS 71 ( Ky. 1996 ), modified, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 41 (Ky. Mar. 27, 1997).

Widow’s only claim of title was a life estate created when she survived her husband, the owner, and the only contrary documents were created by her; the widow’s activities on the property were consistent with the duties of a life tenant, and a title action filed by the remaindermen within 15 years of her death was timely. Gee v. Brown, 144 S.W.3d 844, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 259 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

Evidence demonstrated that a disputed parcel of property had been enclosed by a fence since at least the 1940s. This fenced enclosure amounted to actual possession for purposes of a claim of adverse possession, not the sporadic recreational use of the property. Vick v. Elliot, 422 S.W.3d 277, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 78 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

43.—Estoppel.

In action to recover land where defendant defended and claimed title in himself and pleaded the 15 year statute, he was estopped from claiming adverse possession since he claimed to have purchased only the life interest of the widow and had lulled the heirs into inaction. Carver v. Elmore, 147 Ky. 521 , 144 S.W. 1062, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1912 ).

In a boundary dispute, appellees obtained the disputed parcel of property by adverse possession, and they could adversely possess property they mistakenly thought was their own. Appellants were estopped from contesting the location of the boundary that was established through agreement between their predecessors in interest and one appellee. Elsea v. Day, 448 S.W.3d 259, 2014 Ky. App. LEXIS 33 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).

44.—Commonwealth.

After the running of the period of limitation provided by this section, the original owner of real estate is no longer in a position to assert title to the property; it has effectively vested in the adverse possessor and the Commonwealth is not prohibited by either Ky. Const., § 12 or § 242 from taking advantage of this limitation. Commonwealth, Dep't of Parks v. Stephens, 407 S.W.2d 711, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Constitutional requirement that just compensation be paid for the taking of property does not prevent state from acquiring title by adverse possession. Commonwealth, Dep't of Parks v. Stephens, 407 S.W.2d 711, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 1966 ).

45.—Cessation of Running of Limitation.

Statute of limitations did not run during pendency of action against claimant by adverse possession but the rule did not apply so as to stop the running of the statute of limitations against a subsequent action leading to no change in possession. Martin v. Hall, 152 Ky. 677 , 153 S.W. 997, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 720 ( Ky. 1913 ) ( Ky. 1913 ).

When limitation begins to run against the right to enforce a cause of action to recover land held by adverse possession, the running of the statute is not interrupted by reason of any subsequent event or condition, and the death of the ancestor will not stop the running of the statute. Henderson v. Fielder, 185 Ky. 482 , 215 S.W. 187, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1919 ).

If one fences and takes possession of a neighbor’s land, the only way the neighbor can stop the running of the statute of limitations is by retaking possession or instituting suit within the statutory period; mere words will not be sufficient to stop the running of the statute. Petty v. Petty, 265 Ky. 15 , 95 S.W.2d 1122, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where petitioner had been in open, notorious, hostile and adverse possession of land under a void deed, unsuccessful actions concerning land by heirs of former owner which had not affected petitioner’s possession did not arrest running of statute of limitations and petitioner was entitled to have title quieted in him after 15 years. De Ridder's Unknown Heirs v. Belknap, 312 Ky. 185 , 226 S.W.2d 948, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 620 ( Ky. 1950 ).

The filing of a suit involving the title to or possession of land will toll the running of the statute of limitations insofar as adverse possession is concerned for the purposes of that suit. Yet, it is well settled that if such suit is abandoned, it does not affect the continuity of the adverse possession and, even if it is not abandoned, it neutralizes the statute of limitations only for the purposes of that particular controversy. Thompson v. Ratcliff, 245 S.W.2d 592, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1952 ).

46.—Defense to Quiet Title Action.

In quiet title action, defendants proved their title to the land so claimed by adverse possession under both the 15- and 30-year statutes of limitation. Wood v. Corman, 307 Ky. 580 , 211 S.W.2d 424, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 766 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Evidence in quiet title action supported chancellor’s judgment that for more than 15 years, defendant and his predecessors in title had been in adverse possession of the land. Waller v. Parsley, 312 Ky. 758 , 229 S.W.2d 741, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Defendant who showed no title in himself contended that the record title to the tract described in an action to quiet title was in a third party but there was no evidence that it was anywhere near the land owned by plaintiff or that anyone, prior to the suit, made any claim that the third party’s deed conveyed any of the land described in plaintiff’s deed. Mullins v. Hargis, 242 S.W.2d 611, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1051 ( Ky. 1951 ).

47.—Color of Title.

If entry is under color of title, that shows what he intends to seize. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The purpose of a color of title is to delimit and show the intention of the would-be adverse possessor and not to afford the true owner notice of the extent of the adverse claim which would require the color to be recorded. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where patentee’s heirs and vendees occupied for nearly 45 years tract for which patent had been issued, such occupation, although patent was void, was under color of title extending to boundaries, and hence they acquired title by adverse possession as against claimants under earlier patent for same tract, in view of KRS 413.030 (2) and this section. Gillis v. Martin, 284 Ky. 714 , 145 S.W.2d 1051, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 569 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Evidences of title such as deeds purporting to convey title, whether valid or not, under which an entry is made constitute color of title and, accompanied by actual possession, evidence possession to the extent of the boundary described therein. McDaniel v. Ramsey's Adm'rs, 305 Ky. 536 , 204 S.W.2d 953, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Generally, any instrument, however defective or imperfect, and no matter from what cause invalid, purporting to convey land and showing the extent of the tenant’s claim, may be “color of title,” and a claim to the land thereunder will draw to the claimant the protection of the statute of limitations, the other requisites of adverse possession being present. McDaniel v. Ramsey's Adm'rs, 305 Ky. 536 , 204 S.W.2d 953, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Tax deed, though invalid, afforded sufficient “color of title” to support claim of adverse possession. McDaniel v. Ramsey's Adm'rs, 305 Ky. 536 , 204 S.W.2d 953, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Possession of land for 44 years under color of title, adverse to all the world, open, exclusive, peaceable, notorious, continuous and to a well-defined boundary, ripened into title, irrespective of the validity or invalidity of deeds clothing possessor with color of title. Noland v. Noland, 314 Ky. 316 , 235 S.W.2d 763, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 646 ( Ky. 1951 ).

It was not necessary for plaintiffs physically to possess the area in controversy since they had record title to the farm, including the area in controversy, described by metes and bounds and, as they and their predecessor, for a long period of time, had occupied the principal part of the farm, such possession extended throughout the entire described boundary. Mullins v. Hargis, 242 S.W.2d 611, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1051 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Plaintiffs were not required to trace their title back to the Commonwealth since the basis of their claim was adverse possession under color of title. Mullins v. Hargis, 242 S.W.2d 611, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1051 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where their deed constituted color of title, grantees’ actual possession of any part of their deeded boundary would have amounted to constructive actual possession of the entire boundary. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

A void patent under which plaintiffs claimed title constituted color of title which could fix the boundary of their predecessor’s adverse possession. Hellier Coal & Coke Co. v. Bowling, 272 S.W.2d 651, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1114 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Deed which did not by its description encompass the land claimed could not support a claim based on adverse possession by grantee. Coleman v. Republic Steel Corp., 280 S.W.2d 171, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Considering the vagueness of the description employed in 1859 mineral deed involved in action and the difficulty of ascertaining just what land was embraced by the deed, and considering the gap in the title between grantor of the minerals and his son to whom plaintiff traced his general warranty deed, and the many conveyances over a span of many years which ignored the mineral deed, the court was of the opinion that plaintiff and his predecessors were working two (2) oil wells under color of title. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

What is color of title is a question of law for the court. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Since no one was in possession under a senior patent, entry of junior patent holder under color of title coupled with its continuous, actual occupancy and cultivation of part of its boundary, while claiming to the limits of its deed, constituted possession of the entire boundary and, having continued for more than 15 years, gave the junior patent holder title by adverse possession. Ford Motor Co. v. Collett, 303 S.W.2d 553, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Son’s known and exclusive occupancy of 25 acres deeded to him by his mother was clearly under a claim of right to the fee-simple title, hostile to his half-brother and sister for the statutory period under this section and entitled him to fee-simple title in the 25 acres by adverse possession. Bingham v. Brooks, 359 S.W.2d 618, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Even a deed that is defective or invalid is sufficient to afford color of title; thus, where adverse possessor had color of title; through its 1967 deed, it was immaterial that the deed was junior to record title holder’s deed; accordingly, the extent of adverse possessor’s claim was evidenced by the description contained in its 1967 deed. Appalachian Regional Healthcare, Inc. v. Royal Crown Bottling Co., 824 S.W.2d 878, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1992 ).

48.—To Well-defined Boundary.

In order to establish a title by adverse possession, it must clearly appear that the claimant has occupied the land openly, adversely, and notoriously for a period of 15 years or more, continuously claiming same to a well-defined or marked boundary line. Watts v. Bryant, 144 Ky. 14 , 137 S.W. 780, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Upon the question of adverse possession, the evidence of many witnesses thoroughly established the fact that defendant owned, claimed, and was in possession of a large area for more than 15 years which was inclosed by a well-defined and clearly marked boundary and that this boundary embraced all the land in controversy. Mounts v. Mounts, 155 Ky. 363 , 159 S.W. 818, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 252 ( Ky. 1913 ).

It was not only necessary for defendant claiming adverse possession in an action of ejectment to claim the land in controversy to a well-defined or well-marked boundary, but his possession at the time of the deed to plaintiff must have been an actual adverse possession, manifested by some act or fact sufficient to indicate to others that he in fact had the possession and that the ousted claimant had been dispossessed. Le Moyne v. Neal, 158 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W. 964, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 612 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Where defendant claimed under his deed but also claimed that his deed included the land in dispute and that his fence was on the true line, the claiming of all the land up to his fence precluded any possibility of admission upon his part of ownership in another and his holding was adverse from the time he inclosed the land 30 years previously. Turner v. Morgan, 158 Ky. 511 , 165 S.W. 684, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 658 ( Ky. 1914 ).

It was not necessary to determine, in an action to enjoin trespass, whether a fence was on the dividing line as originally surveyed where the fence had been at its present location for more than 15 years and plaintiff had been in possession of the land up to the fence and claiming it for the statutory period and had acquired the land up to the fence by adverse possession. Petty v. Petty, 265 Ky. 15 , 95 S.W.2d 1122, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1936 ).

One who without color of title enters on land having well-defined boundaries marked on it, or which he himself marks thereon, and who occupies and uses a part, claiming the whole, acquires possession, coextensive with the boundaries, unless some part is in the actual possession of another, or there is conflict as to the boundary with another which is older or superior and the owner of the latter has entered on the boundary. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

To acquire property by adverse possession, the would-be adverse possessor does not have to clear it or even fence it, but he must have a definite boundary to which he intends to claim, and he must have that when he enters and he cannot move his boundary out year by year and claim, at the end of the statutory period, all the land then within the boundary. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

While a would-be adverse possessor without color of title may claim to a boundary marked by another as well as to one marked by himself, he would have this advantage in the latter case — his own act in marking the line would indicate his intention—and in the former instance he would have to show intent to claim to the line marked by another but in either case there must be a definite line to which he must claim. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

If, in an action in ejectment, plaintiff and his immediate and remote grantors, by themselves and tenants, were in the continuous possession of the strip of land in controversy, adversely, to a well-defined boundary for as long as 15 years next before the action was instituted, then his case is made out. Greenway v. Watson, 268 Ky. 745 , 105 S.W.2d 848, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 523 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where the dividing line is uncertain and there is a bona fide dispute as to its location between adjoining landowners who agree on the dividing line and execute the agreement by marking the line or building a fence thereon, such agreement, followed by possession with reference to the boundary so fixed, is conclusive on the parties although the possession may not have been for the full statutory period, it being sufficient to show that the dividing line was actually established and thereafter recognized or acquiesced in by the parties for a considerable time. Hill v. Kerr, 277 Ky. 105 , 125 S.W.2d 1005, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 618 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The owner of a tract, merely by extending its boundaries, does not take such adverse possession of the adjoining land embraced within the extension, overlapping the boundary of the adjoining owner, as would ripen into title; yet, where the dividing line is uncertain and in bona fide dispute as to its location, and a conditional line is established between the adjoining landowners, who agree as to its location and execute the agreement by marking the line, as by setting up stones and stakes at its corners or building a fence, such agreement is not an ineffectual settlement of their boundary controversy, nor is it prohibited by the statute of frauds. Cassada v. Vanhook, 282 Ky. 383 , 138 S.W.2d 1003, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 202 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where defendant, in addition to his paper title, further alleged in his counterclaim and proved that more than 50 years previously, his and plaintiff’s ancestors in title agreed upon and established a conditional line between the lands now in dispute and that he and his predecessors in title since that date had claimed the land in dispute and had it in possession for more than 50 years and pleaded the statute of limitations, the court correctly found for defendant. Martin v. Oliver, 295 Ky. 624 , 175 S.W.2d 127, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 314 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Plea of adverse possession could not be sustained because of failure of proof of possession to a well-defined boundary. Gover v. Queen, 300 Ky. 704 , 189 S.W.2d 672, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Possession, to ripen into title, must be to a well-defined boundary. Gover v. Queen, 300 Ky. 704 , 189 S.W.2d 672, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where strip of land between plaintiff’s and defendant’s lots had been fenced in with defendant’s lot and openly occupied and used by defendant and his predecessors in title for more than 15 years, defendant had title by adverse possession, particularly where no one occupying plaintiff’s lot had made any claim to the strip until plaintiff purchased the lot shortly before filing suit. Garthwaite v. Harges, 301 Ky. 653 , 192 S.W.2d 734, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 755 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Evidence was sufficient to justify the chancellor, in an action charging wrongful entry on land and cutting trees therefrom, in concluding an old fence row to have been established by agreement more than 30 years prior to plaintiff’s purchase of the land and that the land up to that fence row had been held openly, notoriously and adversely for more than the prescriptive period by the defendants. Goodwin v. McNeill, 314 Ky. 605 , 236 S.W.2d 708, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 703 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where parties for 15 years or more had recognized a row of trees as the true, common boundary of their property, and defendant in quiet title action had cultivated the land right up to the row of trees for more than 15 years and had otherwise manifested adverse possession, the line described by the row of trees was accepted as the proven line since the location of the paper line was in irreconcilable conflict. Combs v. Combs, 240 S.W.2d 558, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 972 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where parties for 15 years or more have recognized a certain line as the true, common boundary of their property, the courts will recognize that as the true location and the record line becomes unimportant. Combs v. Combs, 240 S.W.2d 558, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 972 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Petition which described 169-acre tract by metes and bounds, and stated that plaintiffs were the owners in possession of the property and had claimed it to a well-marked boundary for more than 15 years, was sufficiently definite. Mullins v. Hargis, 242 S.W.2d 611, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1051 ( Ky. 1951 ).

In a quiet title action, where a fence stood as a mark and as notice to owners for over 50 years that this was the true division line of the property and the possession of defendant and all his predecessors to the fence was adverse and notorious and plaintiff made no effort to have the fence removed nor indicate by any action it was claiming beyond the fence, the court should have decided that the property up to the fence belonged to defendant. Newman v. Sharp, 248 S.W.2d 413, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where one is in actual possession of a tract to which he has good title, he may not by construction extend boundaries of his possession to cover land owned by another. Fletcher v. Bringardner Lumber Co., 249 S.W.2d 38, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The record contained sufficient proof to show that defendant, ever since the time he erected a fence upon assuming possession under a contract of sale and after he acquired title under a deed which was recorded, held the land in controversy adversely to the world and that these facts were known by plaintiff and his predecessors in title and, while it was true that the fence did not extend completely across the division line between the two (2) properties, it did extend over half the distance and it was sufficient to establish the direction of the boundary. Cox v. Spainhower, 249 S.W.2d 719, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 841 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where the parties to an agreement fixing the boundary line each take possession to the agreed line and exercise possession for the statutory period, the agreed line becomes fixed, although the agreement may be in violation of the statute of frauds, upon the theory that adverse possession precludes either party from claiming beyond the agreed line. Faulkner v. Lloyd, 253 S.W.2d 972, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1126 ( Ky. 1952 ).

In order to establish the actual possession necessary for adverse possession, a party is required to show more than an inclosed fence, constructed by another person, for another purpose. Caudill v. Bates, 286 S.W.2d 922, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 113 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where the owner attempts to extend his boundary to a boundary marked by another, he must clearly show an intent to claim to the line marked. Caudill v. Bates, 286 S.W.2d 922, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 113 ( Ky. 1955 ).

The evidence of adverse possession to a well-marked boundary line during the lifetime of one defendant and his father amply supported chancellor’s finding for defendant and that plaintiff in a quiet title action was not entitled to quiet his title against defendant. Rose v. Griffith, 337 S.W.2d 15, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 355 ( Ky. 1960 ).

49.—Intent.

Adverse possession consists of outward acts and inward intention and the intention guides the entry and fixes its character and extent. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The important element of adverse possession in this state is the intent to adversely hold another’s property for the statutory period of 15 years. Marcum v. Noble, 242 S.W.2d 866, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1082 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where there is a disputed boundary line, possession is adverse if property is held with intention of claiming to such boundary line, though it may be incorrect, but if the possession is with the intention of claiming only if boundary is correct, it is not adverse. Marcum v. Noble, 242 S.W.2d 866, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1082 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Hostile or adverse possession of land must be accompanied with an intention to possess and hold it to the exclusion of all others and this intention can be gathered from acts and declarations of claimant while in possession and from circumstances attending his entry and occupation. Jones v. Caddell, 244 S.W.2d 744, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1239 ( Ky. 1951 ).

The claimant’s intention is the controlling factor under the rules that even though a party may make a mistake as to true location of boundary line, if he has intention to hold another’s property adversely, such intention will determine the nature of his possession. Traylor v. West, 255 S.W.2d 612, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where one occupies another’s land by mistake but does not intend to claim land not belonging to him, his possession will not be adverse. Traylor v. West, 255 S.W.2d 612, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where the evidence was conflicting on the question of intent, adjoining landowners allegedly holding by adverse possession were not entitled to a directed verdict. Traylor v. West, 255 S.W.2d 612, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1953 ).

The claimant’s intention is the controlling factor as to whether possession of another’s property is adverse. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Landowners acquired a gravel road which they mistakenly thought was their own by adverse possession because the landowners demonstrated over more than fifteen years an openly evinced purpose to hold dominion over the property with such hostility as to give the non-possessory owner notice of the adverse claim in that the landowners constructed a gate with a lock and made significant improvements on the land by adding a bridge and culverts and maintaining the road. Bishop v. Brock, 610 S.W.3d 347, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 107 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

50.—Requisites.

The settlor or those claiming under him must commit visible, notorious acts of ownership for the statutory period within the boundaries described by deed put to record or within the marked boundaries of the land. Gillis v. Curd, 117 F.2d 705, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4308 (6th Cir. Ky. 1941 ).

Although family had occupied real estate in which their father had an interest, children claiming under their mother did not have adverse possession of the land continuously for 15 years, since the possession of the children was not adverse while their father lived on the land. Hatfield v. Richmond, 161 Ky. 352 , 170 S.W. 951, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 71 (Ky. Ct. App. 1914).

If possession is actual, open, notorious, continued, exclusive, and adverse for more than 15 years, it ripens into title. Crawford v. Sasser, 238 Ky. 543 , 38 S.W.2d 434, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 275 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Possession which is actual, continuous, open, notorious, visible, exclusive, hostile and under a claim of ownership satisfies every element necessary to acquisition of title by adverse possession if it is definite. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

To defeat title and constructive possession under a prior patent, a party claiming under a subsequent deed must prove actual, adverse, open, and continuous possession on the part of himself and vendors without lapse of possession for as much as 15 years before suit. Fordson Coal Co. v. Collins, 268 Ky. 331 , 104 S.W.2d 985, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 449 ( Ky. 1937 ).

To defeat title and constructive possession under a prior patent, a party claiming under a subsequent deed must prove actual, adverse, open and continuous possession on the part of himself and vendors without lapse of possession for as much as 15 years before suit. Cassada v. Vanhook, 282 Ky. 383 , 138 S.W.2d 1003, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 202 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In suit to recover possession of land, evidence that defendants and predecessors had used, cultivated, and claimed land unchallenged for more than 15 years prior to filing of suit was sufficient to establish title by actual, adverse, open, notorious, peaceable, and continuous possession. Adams v. Shelton, 305 Ky. 113 , 203 S.W.2d 62, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 796 ( Ky. 1947 ).

An open, notorious, and exclusive possession of property for the statutory limitation period is sufficient for acquisition of title by adverse possession even though possession was taken under a mistake as to the boundary line. Scoville v. Burns, 306 Ky. 315 , 207 S.W.2d 756, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 555 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where defendant’s own testimony showed that at no time did she claim or pretend to be the owner of more land than the 27 acres described in her deed, wherever it might be, but, on the contrary, at all times recognized plaintiffs as the owners of the two and three-fourths-acre tract described in their deed, wherever it might be, she could not rely on title by adverse possession. Krupp v. Whelan, 310 Ky. 670 , 220 S.W.2d 956, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 931 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Evidence showed knowledge of ownership of four-acre tract of land in donee’s heirs where deed to grantee from heir of donor was a special warranty deed and not a general warranty deed, the consideration received by her was much less than the value of the land and the wife of grantee was one of the heirs of donee who had exercised dominion over the land for over 15 years. Cornelius v. Stephens, 312 Ky. 499 , 228 S.W.2d 28, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 682 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Although defendant’s record title may not have been valid, eviction of plaintiff by an order of the circuit court in a forcible detainer proceeding served full notice of the adverse claim of defendant to land in which plaintiff claimed a half interest as well as land in which plaintiff claimed a whole interest and defendant’s holding was sufficiently adverse as to ripen into title by prescription. Newell v. Louisville Fire Brick Works, 251 S.W.2d 849, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 934 ( Ky. 1952 ).

51.— —Actual.

The statutes of limitation of both 15 and 30 years barred an action by sole heir to recover land sold under title bond 70 years previously where purchaser and his vendees were in actual adverse possession and neither vendor nor his only heir had attempted to recover the purchase price, the balance of which was due for over 50 years, or the land. Doty v. Jameson, 93 S.W. 638, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 507 (1906).

A mere claim of title, even of record, unaccompanied by an adverse holding, will not start the statute. Kypadel Coal & Lumber Co. v. Millard, 165 Ky. 432 , 177 S.W. 270, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 554 ( Ky. 1915 ).

Where tenant had no possession, and claimed no possession of the land lying outside boundaries of a mineral deed, except a very small acreage which he had fenced, the 15 year statute of limitations was interrupted as to the unoccupied portion. Pond Creek Coal Co. v. Hatfield, 228 Ky. 806 , 16 S.W.2d 442, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 658 ( Ky. 1929 ).

To acquire title by adverse possession, the possession must not only be actual but so continued as to furnish a cause of action every day during the whole period prescribed by this section, which is 15 years or more. Fordson Coal Co. v. Collins, 268 Ky. 331 , 104 S.W.2d 985, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 449 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Actual possession of land may be acquired either by physical inclosure of the whole boundary or by an inclosure of a part of the boundary under claim of title to the whole, if no one else is asserting title to any part of the boundary on which claimant has so entered. Madon v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 586 , 198 S.W.2d 320, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 907 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where the state forestry division was claiming possession of land leased under cover of title of a junior patent and it had never at any time taken actual possession of, or actually occupied in such a way as would ripen into possession by adverse possession, the spot where a shack was erected or the clearing upon which it was located, defendant, holding under a senior grant, was not guilty of forcible entry or detainer. Madon v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 586 , 198 S.W.2d 320, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 907 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where tract of land to which plaintiffs claimed title by adverse possession originally had consisted of three (3) separate parcels, and previous claimant from whom plaintiffs had received deed had resided on one (1) of the parcels long enough to obtain title by adverse possession but had never been in actual possession of the other two (2) parcels, the plaintiffs, whose own actual possession was limited to the same parcel as that occupied by the previous claimant, could not, on the ground that the three (3) parcels had been deeded to them as a single tract, claim that their possession constituted possession of the entire tract to the boundaries described in the deed, since, having good title to the part actually occupied, their constructive possession could not extend beyond that part. Brock v. Howard, 304 Ky. 311 , 200 S.W.2d 734, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 630 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where plaintiff had never claimed title except to land covered by his patent, and one boundary line in his patent was described by courses and distances as well as by line of adjoining owner, in absence of actual possession, plaintiff could not establish adverse possession to parcel of land lying beyond adjoining owner’s true line, even though such parcel would be embraced in plaintiff’s patent if the line as described by courses and distances in his patent was correct. Souleyrette v. York, 307 Ky. 556 , 211 S.W.2d 423, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 765 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In action by deceased grantor’s heirs, other than her son, to establish interest in land conveyed to him, proof supported the conclusion that there was an actual entry and holding on the part of grantee which would ripen into title by adverse possession. Jessee v. Jessee, 310 Ky. 565 , 221 S.W.2d 462, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 982 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where legal titleholder occupies any portion of land covered by his deed, his possession is actual and coextensive with boundaries stated in conveyance, and adverse entrant is deemed to acquire actual possession only of land of which he disseizes legal titleholder, by actual inclosure or other equivalent physical occupancy. Fletcher v. Bringardner Lumber Co., 249 S.W.2d 38, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Inasmuch as grantees were not in actual possession of any part of the land, there was no such possession as would ripen into title by adverse possession. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

A possession which, if continued for the statutory period of 15 years, will ripen into title must, in the first instance, be an actual possession and, if the adverse possessor enters under a deed or other written instrument evidencing title with the intention to possess the land to the extent of boundaries described in his deed or writing, he ordinarily will be considered to be in actual possession to the extent of his boundary lines. D. B. Frampton & Co. v. Saulsberry, 268 S.W.2d 25, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 890 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where the boundary described in the instrument constituting his color of title overlaps senior grant, the adverse possessor is not considered to have the actual possession of the land embraced in the conflict unless he actually enters upon that part. D. B. Frampton & Co. v. Saulsberry, 268 S.W.2d 25, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 890 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Neither of two (2) adjoining landowners proved title by adverse possession of a strip of land but both parties were in actual possession through their tenants who under a separate agreement paid rent to both and each should be awarded rentals proportionate to the part of the property adjudged to belong to him. Cole v. Frazier, 280 S.W.2d 531, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1955 ).

It was unnecessary to consider whether, in the absence of an alleged deed to plaintiff’s ancestor, the evidence was sufficient to show possession by plaintiff’s ancestor coextensive with the boundary described in the complaint where plaintiff, in action for damages for cutting and removal of timber, failed to show they were in actual possession at the time of the cutting and removal of the timber or that their ancestor had held possessory title for 15 years, thereby establishing title in him by adverse possession. Marinaro v. Deskins, 344 S.W.2d 817, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 253 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Actual prior possession of property is enough to establish a legal possessory right and is sufficient to maintain an action for trespass against an adverse claimant who has no title and who stands alone on his later possession; therefore, railroad in actual possession of land under a deed before defendants began fencing and building houses on the land, notwithstanding positive and persistent notice by the railroad company that they were trespassing, was entitled to judgment in their action to recover possession of the land and to require defendants to remove the fences and buildings. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Hall, 347 S.W.2d 82, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 348 ( Ky. 1961 ).

52.— —Continuity.

A well-recognized exception to the Kentucky rule requiring continuous and uninterrupted possession for the full statutory period, in order to ripen an adverse claim into legal title, is that a temporary interruption, not of unreasonable duration, does not destroy the continuity of the adverse possession. Gillis v. Curd, 117 F.2d 705, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4308 (6th Cir. Ky. 1941 ).

In condemnation proceeding wherein intervenor claimed title to tract of land by adverse possession, his claim could not stand up where evidence was insufficient to establish continuous adverse possession for full statutory period. United States v. 179.9 Acres, 107 F. Supp. 265, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3782 (D. Ky. 1952 ).

In order for adverse possession to ripen into title, one of the essential elements is that the possession relied upon shall have been continuous for the full statutory period and, if the continuity of possession be broken by voluntary abandonment or otherwise before the end of the statutory period, such break is fatal to acquisition of title by the adverse claimant and the law restores constructive possession to the owner of the legal title. United States v. 179.9 Acres, 107 F. Supp. 265, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3782 (D. Ky. 1952 ).

Where acts of adverse possession relied on were cutting crossties for six (6) months in 1922, cutting enough timber for a house in 1933 and cutting timber for another house in 1945, the entirely unexplained prolonged periods of abandonment constituted such breaks in the continuity of petitioner’s possession as to preclude his acquisition by adverse possession as against the holder of legal title. United States v. 179.9 Acres, 107 F. Supp. 265, 1952 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3782 (D. Ky. 1952 ).

It is the rule in this state that the feeding of hogs or the grazing of cattle on uninclosed land will not constitute adverse possession, as such acts are in the same category with other fitful acts of possession, such as the occasional cutting of timber, of the mowing of hay, or the digging of coal, or the establishment of a sugar camp for a short period of time, which are generally regarded as insufficient to sustain a plea of limitation. Kentucky Coal Lands Co. v. Wilder, 165 Ky. 293 , 176 S.W. 1155, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1915 ).

Where defendant entered land in 1903 and remained continually in possession until 1934, but judgment quieting title was entered against him in favor of another in 1916, defendant could not claim title by adverse possession, although no writ of possession was issued on 1916 judgment, since he was estopped by judgment from claiming title so long as judgment remained in effect, and could not add period after judgment was barred by limitations to period before judgment was entered because adverse possession must be continuous, and was broken by judgment. Creech v. Jenkins, 276 Ky. 163 , 123 S.W.2d 267, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Evidence showed that plaintiff, who was claiming under a void tax deed, did not hold land in adverse possession for 15 continuous years through tenant where tenant lived on the property a year after his mother’s death, then moved to another place where he lived for nine months before returning to the property, since the interim of nine months broke the continuity of the adverse possession and the disseizor had to start all over again to hold adversely for 15 continuous years before he could obtain title by adverse possession. Wilder v. Lee, 304 Ky. 144 , 200 S.W.2d 153, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 603 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The fact that the owner for a consideration permitted the hauling of logs across his lands was merely a specific instance which fell within the period since he had purchased the land, and was not persuasive or controlling due to the fact that the hauling of logs is a heavy undertaking. Haynes v. Dennis, 308 Ky. 483 , 214 S.W.2d 1005, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 965 ( Ky. 1948 ).

When a trespasser continuously shall have disseized the lawful owner by taking actual, open, exclusive, and notorious possession adverse to the claim of the lawful owner for a period of 15 years, title to the land ripens in the name of the disseizor, but if disseizor relinquishes his actual possession by “stepping off” the property, even for a moment, within the 15-year period, the continuity of the trespasser’s possession thereby is broken and he must “step back” to commence again and mere occasional entry by a junior patentee, either in person or by his tenant, does not satisfy the rule as to continuity of possession. Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Fordson Coal Co., 311 Ky. 19 , 223 S.W.2d 175, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1041 ( Ky. 19 49 ).

Where adverse possession relied on by defendant lumber company was through the tenants under its various contracts of lease which had been continuous from 1910 to 1939 but the evidence showed possession by the tenants had been sporadic, with the tenants tilling the land a year or so, abandoning it for a year or two, then returning, retilling and reabandoning and with a part of the fence “laid down” permitting cattle to enter at random during the years it was not in cultivation, such occasional possession did not ripen into title and the chancellor properly adjudged defendant to have been trespasser and liable to plaintiff for the value of timber cut from the tract, and he correctly enjoined defendant from continuing to trespass on the tract. Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Fordson Coal Co., 311 Ky. 19 , 223 S.W.2d 175, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1041 ( Ky. 19 49 ).

Adverse possession must be continuous to oust the true owner; otherwise, the latter’s constructive possession reasserts itself whenever the disseizor abandons his occupancy even for a short period of time. Thompson v. Ratcliff, 245 S.W.2d 592, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1952 ).

After one has gone into adverse possession, its continuity may be broken by: (1) an act of the real owner; (2) intrusion of a stranger; or (3) abandonment by the occupant. Thompson v. Ratcliff, 245 S.W.2d 592, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The requirement of continuous possession is a sound one, but it does not mean that the disseizor in person need be present on the premises at all times; the important consideration is whether or not the physical use of the property by the adverse claimant or his representative, the erection of structures, or the keeping of chattels thereon demonstrates that he is asserting dominion over the property. Thompson v. Ratcliff, 245 S.W.2d 592, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1952 ).

In order to acquire title by adverse possession, the possession must be so actual and so continuous as to furnish a cause of action every day during the entire period prescribed by the statute. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In order to acquire title by adverse possession, the possession of the claimant must not only be actual but so continuous as to furnish a cause of action in ejectment or for trespass every day during the statutory period of 15 years, and trimming and caring for the trees and shrubbery and cutting the grass on adjoining property was not sufficient to meet the test. Ballard v. Moss, 268 S.W.2d 35, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 893 ( Ky. 1954 ).

53.— —Hostile.

Where woman knew she had never been the wife of decedent, who had a lawful wife, and could not therefore be entitled to the rights of a widow, her holding of his land began upon decedent’s death and was a hostile holding by one having no lawful claim or title which, after 15 years, barred an action by decedent’s lawful wife and children for recovery of the land. Griffith v. Griffith's Ex'r, 152 Ky. 185 , 153 S.W. 229, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 632 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where a father permits his son or one person permits another as an accommodation to enter and occupy a house or land without consideration and under a verbal contract, no presumption of gift arises from such act of taking possession of the property under this arrangement, nor will the person who enters into possession of the property be permitted to set up a title to it by adverse possession, unless the intention to claim it adversely is actually brought home to the donor by such acts or conduct on the part of the donee as would put him on notice, or put a man of reasonable prudence on notice, that a hostile claim of title was being asserted, and this character of holding has continued for the requisite statutory period and in the absence of such acts or conduct as would furnish this notice of a hostile claim, the entry will be deemed amicable and the possession permissive. Tippenhauer v. Tippenhauer, 158 Ky. 639 , 166 S.W. 225, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 702 ( Ky. 1914 ).

If possession is hostile, color of title is not necessary to obtain title by adverse possession. Rice v. Blair, 161 Ky. 280 , 170 S.W. 657, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Son’s possession of real property was never hostile to his father’s ownership and possession but was at most permissive. Rice v. Blair, 161 Ky. 280 , 170 S.W. 657, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Where there was an old fence on the east side of a creek, evidently put there by a former owner for the purpose of preventing stock from trespassing on the adjoining owner, but there was no evidence it was ever built or recognized as the dividing line between the two (2) properties, and plaintiff’s deed called for the middle of the creek, the presumption was that he took possession in accordance with the boundaries stated in his deed and, where he never cultivated the land on the east side of the creek and all he did was rent his own land now and then for pasturage purposes, to help repair the old fence, and to assist in cleaning off the underbrush, with the result that cattle occasionally strayed on the land in dispute, it was not sufficient to bring home to the defendant who was the real owner of the land that plaintiff’s sporadic acts of possession were of a hostile character which would give plaintiff adverse possession. Ennis v. Billingsly, 264 Ky. 254 , 94 S.W.2d 669, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 317 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where deed to trustees of church did not include lot in controversy which had been previously deeded by the same grantor to another but the lot in controversy adjoined the church lot and the two (2) lots had been inclosed by fences on three (3) sides and a public road on the other for 40 years, the church did not obtain title to the lot in controversy by adverse possession by cleaning the lot, filling the well, occasionally trimming a small shade tree, holding Sunday school services on the lot when the weather permitted and using it as a hitching and parking lot for, considering the location of the lot, the acts of possession were too sporadic and too friendly to indicate a hostile claim. Miller v. Cumberland Petroleum Co., 269 Ky. 525 , 108 S.W.2d 514, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 642 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The term “hostile” need not be used in defining adverse possession, since “adverse” implies or embodies “hostile” opposition. Garthwaite v. Harges, 301 Ky. 653 , 192 S.W.2d 734, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 755 ( Ky. 1945 ).

In an action for sale of land in which plaintiff claimed an undivided one-half interest, the mere fencing of the land, occupancy of it, or the clearing of timber from it by defendant was not of the hostile character required to establish title in defendant by adverse possession under the 15 year statute of limitations against his coowner where there was no evidence that the defendant hostilely brought actual knowledge to the plaintiff of his adverse possession. Cary-Glendon Coal Co. v. Warren, 303 Ky. 846 , 198 S.W.2d 499, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 911 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In the case of a claim of title by adverse possession, the hostile possession must be exclusive and continuous for every day of the statutory period. Lyle v. Holman, 238 S.W.2d 157, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 808 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where petition alleged plaintiff’s possession was “open and adverse,” which sufficiently apprised defendant of the nature of the claim, it was not necessary that it allege that plaintiff’s possession was hostile. Mullins v. Hargis, 242 S.W.2d 611, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1051 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Title gives constructive possession and there can no more be two (2) hostile constructive possessions of same land at the same time than there can be two (2) hostile actual possessions of the same land contemporaneously. Fletcher v. Bringardner Lumber Co., 249 S.W.2d 38, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1952 ).

An element of “adverse possession” necessary to create title is a requirement that disseizor openly evince a purpose to hold dominion over the land in such hostility as will give notice to owner of nonpossessory title of his adverse claim. Sweeten v. Sartin, 256 S.W.2d 524, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1953 ).

If one enters upon land by owner’s permission, expecting that the owner will give it to him, then such possession is not a hostile holding and he cannot obtain title by adverse possession. White v. Smith, 265 S.W.2d 937, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 770 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where the property in controversy was built upon and improved to some extent and it was used and improved as owners are accustomed to do, it would seem such conduct showed a hostile entry which amounted to a public pronouncement of hostility to the title of the real owner by grantees in possession up to the supposed lines with absolute claim of title thereto and they were deemed to have held adversely although their claim of title originated in a mistaken belief that the land lay within the calls of their deeds. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where son entered upon land by permission of his parents, occupied a house for 48 years which he helped his father to construct, built a fence to inclose six (6) acres of his father’s 138 acres, tilled the soil, planted an orchard and paid the taxes, expecting his parents would give the six (6) acres to him, his possession was not a hostile holding as he occupied the property by permission of his parents and his brothers and sisters to whom his parents subsequently deeded the property and not under a claim of title and he could not maintain claim of title based on adverse possession as there was no proof he ever apprised the true owners that he was no longer occupying the house under permissive use and intended to hold it adversely to them. Triplett v. Chadwick, 311 S.W.2d 554, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Adverse claimants’ sporadic payment of property taxes on the disputed lot, their sporadic clearing of the property, and their lease of the property to a relative from 1979 to 1995 were insufficient to establish hostile possession for 15 years as was required in an adverse possession claim under KRS 413.010 , as neither the payment of taxes nor clearing of the property were continuous, and the tenant was related to the owner of the property. Phillips v. Akers, 103 S.W.3d 705, 2002 Ky. App. LEXIS 2355 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).

54.—Payment of Taxes.

One cannot acquire title to the land of another by paying the taxes on it, nor will a claim of title under a void deed, although recorded, ripen into a fee by lapse of time, nor will limitations run against the owner of record in favor of a claimant not in possession, nor is it incumbent upon the owner to sue for cancellation of a void deed, or to take steps to remove a cloud upon his title, nor need he make investigation of the record in order to correct any mistake in the sheriff’s report of sale of his land for taxes. Kypadel Coal & Lumber Co. v. Millard, 165 Ky. 432 , 177 S.W. 270, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 554 ( Ky. 1915 ).

An adverse possession cannot be established by paying taxes upon the covered property; however, where one enters upon and begins to hold a definitely described piece of property and to pay taxes on the whole of it, such payment of taxes upon the whole is some evidence of an intention to seize and claim the whole. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Payment of taxes by plaintiff in action for damages for trespass was not in itself sufficient to show an intention to hold adversely but to a certain extent it did strengthen her claim that she believed the property to be hers. Sweeten v. Sartin, 256 S.W.2d 524, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1953 ).

The occasional cutting of timber and payment of taxes on land did not constitute an adverse holding sufficient to acquire title by adverse possession, even though such acts continued sporadically for the prescriptive period. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

55.—Partition.

A verbal division of land is invalid under the statute of frauds and invests the purchaser with no title whatever but, if the division is followed by a continuous and exclusive possession of 15 years or more, it ripens into a title which will entitle the holder to possession, if illegally dispossessed. Blanton v. Howard, 148 Ky. 547 , 146 S.W. 1089, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 454 ( Ky. 1912 ).

An oral partition of land by joint owners, followed by an adverse possession of each, and acquiesced in by all of the parties for more than 15 years, will vest in each the title to that portion of the land allotted to him. Helton v. Campbell, 155 Ky. 257 , 159 S.W. 785, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 1913 ).

An oral partition of land is within the statute of frauds and by reason thereof unenforceable as a contract or agreement and the same is true of an oral or parol sale of land, but cases are numerous holding that such sale or partition will not be disturbed by the court if followed by the actual, continuous and adverse possession of the land by the purchaser, or joint owner receiving an allotment, for more than 15 years. Henderson v. Clark, 163 Ky. 192 , 173 S.W. 367, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 201 ( Ky. 1915 ).

56.—Executory Contracts.

The 15 years statute of limitations under this section did not apply where the defendants were holding interest in oil and gas lease under color of title as trustee for beneficiary and were not holding adversely to her but in cooperation with her under an executory contract if the contract were valid and for her if the contract were invalid. Dempsey v. D. B. & M. Oil & Gas Co., 112 F. Supp. 408, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2786 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

When one enters into and holds possession of land under an executory contract of purchase, or bond for title, the entry and possession are in subordination to the title of the vendor until payment or performance of all the conditions by the vendee, or until the vendee has distinctly and unequivocally repudiated the title of his vendor, which repudiation is brought expressly or by legal implication to the vendor’s knowledge. Rice v. Blair, 161 Ky. 280 , 170 S.W. 657, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1914 ).

A vendee under an executory contract of sale cannot hold the property adversely to the vendor until he has performed the conditions of the contract or repudiated the vendor’s title. McGuire v. Owens, 300 S.W.2d 556, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 456 ( Ky. 1957 ).

57.—Parol Gifts.

Where defendant alleged in his answer that he was the owner of the tract of land claimed by plaintiffs, wife or defendant’s uncle and their four (4) children, by virtue of a parol gift by his uncle and adverse possession for more than 15 years, although there was some conflict in the evidence, it did not support his contention. Porter v. Davis, 295 Ky. 498 , 174 S.W.2d 750, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1943 ).

A parol gift of land may ripen into title where accompanied by actual possession for statutory period and, under such a gift, donee’s possession is adverse from its inception. Combs v. Combs, 307 Ky. 790 , 212 S.W.2d 307, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 832 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In an action to quiet title to certain land, the evidence supported the chancellor’s finding that the defendant had failed to establish his claim to title of a certain tract of land by a parol gift from his father accompanied by actual possession for the statutory period. Combs v. Combs, 307 Ky. 790 , 212 S.W.2d 307, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 832 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The evidence preponderated in favor of finding of fact that defendant had failed to establish title by a parol gift accompanied by actual possession for the statutory period. Combs v. Combs, 307 Ky. 790 , 212 S.W.2d 307, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 832 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Adverse possession may run against grantor under void deed or against donor under verbal gift of land where grantee or donee, as the case may be, actually holds the land as his own, and such a holding may ripen into title even where grantor or donor continues to reside on the property. Jessee v. Jessee, 310 Ky. 565 , 221 S.W.2d 462, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 982 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where plaintiffs testified owner of farm gave them the farm 27 years previously and that they moved onto the land and occupied it although donor listed the land for taxation and paid all the taxes upon it and that when part of the land was condemned for road purposes they were not made parties to the suit nor did they receive any payment therefor and that after donor’s death they asked if donor’s heir would sell the farm, the intention of plaintiffs when considered in light of their acts and declarations was not to disseize the owner of title but to occupy the land with his permission, and their amicable possession did not ripen into title by adverse possession. Jones v. Caddell, 244 S.W.2d 744, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1239 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where there is an unconditional parol gift of well-defined body of land, accompanied by actual possession for 15 years or more, with claim of ownership, such possession ripens into title and the donor or purchasers from heirs of donor cannot recover the land. White v. Smith, 265 S.W.2d 937, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 770 ( Ky. 1954 ).

58.—Parol Purchases.

As long as the vendee, under an oral agreement to purchase land, looks to his vendor for title, his possession is not adverse and he cannot avail himself of possession under such a contract to prove his title but a party may, by parol, purchase land, and enter upon the same, and he may then openly and notoriously hold, claim, and occupy the same adverse to all the world and such adverse holding and occupancy will ripen into a perfect title within 15 years unless the statute is suspended or extended on account of disability of the holder of the legal title. Creech v. Abner, 106 Ky. 239 , 50 S.W. 58, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1812 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1899 ).

The entry under a parol purchase of land, the extent of which was definitely fixed, was adverse to the vendor and ripened into a title after the lapse of the requisite statutory period. Gilbert v. Kelly, 57 S.W. 228, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 353 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 617 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

Right to land in controversy could not rest upon an unenforceable parol contract but the actual possession of the land acquired under that contract having continued uninterruptedly, adversely and notoriously for such a time as would under the statute of limitations bar a recovery of the land even by an infant, no legal ground could be found for depriving adverse possessor of it. Muncy v. Smith, 142 Ky. 201 , 133 S.W. 1152, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1911 ).

59.—Cemetery Lots.

In order to ultimately ripen into a title of an easement under the 15 year statute of limitations, burial of the dead body is the only possession, where claimed and known, necessary to ultimately create complete ownership of the easement so as to render it inheritable and there cannot be an actual ouster of possession by an intruder, or running of statute of limitations in his favor, while a gravestone stands there indicating by inscription the previous burial of another whether or not it is inclosed as burial ground. Hook v. Joyce, 94 Ky. 450 , 22 S.W. 651, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 337 , 1893 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1893 ).

Nonresidence did not divest an heir at law of an easement in the graves of his parents, the gravestones of his parents being, as long as they stand, conclusive of his claim of ownership as well as right of entry. Hook v. Joyce, 94 Ky. 450 , 22 S.W. 651, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 337 , 1893 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1893 ).

The possession of a cemetery lot must be under a color of title, although the courts are not quite in accord as to what must be the nature or character of use in order to constitute possession, such as the sufficiency of the mere presence of the body without care or improvement of the plot of ground, and likewise there is some difference as to whether it is confined to the space occupied by a body or covered by graves or the entire plot. Brunton v. Roberts, 265 Ky. 569 , 97 S.W.2d 413, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The right or title in a cemetery lot may be acquired by prescription and it cannot be defeated even by the record owner of the soil and conversely title may be lost by entry and continuous adverse possession by another, according to the statutory and other legal requirements. Brunton v. Roberts, 265 Ky. 569 , 97 S.W.2d 413, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where burial of two (2) bodies in the cemetery plot of another was due to mistake as to the location of the boundary because the corner markers of the lots had been obliterated and the cemetery overgrown, the encroachment was unintentional and the indispensable element of adverse possession was missing, for the intent to claim ownership determines the character of the possession and the possession was not hostile and could not ripen into adverse possession; thus, the record holder of the plot was entitled to have the bodies removed and the unfortunate mistake corrected. Brunton v. Roberts, 265 Ky. 569 , 97 S.W.2d 413, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Defendants proved their title to the land claimed by adverse possession under both the 15 year and 30 year statutes of limitation in an action to quiet title and for complete possession of a tract of land allegedly set apart as a burial ground. Wood v. Corman, 307 Ky. 580 , 211 S.W.2d 424, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 766 ( Ky. 1948 ).

As long as a cemetery lot is inclosed or continues as a place of burial, the possession is to be regarded as adverse to all claimants of the property other than the lineal descendants of those buried or having the right to be buried there. Goins v. Beech Bottom Baptist Church, 313 Ky. 287 , 231 S.W.2d 23, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 867 ( Ky. 1950 ).

There was no adverse possession to a portion of land outside the fence of a cemetery lot excepted in a deed where there were no graves in that portion of the land or outside the fence on that side, although there were graves outside the fence on another side of the reserved cemetery lot. Goins v. Beech Bottom Baptist Church, 313 Ky. 287 , 231 S.W.2d 23, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 867 ( Ky. 1950 ).

60.—Mineral Rights.

The only way the statutes can be started running in favor of the surface holder as against the owner of the mineral is by the former taking actual possession of the mineral under claim of right by opening mines or wells and operating the same and when this possession has continued for the statutory period, title to the mineral by adverse possession is perfected, but the opening of a coal bank or oil or gas wells for the purpose of taking only a small quantity of the mineral for domestic purposes and not with the avowed intention of acquiring title to the whole mineral estate does not start the statutes running. Hoskins v. Northern Lee Oil & Gas Co., 194 Ky. 628 , 240 S.W. 377, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 1922 ).

The 15 year statute of limitations was not applicable where defendant’s grantor had recognized his ownership of mineral rights and defendant could assert ownership 35 years later in an action to quiet title by grantor’s son who had been conveyed the fee by his father without a reservation or exception in his deed as to the minerals or mineral rights, but the son, when he sold the fee, excepted the mineral rights in his deed by the words “the minerals, oil and gas are hereby reserved and set out, same having been conveyed heretofore” and the only conveyance of mineral right on record was the conveyance of his father to the defendant, for the son was not an innocent purchaser for value. Porter v. Justice, 242 S.W.2d 863, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1081 ( Ky. 1951 ).

In an action to quiet title to coal and minerals lying under a 35-acre tract and to recover damages under claim of record title and adverse possession, evidence was convincing that at no time did the adverse claimant abandon the premises but on the other hand they were committing a trespass as against the true owners and the evidence supported the finding that plaintiff was the holder of title by adverse possession. Thompson v. Ratcliff, 245 S.W.2d 592, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The severance of the coal under land must have taken place prior to the inception of adverse possession to effectively constitute a severance of the coal from the surface as against an adverse claimant under color of title. Hellier Coal & Coke Co. v. Bowling, 272 S.W.2d 651, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1114 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where defendants claimed a superior title to three (3) interlocks with the boundary claimed by plaintiff by virtue of other prior patents and these interlocks covered the land under which defendants had mined coal, the chancellor correctly disallowed any claim for damages since plaintiffs had never adversely possessed the coal under these portions of the tract. Hellier Coal & Coke Co. v. Bowling, 272 S.W.2d 651, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1114 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Maps required under KRS 352.450 were insufficient to support defendant’s claim that plaintiff had actual notice of defendant’s trespass in mining coal under ten-acre tract and that the statute of limitations had consequently run, where no copies of the maps were filed, apparently because no copies were available, and defendant’s engineer, who had testified in a previous suit that such maps had been filed, had since died. Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 277 S.W.2d 57, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 466 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Once minerals have been severed, claim of adverse possession may not properly arise from surface use alone for statutory period. Coleman v. Republic Steel Corp., 280 S.W.2d 171, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1955 ).

After severance of the mineral rights from surface rights, title to minerals cannot be gained through adverse possession without a penetration of the mineral estate, but presumption prevails that owner and holder of surface is trustee of minerals for use and benefit of owner of mineral rights. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

After severance of the mineral rights from the surface rights, the surface owner may repudiate the trust for the benefit of the owner of the minerals by acts or words which clearly and unmistakably bring home to mineral holder the knowledge that surface owner is claiming the minerals adversely. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

The required factors to establish adverse possession of minerals are identical with those required for adverse possession of land. In other words, there must be exclusive, actual, peaceable, open and notorious, continuous and hostile possession of minerals under a claim of right for the statutory period. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

The rules of constructive possession applicable to surface estates are applicable to adverse possession of mineral estates and one working part of a well-defined, severed mineral estate may be deemed to be in constructive possession of the whole estate. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Where operation of two (2) oil wells on 56 acres for over 30 years altered the entire subterranean structure underlying not only the particular tract but the entire 800 acres described in an old mineral deed as well, the operators of the two (2) wells exercised dominion over all of the oil under their tract when they withdrew it by means of their two (2) wells and obtained title by adverse possession to the mineral rights under the full 56-acre tract in question. Diederich v. Ware, 288 S.W.2d 643, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 270 ( Ky. 1956 ).

61.—Patentees.

The actual occupancy by a junior patentee or junior titleholder of that part of a tract of land which does not interfere with the elder grant does not give him possession of the part within the interference by adverse possession, although the elder patentee or titleholder never actually entered upon any part of the land included in the patent. Curtis v. Warden, 144 Ky. 383 , 138 S.W. 245, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 604 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The law does not recognize a constructive possession of the same land at the same time in two (2) claimants, and, in case of conflict of titles depending on constructive possession, the older title prevails. Frazier v. Ison, 161 Ky. 379 , 170 S.W. 977, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1914 ).

If an entrant goes upon a boundary under a junior patent, which latter is entirely or partly within a senior grant or survey, he will be deemed to be in actual possession of only so much of the land as he actually incloses, if owner of senior grant is then in actual possession of his boundary; or, if owner of senior grant be not in actual possession of boundary in his grant but enters thereon before patentee of junior grant has ripened a title by adverse possession, grantee of junior grant will be restricted to his actual close. Madon v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 586 , 198 S.W.2d 320, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 907 ( Ky. 1946 ).

The defendant was not guilty of forcible detainer where the forestry division of the state was in the position of claiming possession under color of title of a junior patent and had never at any time taken actual possession or actually occupied, in such a way as would ripen into title by adverse possession, the spot where the defendant’s shack was erected, or the clearing upon which it was located. Madon v. Commonwealth, 303 Ky. 586 , 198 S.W.2d 320, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 907 ( Ky. 1946 ).

An entrant under a junior patent which lies wholly or partly within a senior grant wherein the owner of the senior grant is in possession of his boundary will be limited to so much of the land as he actually inclosed and was in actual possession of for the statutory period. Harmon v. Lowe, 310 Ky. 60 , 219 S.W.2d 982, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 848 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Leasing in itself is not sufficient to constitute possession of junior patentee on land of senior patentee, for one having legal title to property may possess constructively and at all times does so. Fletcher Lumber Co. v. Fordson Coal Co., 311 Ky. 19 , 223 S.W.2d 175, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1041 ( Ky. 19 49 ).

The mere occasional entry of the junior patentee upon the land within the conflict to cut timber is not sufficient possession to establish title in junior patentee by adverse possession. D. B. Frampton & Co. v. Saulsberry, 268 S.W.2d 25, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 890 ( Ky. 1954 ).

62.—Tenants.

A tenant cannot ordinarily set up an adverse possession, and will be prima facie deeded to continue in that character so long as he remains in the occupation of the land, but a tenant who has openly disavowed the title of the landlord, and notoriously held adversely to him by clear and positive claim on the part of the tenant, with the knowledge of the landlord, will be protected by the statute of limitations after the lapse of the statutory period. South's Heirs v. Marcum, 58 S.W. 527, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 641 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 731 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Evidence supported judgment that defendant’s predecessor in title did not claim title during period of possession but only as tenant of plaintiff’s predecessors. Brittain v. Campbell, 275 Ky. 783 , 122 S.W.2d 740, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 492 ( Ky. 1938 ).

One who is upon his land when it is sold under a judicial proceeding and who remains upon the land afterward remains there impliedly as the tenant of, and not as hostile to the purchaser under the proceeding, and does not perfect title by adverse possession. Justice v. Graham, 246 S.W.2d 135, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 618 ( Ky. 1952 ).

63.— —Joint.

The possession of a cotenant may be adverse or hostile to other cotenants and, if continued for 15 years or more, will ripen into a perfect title whether the original entry was with intent to hold adversely or whether the entry was as tenant in common. Wilson v. Hoover, 154 Ky. 1 , 156 S.W. 880, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 9 ( Ky. 1 913).

Running of 15 year statute of limitations against one cotenant after conveyance at instance of the other was not interrupted by former’s death, though his descendants were then under disability. Hardin v. Swinney, 214 Ky. 793 , 284 S.W. 75, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 422 ( Ky. 1926 ).

In absence of possession under color of title, neither husband nor wife can acquire title by adverse possession of lands which they are jointly using or occupying during continuance of marriage relationship, and hence statute of limitations does not run. Howard v. Turner, 287 Ky. 206 , 152 S.W.2d 589, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Where husband and wife were living together on land and using it jointly, possession of neither could be exclusive, adverse and hostile to other, necessary elements for ejectment action were not present, nor could either maintain forcible detainer action against other, and hence 15 year statute of limitations against actions to recover real property did not run. Howard v. Turner, 287 Ky. 206 , 152 S.W.2d 589, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Any use of lands which is not inconsistent with the cotenancy is not sufficient to make the outstanding cotenants aware of the adverse claim, and will not amount to a disseizin, or start the statute of limitations to running; but the erection of permanent and lasting structures, the sale and conveyance by recorded deeds of the whole or portions of the estate in fee are such acts as are reasonably calculated to apprise fairly prudent persons of the fact that the claimant is holding adversely to his cotenant. Hannah v. Littrell, 304 Ky. 304 , 200 S.W.2d 729, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 627 ( Ky. 1947 ).

In order that one of several cotenants may acquire title by adverse possession as against the others, his possession must be of such an actual, open, notorious, exclusive and hostile character as amounts to an ouster of the other tenants. Hannah v. Littrell, 304 Ky. 304 , 200 S.W.2d 729, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 627 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where plaintiffs based their action to quiet title against cotenants on their chain of title to an undivided one-half interest and adverse possession for more than 15 years of the full interest and cotenants did not know of the existence of the tract or of their titular interest therein until shortly before the commencement of the action, evidence of the erection of a building on the tract by a tenant of the plaintiff without any showing as to the nature or character of the building was insufficient to apprise the cotenants that plaintiffs were holding adversely to them and overcome the presumption that cotenants in possession hold for the use and benefit of all cotenants. Hannah v. Littrell, 304 Ky. 304 , 200 S.W.2d 729, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 627 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Every cotenant has the right to enter into and occupy common property and every part thereof, provided, in so doing, he does not exclude his fellow tenants or otherwise deny to them some right to which they are entitled as cotenants, and they, on their part, may safely assume, until something occurs to the contrary of which they must take notice, that possession is held by him as cotenant and is not adverse to any of them, and there can be no adverse holding against a cotenant who does not know that he has an interest in the land. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

For a joint tenant to oust his cotenants by adverse possession, the required notice may be actual or constructive, and may be inferred or imputed from the acts and conduct of the one in actual possession. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

One joint tenant cannot acquire title by adverse possession against his cotenants by mere possession, no matter how long continued, for he has a right to occupy the premises, and his occupancy thereof is not to be presumed hostile, but is presumed to be amicable and in harmony with his legal rights. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The possession of one joint owner is presumptively the possession of all; therefore, mere possession can never ripen into title by adverse possession as against cotenants. To acquire title by adverse possession, a joint owner must make his possession of such a character as to bring home to his cotenants notice that he is holding and claiming adversely to them. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

There can be no adverse holding against a cotenant who does not know that he has an interest in the land. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The statute of limitations will not begin to run in favor of the cotenant in possession until notice of adverse holding is brought home to his coowners and, while this may be accomplished by acts of such notoriety and conspicuousness as would be calculated to put ordinarily prudent persons upon notice of his adverse holding, the burden is upon the claimant to show a disseizin and notice. In absence of a contrary showing, presumption is that a joint tenant is holding common property for joint use and benefit of himself and cotenants. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where cotenant, by inheritance, resided in a distant state and never knew that she had an interest in the land in question until she was asked to sign a quit-claim deed, the fact that her cotenant claimed and occupied land, paid balance on purchase-money note, made all necessary repairs, paid insurance and taxes, rented property and kept all proceeds, for the statutory period, was not sufficient to give cotenant title by adverse possession. Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

If one cotenant in possession of a jointly owned tract of land occupies and claims as part of that tract an adjoining parcel, his adverse possession of the adjoining parcel must be deemed to be that of all the cotenants and the period of his possession may be claimed by remote grantees of the cotenants to establish adverse possession for a period of 15 years. Big Run Coal & Clay Co. v. Helton, 323 S.W.2d 855, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1959 ).

The possession of one cotenant is presumptively the possession of all and inures to the benefit of all and when one cotenant acquires an outstanding adversary title, the acquisition inures to the benefit of his cotenants. Big Run Coal & Clay Co. v. Helton, 323 S.W.2d 855, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1959 ).

64.— —Life.

To start statute for recovering realty running against remainderman, apparent life tenant must bring home to remainderman notice of basis of adverse holding so as to indicate to reasonably prudent person that life tenant repudiates life tenancy, and is basing holding upon adverse claim, and remainderman then has right of entry because of resulting acceleration of remainder. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Under circumstances, life tenant’s suit to quiet title against remaindermen and for slander of title was insufficient to start limitation statute for recovery of realty running against remaindermen. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

There can be no adverse holding unless the life tenant brings home to the remainderman during the life of the tenant by clear and convincing evidence, notice of intention to claim the fee and, where there is no adverse holding, the statute of limitations does not begin to run. Slack's Ex'r v. Barrett, 290 Ky. 251 , 160 S.W.2d 595, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 368 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where the life tenant undertakes to dispose of, or enlarge upon, the estate and brings home to the remainderman notice of the adverse holding in such manner as to indicate a repudiation of life tenancy, or where the person under whom the remainderman asserts a derivative right undertakes to transfer title to the real estate, possession thereunder for the statutory period bars the remainderman’s right to recover the land. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

65.—Tacking.

Adverse possession by decedent, wife, daughter and tenants could be tacked so as to constitute 23 years of continuous possession. Culton v. Simpson, 265 Ky. 343 , 96 S.W.2d 856, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where defendant’s mother had been in possession of the land in dispute since 1908, her adverse possession could be tacked on to that of defendant, since he and her other children inherited the land from their mother and were in privity with her. Waller v. Parsley, 312 Ky. 758 , 229 S.W.2d 741, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1950 ).

It is well settled that the adverse possession of a grantee may be tacked on to that of his grantor to complete the statutory period and, where defendant’s house was a couple of feet over his line upon plaintiff’s property and the record showed that defendant’s predecessor in title had occupied that portion of plaintiff’s land adversely and under color of title for over 25 years, this gave defendant title to the property. Martin v. Kane, 245 S.W.2d 177, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1254 ( Ky. 1951 ).

In action to quiet title, the requisite privity of adverse possession so as to entitle grantees to tack on their possession to that of the former claimant could be implied from the circumstances where it seemed clear that former claimants to land intended to transfer to grantees the disputed area occupied by them though not embraced in their deed. Tartar v. Tucker, 280 S.W.2d 150, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Adverse possession of part of adjoining parcel by one tenant in common is not personal to that cotenant but must be deemed to be that of all of the cotenants and is effective to vest title by adverse possession in all of the cotenants and a deed by them passes title to the adversely possessed land to their grantee who can tack the adverse possession by the cotenants even though the deed from them to the purchaser does not expressly convey the adversely possessed land. Big Run Coal & Clay Co. v. Helton, 323 S.W.2d 855, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Plaintiff’s constructive possession, by virtue of its occupancy of its 1,600-acre tract under color of title, could not prevail against the actual possession by defendants and their predecessors in title for at least 40 years by tacking. Big Run Coal & Clay Co. v. Helton, 323 S.W.2d 855, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Where there is no privity of estate or connection of title between the several occupants, several successive possessions cannot be tacked for the purpose of showing continuous adverse possession. Cowherd v. Brooks, 456 S.W.2d 827, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1970 ).

66.—Pleadings.

In an action to quiet title to both the surface and the minerals of a tract of land where the defendant’s grantor had conveyed the surface of the land in dispute, but had retained the mineral rights, the grantor should have been made a party defendant from the outset rather than being added as a party by amendment after the proof was taken, and any evidence taken between the plaintiffs and the defendant was improperly considered against the defendant’s grantor, as he should have been given the opportunity to make his own defense. Brock v. Howard, 304 Ky. 311 , 200 S.W.2d 734, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 630 ( Ky. 1947 ).

A party may prove title by adverse possession under a general allegation of ownership, although adverse possession has not been specifically pleaded. Bryant v. Bullock, 309 Ky. 590 , 218 S.W.2d 381, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Plaintiff failed to prove the possession necessary to maintain suit to quiet title under KRS 411.120 , but since in his pleadings defendant averred he had title to the land in dispute, the court treated the question of possession as waived. Waller v. Parsley, 312 Ky. 758 , 229 S.W.2d 741, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1950 ).

A defendant in an ejectment action is not required to plead adverse possession merely to refute by evidence an allegation of his wrongful possession. Arnold v. Heffner, 330 S.W.2d 943, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1959 ).

67.—Evidence.

Where some of the evidence admitted in an action to settle a boundary dispute was incompetent and irrelevant but the court properly admonished the jury not to consider the challenged incompetent evidence, it could not be concluded that the court was improperly swayed either by the “conduct” of the witness or by the incompetent and irrelevant testimony most of which related to the matter of “boundary” and not to adverse possession. Marcum v. Noble, 242 S.W.2d 866, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1082 ( Ky. 1951 ).

68.— —Sufficient.

Evidence in action to quiet title established title in plaintiff by adverse possession for more than 15 years where plaintiff’s chain of title to the Commonwealth was complete, plaintiff through tenants and subtenants had fenced the land, erected houses, cleared and cultivated the fields and had possession of the land when defendant in a bad faith effort purchased and undertook to take possession of house occupied by one of the tenants. Fordson Coal Co. v. Collins, 268 Ky. 331 , 104 S.W.2d 985, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 449 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where proof was clear that defendant’s predecessor acquired deed in 1903 from a man who had been in possession of it a great number of years and, immediately upon obtaining his deed, inclosed the entire tract with a fence and successive owners claimed title to the entire tract within the fence as constructed in 1903, there could be no doubt but that the testimony established the necessary adverse possession in defendants and those through whom they claimed to ripen title in them to that tract and the court did not err in quieting title in defendant. Lyttle v. Columbus Mining Co., 275 Ky. 145 , 120 S.W.2d 1037, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 385 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The fact that original owner of defendant’s lot had fenced in and occupied a strip of adjoining lot with permission of owner of adjoining lot would not bar defendant from claiming title to the strip by adverse possession, where defendant, in purchasing lot, thought that he was obtaining title back to fence, and he occupied and used the strip for more than 15 years. Garthwaite v. Harges, 301 Ky. 653 , 192 S.W.2d 734, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 755 ( Ky. 1945 ).

In an action to quiet title, the evidence supported the court’s finding that the plaintiff and his predecessors in title and possession had been in adverse possession of the questioned tract of land for more than 15 years, and that he was the true and rightful owner thereof. Durham v. Anglin, 301 Ky. 499 , 192 S.W.2d 399, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where, through mistake, building was so constructed that part of one wall and all of an outside stairway extended onto adjoining lot, and, notwithstanding subsequent notice of encroachment from adjoining owner, the building and stairway continued to be used openly and without interference for more than 15 years, the owner of the building thus acquired title by adverse possession to the extent of the encroachment, as against contention of adjoining owner that a party wall had been established by agreement. Scoville v. Burns, 306 Ky. 315 , 207 S.W.2d 756, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 555 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In a condemnation proceeding, the claimants of the whole award wholly failed to establish title by adverse possession, since there were no inclosures on the land, they had no color of title, and they failed to establish by their evidence a well-marked boundary defining the limits of their possession or acts within the boundary sufficient to acquire title by adverse possession. Marsee v. Colson, 307 Ky. 328 , 210 S.W.2d 952, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In action to enjoin defendant from erecting a fence along a certain line, testimony was sufficient to justify the conclusion by the chancellor that the disputed area had been adversely claimed and occupied by the owners of plaintiffs’ tract for a time sufficient to acquire a prescriptive title thereto. Lowe v. Allen, 310 Ky. 734 , 221 S.W.2d 465, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 984 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Evidence that decedent sold merchantable timber on unfenced four-acre tract on two (2) occasions, and the timber was cut and sawed with about 15 years elapsing between the two (2) sales; that he cut timber on the land regularly during his lifetime for his personal use but never cultivated it; that he sold or gave a small strip of it to a neighbor who owned an adjoining tract and permitted the strip to be fenced; that on two (2) occasions he permitted the erection of a temporary house on the land; that for nearly 50 years he was the only person who exercised or attempted to exercise any dominion over the land; and that he was the owner was generally recognized throughout the community, sufficiently established title in him by adverse possession. Cornelius v. Stephens, 312 Ky. 499 , 228 S.W.2d 28, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 682 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Where plaintiff in action to quiet title pleaded that on an indefinite date she and her husband entered into an agreement for exchange of land with defendants, that defendants promised to convey to her and her husband the tract of land described in petition, and that she thereafter took possession of said land and adversely possessed it more than 15 years prior to commencement of action, and, by answer, defendants admitted that in 1934 they entered into an agreement for exchange of lands as alleged, but that the description of the land to be conveyed by them was different from that set out by the plaintiff, the pleadings formed a very clear issue concerning what the 1934 agreement was which question was controlling in the case and the finding of the chancellor that the agreement was as claimed by plaintiff was certainly supported by the pleadings. Wood v. Davis, 242 S.W.2d 612, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1052 ( Ky. 1951 ).

In action to settle boundary dispute, there was ample proof to support a verdict for the plaintiff and judgment that plaintiffs were the owners by adverse possession of the boundary described in the petition as amended. Marcum v. Noble, 242 S.W.2d 866, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1082 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Evidence that defendants and their predecessors in title had occupied and had exercised dominion over the land in controversy for a period exceeding 50 years, cultivating crops and cutting timber, and that no claim was made by plaintiffs or their predecessors in title that it was their land, justified a finding that defendants had title by adverse possession. Belcher v. Bingham, 246 S.W.2d 449, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 624 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where in 1918 the surviving husband conveyed to a purchaser land owned jointly by himself and his wife at the time of her death and the purchaser and trustees to whom the purchaser conveyed the land in trust possessed the entire tract adversely and peaceably until the institution of an action by wife’s heirs in 1950, the purchaser and trustees acquired title to the deceased wife’s interest under this section. Sams v. Sampson, 255 S.W.2d 626, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 674 ( Ky. 1953 ).

An abundance of evidence established ownership of property by adverse possession in a widow, who paid part of the consideration and who exercised dominion over the property which she thought was in the name of her husband and herself jointly by collecting rents, occupying a second house on the premises for 23 years, improving the property and paying the taxes, as against the purchaser from grantee of her stepson, where her husband had actually put the property in the name of her stepson. Sweeten v. Sartin, 256 S.W.2d 524, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In an action in which plaintiffs relied on record title and adverse possession to an entire city lot and defendant relied on adverse possession and title under a deed made by grantors who did not own the property to the eastern portion of the lot, evidence disclosing that plaintiffs and their predecessors in title, through an unbroken record title, had been living in a residence on the western portion of the city lot for over a half century and that no one occupied the eastern portion of the lot for over 35 years before defendant built a taxi stand seven years prior to suit justified finding title to the entire lot in plaintiff. Miller v. Hampton, 258 S.W.2d 897, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 886 ( Ky. 1953 ).

While the evidence introduced in behalf of defendants in quiet title action tended to contradict the proof offered by plaintiffs concerning the character of plaintiffs’ possession of the land, thus making a sharp issue of fact, the chancellor had ample evidence upon which to resolve that plaintiffs had title by adverse possession. White v. Smith, 265 S.W.2d 937, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 770 ( Ky. 1954 ).

In action to establish title and right to possession of small farm, it was proper to allow the jury to determine whether plaintiffs had established their title by adverse possession and, as the jury had been instructed that plaintiffs had burden of proving they had acquired title by adverse possession for reason defendants had first established a prima facie case as to their title, verdict was not flagrantly against the evidence. Havens v. Clem, 275 S.W.2d 70, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1244 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where a lot was donated to a city for use as a public square and the city purported to deed the lot to the board of education for use as a school, the purported deed was an abandonment of the property by the city and the reversionary interest in the heirs of grantor vested in them at the time the school building was erected by the board of education giving the board of education title by adverse possession when they thereafter held the property in excess of 15 years. Bowling Green v. Board of Education, 278 S.W.2d 726, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1955 ). (See KRS 381.218 through 381.223 .).

The possession of plaintiffs was adverse if they intended to and did hold to the fence which had stood for 40 years, regardless of the condition of the fence and of where the true boundary ran, or were in a strong but erroneous belief that the boundary fixed by the fence was the true boundary line and, while there was no evidence to show plaintiff had read his deed or had intended to claim to the fence only in the event it proved to be the true boundary, there was his testimony that he took possession of “everything inside the fence” and evidence that he openly treated the property as his own, and utilized it continuously for the purposes for which the land was best suited — pasturing and timber-cutting; accordingly, his possession ripened into title by adverse possession against the record owners after 15 years. Mudwilder v. Claxton, 301 S.W.2d 3, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Court was warranted in finding that the appellees had acquired title by adverse possession by virtue of fencing and occupancy and the findings of fact were sufficient. Broaddus v. Broaddus, 302 S.W.2d 103, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 170 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Evidence for defendants in action in ejectment which showed that over a period of many years, the had cut and removed timber, leased for oil and gas, paid taxes, occupied a cabin and exercised other acts of dominion through various instruments and documents was sufficient to support finding of actual adverse possession. Arnold v. Heffner, 330 S.W.2d 943, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 214 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Evidence established beyond a doubt, even if defendant’s deed did embrace the land in controversy, that plaintiff in quiet title action had acquired ownership by adverse possession and was entitled to damages for the wrongful taking over of her house and premises in the amount of the reasonable rental value for the time it was withheld, where, within a few months after she bought the property, she inclosed all the land she purchased and also the disputed tract with a fence which had remained around the land except for repairs until fairly recent years, had put in a garden each year in the disputed area, had built a garage on the tract, had later erected a house where the garage had been and had held the land for 28 years against all comers, thinking the land was hers and treating it as such, and no one had objected to her claim of ownership until the defendant attempted to convey the land. Walden v. Baker, 343 S.W.2d 797, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 431 ( Ky. 1961 ).

In an action for obstruction of a lane, the trial court was warranted in concluding that even if lane originally constituted an exclusion from defendant’s deed, they had acquired title by adverse possession by reason of having inclosed it within their fence line for more than 15 years. Craft v. Mullins, 347 S.W.2d 72, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 342 ( Ky. 1961 ).

69.— —Insufficient.

Where the possession of plaintiff was limited to that tract to which they had good title and the only showing of possession on the disputed tract was possession which started about two (2) years prior to the time of forfeiture of patent, plaintiffs had no better claim to the disputed tract under old forfeiture statute requiring five (5) years of adverse possession next preceding judgment of forfeiture of land to state for nonpayment of taxes as prerequisite to vesting of title by adverse possession than they had under this section. Brock v. Howard, 304 Ky. 311 , 200 S.W.2d 734, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 630 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Claimants of the whole of condemnation award failed to establish title by adverse possession to portion of land taken to which they had no color of title, on which there were no inclosures and as to which they failed to establish any well-marked boundary defining limits of their possession or acts within the boundary sufficient to acquire title by adverse possession. Marsee v. Colson, 307 Ky. 328 , 210 S.W.2d 952, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Entry upon uninclosed land to cut timber did not constitute an adverse holding, even though such acts continued sporadically for the prescriptive period. Marsee v. Colson, 307 Ky. 328 , 210 S.W.2d 952, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The evidence was insufficient to warrant a claim to title by adverse possession in an action for trespass where the defendants did not make an actual entry on the land in dispute after the rendition of a judgment in a federal quiet title action, or after a survey which followed erroneous calls in the patent, especially when there was no evidence that the surveyor’s mistake actually caused the defendants to alter detrimentally their position. Speed v. Creech, 307 Ky. 765 , 212 S.W.2d 265, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 816 ( Ky. 1948 ).

The defendants showed that some of their predecessors had once cut some timber from parcel in dispute and had cleared a part of it for cultivation, but the evidence was too indefinite and insufficient to establish title by adverse possession. Floyd v. Bruce, 308 Ky. 324 , 214 S.W.2d 402, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 932 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Evidence was insufficient to establish title by adverse possession or claim of champerty because of failure to meet requirements as to duration of time and continuity of possession, or to show that plaintiff or any other person was in possession of property involved at time defendant purchased his property. Powell v. Peel, 309 Ky. 380 , 217 S.W.2d 959, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 716 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Merely marking trees so as to include the contiguous parcel with other lands owned and occupied by the adverse entrant does not come within the rule that an adverse entrant is deemed to acquire actual possession of land of which he disseizes the legal titleholder by an actual inclosure or other equivalent physical occupancy. Fletcher v. Bringardner Lumber Co., 249 S.W.2d 38, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where plaintiff had constructive possession of timberland under a superior record title, defendant, resting constructive possession through extension of the boundary by a predecessor under a void patent title, could not claim title by adverse possession where none of the land was cleared and no act of proprietorship was ever committed in relation to it. Fletcher v. Bringardner Lumber Co., 249 S.W.2d 38, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Boundary line claimed by defendants had not become fixed under either the doctrine of agreed boundaries or adverse possession where a duly recorded map or plat of the subdivision was available to either party and the possession had been for less than the statutory period. Faulkner v. Lloyd, 253 S.W.2d 972, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1126 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Evidence supported the verdict and judgment for the record holder in a controversy involving the ownership of a strip of land within the record holder’s deed which the owners of adjoining tract claimed they had adversely possessed by encroachment for more than 15 years. Traylor v. West, 255 S.W.2d 612, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Open, visible and notorious possession limited to the cutting of trees from time to time over a period of some 40 years was not such adverse possession as to invest title in defendants or to make the plaintiffs’ deeds void under the champerty statute (KRS 372.060 ). Price v. Ferra, 258 S.W.2d 460, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 831 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where neither plaintiffs nor their predecessors in title had ever occupied the rough, mountainous land with no clearings, buildings or inclosures and the only acts of possession ever exercised by plaintiffs or their vendors was the occasional cutting of timber, continuous claim of title to and payment of taxes on the property for the statutory prescriptive period, evidence was not sufficient to sustain plaintiff’s title on the grounds of adverse possession. Noland v. Wise, 259 S.W.2d 46, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Where it was clear that son’s occupancy of a tract for 20 years was by permission of his parents and not under a claim of title, his claim of title by adverse possession was not justified. Mills' Adm'x v. Mills, 265 S.W.2d 458, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 735 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Whether claim to property was challenged or not, there was no title by adverse possession, since the claim had continued for less than six (6) years. Cole v. Frazier, 280 S.W.2d 531, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Evidence of stringing clotheslines on unfenced lot and at times keeping a pigpen, doghouse, junkpile and signboards thereon, and at time running chickens on the lot, staking a cow out to graze, using it as a playground for children and raising a garden thereon was insufficient to put owner on notice that adjoining lot owner was holding the lot in actual, open, notorious, hostile and continuous adverse possession, with the exception of a small plot 5.1 feet by 5.9 feet occupied by the adjoining lot owner’s outdoor toilet for more than 15 years. Jarboe v. Yopp, 283 S.W.2d 213, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 297 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where plaintiff’s predecessor in title built, in about the year 1910, a rail fence between two (2) tracts and located it where he did because of necessity due to rough terrain rather than as an actual monument to the true line, which fence remained in place until the early 1930’s, when, after a part of it had been destroyed, the remainder was removed by plaintiff’s predecessor in title who had, during the time it remained in place, pastured, cultivated and occasionally cut timber from the inclosed area, plaintiff did not establish a claim of adverse possession to the place where the fence was located, for the holding by plaintiff’s predecessor was not hostile and adverse and the original fence was not built for the purpose of holding adversely. Thompson v. Gonterman, 285 S.W.2d 157, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1955 ).

In an action to restrain defendant from cutting and removing timber from a tract of land inclosed with defendant’s land by a fence erected by the owners of the mineral rights under defendant’s land, evidence to the effect that defendant had cultivated one corner of the tract for a number of years and had on various occasions cut and sold timber but the number of trees was small and no regular pattern of activity appeared was insufficient to establish adverse possession where plaintiff had protested the construction of the fence and had cut it in various places during the years. Caudill v. Bates, 286 S.W.2d 922, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 113 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Assuming defendant’s claim of adverse possession to the whole of an old country road could properly be asserted in an action to quiet title to a portion of the road and to enjoin its obstruction by defendant, the evidence was highly conflicting as to its nature and extent and court on appeal could not say that chancellor’s finding that the claim was not proven was clearly erroneous. Hylton v. Belcher, 290 S.W.2d 475, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 321 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Mere fact that a person executed one deed conveying fee simple to certain realty and another deed conveying the minerals underlying said realty of which he was not record owner was not a basis for presuming he had actual adverse possession of such realty. Kentucky River Coal Corp. v. Bayles, 318 S.W.2d 554, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 1 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Petitioners failed to establish adverse possession because petitioners’ use of the disputed property for hunting, fishing, and other recreation and their one-time removal of timber were indistinguishable from the other uses which did not establish “actual” possession; the use in no way altered the condition of the property. It remained today the wild, unimproved land it had long been. Moore v. Stills, 307 S.W.3d 71, 2010 Ky. LEXIS 50 ( Ky. 2010 ).

70.—Instructions.

In action in ejectment, instruction to the jury omitting the word “next” from the clause “and shall further believe from the evidence that said plaintiff and her predecessors in title have been in the actual adverse . . . . . possession of same for 15 years or more prior to the 19th day of October, 1938, then you will find your verdict for the plaintiff” was not prejudicial where all proof was directed to 15 years’ continuous adverse possession immediately prior to October 19, 1938, and there was no evidence that there was any break in the possession of either party. Jones v. Sanders, 284 Ky. 571 , 145 S.W.2d 514, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Jury instructions that submitted the question of whether or not use of land by plaintiff was adverse or permissive were proper where plaintiff both by pleadings and proof asserted title to the land by adverse possession and where her claim was not merely a right of easement by more than 15 years’ adverse use as a route to the pond but a claim that she was the owner of the land in fee. Price v. Shadoan, 298 Ky. 828 , 184 S.W.2d 237, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1025 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Instructions which told jury in substance that if defendants and their predecessors in title had for 15 years or more claimed adversely up to the line located by defendants’ own surveyor, they should find for defendants, if not, then the jury should find for plaintiff, and defined adverse possession, fairly submitted the issue on the question of adverse possession by the defendants. Jones v. Goss, 307 Ky. 263 , 210 S.W.2d 958, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 732 ( Ky. 1948 ).

It was not error to instruct jury on adverse possession in an action to quiet title where defendant alleged in his answer that he was the owner and in possession of the land in controversy, it was stipulated at the beginning of the trial that the questions involved dealt with the location of the line between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the question of adverse possession and champerty, and practically all the proof was to the effect that the defendant and his predecessors in title had been in the undisputed and uninterrupted possession of the land in controversy for more than 50 years. Bryant v. Bullock, 309 Ky. 590 , 218 S.W.2d 381, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 754 ( Ky. 1949 ).

In action to settle boundary dispute, the instructions correctly spelled out the facts to be included to constitute adverse possession: that plaintiff held possession of the tract of land described under color of title to a well-marked boundary, openly, notoriously, hostilely, and adversely to defendant and for a period of 15 years, occupying and using the same under color of right. Marcum v. Noble, 242 S.W.2d 866, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1082 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Instruction authorizing jury to find for adjoining landowners if they believed their possession had been actually adverse rather than permissive or with an intention to claim only to true boundary was proper and presented both plaintiff’s and defendant’s theory of the case in an action by adjoining landowners to quiet title to tract they had allegedly held by encroachment and adverse to the record owner for over 15 years. Traylor v. West, 255 S.W.2d 612, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In action to establish title and right to possession of realty, instruction correctly told the jury defendants had the burden of proving they had acquired title by adverse possession for the reason that plaintiffs had first established a prima facie case as to their title. Havens v. Clem, 275 S.W.2d 70, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1244 ( Ky. 1954 ).

It was proper to allow jury to determine whether defendants had established title to farm by adverse possession where the evidence was conflicting on this point and plaintiffs met the requirement of title by proving both conveyances derived from a common source. Havens v. Clem, 275 S.W.2d 70, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1244 ( Ky. 1954 ).

In action to recover damages for wrongful cutting of timber, the court correctly refused to give any instruction having to do with adverse possession where plaintiff failed to show that any claim to the land in question had been made by plaintiff’s predecessor in title and, as plaintiff had purchased his land in 1947, the statutory period for adverse possession was not established. Noland v. Wise, 333 S.W.2d 501, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 190 ( Ky. 1960 ).

71.Pleadings.

Motion to file supplemental complaint on day of oral argument in United States Court of Appeals, which alleged for the first time that the period of time for bringing an action for the recovery of real estate was 15 years under this section and that the period of time had expired, was overruled, since a new issue, not raised by the pleadings in the district court or considered by it, could not be raised for the first time on appeal. Walker v. Felmont Oil Corp., 262 F.2d 163, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5888 (6th Cir. Ky. 1958 ), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 840, 80 S. Ct. 61, 4 L. Ed. 2d 78, 1959 U.S. LEXIS 528 (U.S. 1959).

A litigant need not anticipate in his pleading that the defense of limitation will be made and rely on matters in avoidance thereof in the same pleading but, when limitation is relied on, it must be controverted in some form, the usual method being a denial in a pleading responsive to the one containing the plea. Klineline v. Head, 205 Ky. 644 , 266 S.W. 370, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Plea of limitation stands confessed, in absence of reply. Ogle v. Cole's Ex'rs, 221 Ky. 726 , 299 S.W. 566, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 798 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Statute of limitations must be pleaded. Treas v. Bank of Marshall County, 234 Ky. 376 , 28 S.W.2d 43, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1930 ). See Vance v. Atherton, 252 Ky. 591 , 67 S.W.2d 968, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 827 ( Ky. 1934 ); Markwell v. Kahlkoff, 258 Ky. 231 , 79 S.W.2d 984, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1935 ).

A plea of the statute of limitations is a personal one, and cannot be raised by demurrer, and, to be available to the party relying thereon, must be pleaded. Cox v. Simmerman, 243 Ky. 474 , 48 S.W.2d 1078, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1932 ). See Vance v. Atherton, 252 Ky. 591 , 67 S.W.2d 968, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 827 ( Ky. 1934 ); Markwell v. Kahlkoff, 258 Ky. 231 , 79 S.W.2d 984, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1935 ).

A party to an action may not rely on the statute of limitations in bar of his adversary’s right to recover unless he specifically pleads the statute. Fresh v. Dunakin, 306 Ky. 87 , 206 S.W.2d 203, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 960 ( Ky. 1947 ).

72.Breach of General Warranty.

This section is the applicable statute of limitations in an action upon breach of a general warranty. Ralston v. Thacker, 932 S.W.2d 384, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 129 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

73.Actions.

The statute of limitations applied to suits brought by petition and summons. Banks v. Coyle, 9 Ky. 564 , 1820 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 1820 ) (decided under prior law).

74.Change, Modification or Repeal.

The legislature would change, modify or repeal the statutes of limitation, provided it did not change or injuriously affect vested rights. Davis v. Davis, 4 Ky. Op. 602, 1870 Ky. LEXIS 438 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 14, 1870) (decided under prior law).

75.Commencement.

The statute started to run from the time a cause of action accrued and a suit could be maintained. Banks v. Coyle, 9 Ky. 564 , 1820 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 1820 ) (decided under prior law). See Dobyns v. Schoolfield, 49 Ky. 311 , 1850 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1850 ) (decided under prior law).

Cited in:

Powell v. Winchester Bank, 551 S.W.2d 820, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 706 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977); Ernst v. Shaw, 783 S.W.2d 400, 1990 Ky. App. LEXIS 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990); White Log Jellico Coal Co. v. Zipp, 32 S.W.3d 92, 2000 Ky. App. LEXIS 74 (Ky. Ct. App. 2000).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action to quiet title, KRS 411.120 .

Heirs, devisees not claiming for eight years, property escheats, KRS 393.020 , 393.040 .

Limitation on action requiring reliance on grant prior to 1820, Ky. Const., § 251.

No special legislation to regulate limitations, Ky. Const., § 59 (Fifth).

Kentucky Law Journal.

Matthews, Kentucky Developments in 1954: Personal and Real Property, Future Interests and Trusts, 44 Ky. L.J. 37 (1955).

Lee, Working Part of a Mineral Estate as Adverse Possession of the Whole, 46 Ky. L.J. 67 (1957).

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Comments, Tax Implications of the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act: Does the Davis Rule Still Apply in Kentucky?, 66 Ky. L.J. 889 (1977-1978).

Comment, Breaking the Trust: Adverse Possession of Subsurface Minerals Under Kentucky Law, 71 Ky. L.J. 235 (1982-83).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Kentucky Law Survey, Youngs, A Compendium of Cases on Future Interests in Kentucky, 6 N. Ky. L. Rev. 283 (1979).

Brady, “Expert Testimony in Kentucky”, see article for analysis of court standards regarding expert testimony, 25 N. Ky. L. Rev. 2 (1998).

Ruh & Lockaby, Balancing Private Property Rights with “Public Use”: A Survey of Kentucky Courts’ Interpretation of the Power of Eminent Domain., 32 N. Ky. L. Rev. 743 (2005).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Pleading Adverse Possession (Another Form), Form 303.08.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Pleading Adverse Possession as Defense Where Entry Was by Parol Gift, Form 303.07.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Establish Title by Adverse Possession, Form 303.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Adverse Possession, § 303.00.

413.020. Action for recovery of real property — Plaintiff under disability.

If, at the time the right of any person to bring an action for the recovery of real property first accrued, he was an infant or of unsound mind, he or the person claiming through him may, though the period of fifteen (15) years has expired, bring the action within three (3) years after the time the disability is removed.

History. 2506.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The purpose of this section is not to extend the statute of limitations three (3) years in any cases save those in which the disability is not removed more than three (3) years before the expiration of the 15 years and to give such persons as are under disability at the time the cause of action accrues three (3) full years after the removal of the disability within which to bring their action. Dukes v. Davis, 125 Ky. 313 , 101 S.W. 390, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 1348 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1907 ).

2.Application.

An action for breach of a covenant contained in a deed as to the use of the land commenced by one laboring under disability at the time the breach occurred is governed by the provisions of KRS 413.170 and not by the provisions of this section, which latter section applies to an action for the recovery of real property and not to one based upon the breach of a covenant in which the recovery of real property is not sought. National Finance Corp. v. Robinson, 193 Ky. 649 , 237 S.W. 418, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1922 ).

This section relates to the suspension of limitation by disability, and it does not deal with the question of notice of adverse possession. Lake v. Ford, 244 Ky. 803 , 52 S.W.2d 724, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 515 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Insurance subrogee’s common law indemnity claims against a subcontractor for indemnification of the subrogee’s claims paid out on behalf of the insurer were not subject to the four-year limitation periods that applied to a contractual sale of goods under KRS 355.2-725. Although the underlying relationship involved a sale of goods, common law claims for indemnity could be recognized and governed by the limitations provisions set forth in KRS 413.020(7). Elec. Ins. Co. v. Freudenberg-NOK, Gen. P'ship., 487 F. Supp. 2d 894, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17292 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

3.Disabilities.
4.— Infancy.

The statute of limitations began to run against an infant, notwithstanding his infancy, at the death of his grandmother, at which time he was by law entitled to possession of the real estate, but under this section he had three (3) years after he arrived at full age within which to assert his claim to the land and the statute, having begun to run against the infant at the death of his grandmother, continued to run against his heir. Call v. Phelps' Adm'r, 45 S.W. 1051, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 507 (1898).

As all of the adult children of decedent had disposed of their interests in their father’s estate before his death and made deeds therefor, the right of the only heir, who was an infant when the decedent died, to sue must be determined as though he alone had such right. Sharp v. Stephens' Committee, 52 S.W. 977, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 687 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 356 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

If the only disability infant labored under at the date of his intestate’s death was infancy, the disability was removed upon his arrival at 21 years of age, and if the alleged unsoundness of mind developed subsequent to the time when his cause of action first accrued, this disability cannot be added to that of infancy to extend the time for the institution of suit. Sharp v. Stephens' Committee, 52 S.W. 977, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 687 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 356 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

Under this section the right of an infant to sue is limited to 15 years where the disability of infancy is removed as much as three (3) years before the expiration of the 15 years. Sharp v. Stephens' Committee, 52 S.W. 977, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 687 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 356 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

A conveyance to a woman and her children creates a life estate in the mother with remainder to her children, who become vested with the entire title on the death of their mother, so the statute of limitations would not begin to run against the minor children’s interest in the real property until their mother’s death and, if the children are infants at that time, their right of action to recover the land would not be barred until three (3) years after their disability was removed. Salyer v. Johnson, 107 S.W. 210, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 709 (1908).

Action based on joint right of entry accruing to infant plaintiffs in 1891 as to which the disability of infancy was removed in 1906, not brought within three (3) years thereafter, as permitted by this section, was barred. Parsons v. Justice, 163 Ky. 737 , 174 S.W. 725, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 310 ( Ky. 1915 ).

If possession begins prior to vesting of title in infant, his infancy will not interrupt the running of the statute. Ross v. Richardson, 173 Ky. 255 , 190 S.W. 1087, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 445 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Potter v. Quillen, 309 Ky. 500 , 218 S.W.2d 60, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1949 ).

One is not allowed 15 full years after arriving at 21 years of age within which to bring suit to recover real property adversely held while he was an infant but only three (3) years after he becomes 21 and this is true although the period of limitations and the extended time after the removal of the disability are partly or wholly concurrent so, if the limitation period is completed while the disability exists, suit may be brought within three (3) years after the disability is removed but if the disability is removed before the completion of the limitation period, then the extension provided by this section becomes concurrent with the running of the statute. Campbell v. Whisman, 183 Ky. 256 , 209 S.W. 27, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Where defendant and those through whom they claimed had held the land adversely to plaintiffs for 15 years on March 27, 1912, and at that time the youngest plaintiff had been 21 years of age for nearly six (6) years, then, under this section, the time expired in 1915 and an action in ejectment filed in 1917 was barred by the statute of limitations. Campbell v. Whisman, 183 Ky. 256 , 209 S.W. 27, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1919 ).

When limitation begins to run against the right to enforce a cause of action, the running of the statute is not interrupted by reason of any subsequent event or condition and the death of an ancestor will not stop the running and, since the heirs are placed exactly in the shoes of their ancestor, the minority of descendants after the ancestor’s death will not arrest it. Henderson v. Fielder, 185 Ky. 482 , 215 S.W. 187, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1919 ).

If infancy existed or is intended to be relied on, it must, like the statute of limitations, be pleaded. Adams v. Bates, 191 Ky. 710 , 231 S.W. 238, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 376 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Where actual possession under a void title bond was not taken until after the true title had vested in infant heir, her right of action was not tolled until three (3) years after she became 21 years of age and the limitations did not begin to run against her until then, the 30 year statute under KRS 413.030 not being involved. Phillips v. American Ass'n, 259 Ky. 402 , 82 S.W.2d 456, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 320 ( Ky. 1935 ).

If possession begins after vesting of title in infant, adverse possession cannot be acquired during his minority. Elkhorn Coal Corp. v. Tackett, 261 Ky. 795 , 88 S.W.2d 943, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 737 ( Ky. 1935 ). See Potter v. Quillen, 309 Ky. 500 , 218 S.W.2d 60, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 752 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Action to recover land, instituted by former infant in 1945 on ground that sale by guardian in 1916 was void, was barred by statute of limitations where plaintiff had become of age in 1935. Horn v. Montgomery, 305 Ky. 275 , 203 S.W.2d 58, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 794 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The 15-year limitation period begins to run when the right to institute an action for recovery of real property first occurs and this is true, notwithstanding the holder of the right is under the age of majority, in which case, he can avail himself of the saving provision of this section, if need be; but if the 15-year period extends beyond the three-year grace period, the saving provision is rendered inconsequential. Pendleton v. Centre College of Kentucky, 818 S.W.2d 616, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 122 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

5.— Unsound Mind.

This section did not bar committee from suit to recover land conveyed by his ward while congenitally incompetent mentally to make a contract at the time she made the conveyance and there was no change in her mental condition after the conveyance was made. Collins v. Lawson's Committee, 140 Ky. 510 , 131 S.W. 262, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where one’s right of action to recover land accrued in 1859, if he became of unsound mind after his cause of action accrued, this did not affect the running of the statute and, if he was of unsound mind when his cause of action accrued and so remained until his death in 1882, the action might have been brought within three (3) years after that time and although, when he died, his heirs at law were under disability, this did not affect the running of the statute of limitations and an action by the heirs for partition in 1908 was barred by the statute of limitations. Hale's Heirs v. Ritchie, 142 Ky. 424 , 134 S.W. 474, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Although a cause of action had accrued, the 15 year statute did not run against a person who was insane at the time possession was taken adverse to him, but, where one of his heirs was not under disability at his death, an action commenced by some of the heirs 16 years after his death was barred by the statute of limitations. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Insanity was a disability which extended the period of limitation insofar as the 15 year statute was involved, but it had no effect upon the accrual of his right of action, since a cause of action accrues when the right to institute and maintain a suit arises, and it is not dependent upon the capacity of the person in whose favor the right exists. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where, at all times mentioned in the record, a war veteran was under a disability, a plea of limitations was not available and veteran’s successor committee could avoid conveyance from former committee as individual to himself as committee for veteran and recover the purchase price. First State Bank v. Catron, 268 Ky. 513 , 105 S.W.2d 162, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Even though ancestor’s cause of action to set aside deed on ground of fraud was not barred by limitations during his lifetime because of his mental incompetency, his heirs could be barred by laches or estoppel. Williams Coal & Coke Co. v. Spears, 277 Ky. 57 , 125 S.W.2d 745, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 565 ( Ky. 1938 ).

6.Commencement of Running of Limitation.

Where adult children and a minor grandchild inherited land as joint tenants and the adult children sold the land and purchaser took possession, the 15 year statute of limitations commenced to run against all the joint owners, including the minor grandchild, at the time of the sale, for, when any one or more of joint owners are free from disability, the statute runs against all, even those under disability. Quarles v. Bradshaw, 200 Ky. 475 , 255 S.W. 124, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1923 ).

If part of heirs to whom right of entry descends are not then under disability, the disability of the others does not prevent the statute of limitations from running against all. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

When the right of entry descends to heirs who are all under disability at the time their right of action accrues, limitation does not begin to run against any of them until disability is removed from all. Wilcox v. Sams, 213 Ky. 696 , 281 S.W. 832, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1926 ).

It is the rule that where a right of entry descends to heirs, some of whom are under disability and some are not, the statute of limitations runs against all. Lake v. Ford, 244 Ky. 803 , 52 S.W.2d 724, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 515 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where evidence showed actual, visible, adverse possession of disputed land began during life of alleged owner, the statute of limitations as to him commenced in his lifetime and infancy of his children occurring after the commencement of the operation of the statute of limitations did not suspend the statute of limitations, so an action by his children to recover the land brought more than 30 years after the commencement of the statute of limitations would be barred by KRS 413.030 . Edwards v. Clark, 261 Ky. 749 , 88 S.W.2d 914, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1935 ).

It is a generally accepted rule that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until there is a person in being capable of bringing a suit. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Since the remainderman has no right of possession until the particular estate is terminated, the general rule is that laches, estoppel, or the statute of limitations will not run against a remainderman prior to the termination of the life tenancy; but there are exceptions to this general rule where the life tenant undertakes to dispose of, or enlarge upon the estate and brings home to the remainderman notice of the adverse holding in such manner as to indicate a repudiation of life tenancy or where the person under whom the remainderman asserts a derivative right undertakes to transfer title to the real estate, in which case possession thereunder for the statutory period bars the remainderman’s right to recover the land. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

The rights of the life tenant in the land may be terminated or extinguished other than by his death, in which event the remaindermen’s right of possession will be accelerated. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where mortgagor conveyed mortgaged realty to daughter-in-law for life with remainder to son’s heirs and then the mortgagee foreclosed, bought in land at sale, ousted life tenant and remaindermen and took possession under a commissioner’s deed, there was a “falling in” of the life estate at that time and action by remaindermen to recover land 49 years later was barred by the statute of limitations even though the life tenant had died only seven (7) years before. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Cause of action for common law indemnity filed by an insurance subrogee in the place of the manufacturer accrued against the supplier of an allegedly defective part on the date that the subrogee actually made payments to the injured parties, not at the time of the underlying accident. Elec. Ins. Co. v. Freudenberg-NOK, Gen. P'ship., 487 F. Supp. 2d 894, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17292 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Davies, Children Born Out of Wedlock: Their Time Has Come, Volume 49, No. 2, April 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 10.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Roberts, Kentucky Decisions on Future Interests (1938-1953), 42 Ky. L.J. 3 (1953).

413.030. Action for recovery of real property — Extension for disability limited — No extension past thirty years.

  1. The time within which an action for the recovery of real property may be brought shall not be extended by reason of any disability that did not exist when the right to bring the action first accrued, nor by reason of any disability of the heirs of the person to whom the right first accrued.
  2. The period within which an action for the recovery of real property may be brought shall not, in any case, be extended beyond thirty (30) years from the time when the right to bring the action first accrued to the plaintiff or the person through whom he claims.

History. 2507, 2508.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

This section was intended to prescribe the period of 30 years as the limit beyond which the right to bring an action for the recovery of real property should not be extended, even to a person laboring under disability when the cause first accrued. Bradley v. Burgess, 87 Ky. 648 , 10 S.W. 5, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 701 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1888 ).

2.Application.

The statute of limitations as to actions for the recovery of real estate by analogy are applicable and should be applied to actions to restore or perpetuate evidence of title to real estate and in no case can the right to bring such an action continue more than 30 years after the cause of action accrues. Brandenburg v. McGuire, 105 Ky. 10 , 44 S.W. 96, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1598 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1898 ).

This section does not apply to adverse possession by surface owner of mineral and mining rights severed from the surface, since KRS 381.430 controls such rights and a person who holds the surface cannot hold the mineral rights by adverse possession. Farnsworth v. Barret, 146 Ky. 556 , 142 S.W. 1049, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section does not apply to remaindermen until the death of the life tenant, since all statutes of limitation begin to run from the accrual of the cause of action and a remainderman has no right to entry and no cause of action until the death of the life tenant, since being a remainderman is not a disability. Superior Oil Corp. v. Alcorn, 242 Ky. 814 , 47 S.W.2d 973, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 855 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Statute fixing time within which action for recovery of realty must be brought could not be invoked by plaintiff in quiet title action, where no adverse possession by him had been shown. Hale v. Horn, 265 Ky. 560 , 97 S.W.2d 402, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 533 ( Ky. 1936 ).

This section has no application, since the possession by one tenant in common or joint tenant is deemed to be the possession of his cotenants also, and the one in possession cannot acquire title by adverse possession as against his cotenants unless they have notice or knowledge that he denies their possession and claims adversely to them. Fordson Coal Co. v. Vanover, 291 Ky. 447 , 164 S.W.2d 966, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1942 ). See Moore v. Gaines, 308 Ky. 223 , 213 S.W.2d 990, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 878 ( Ky. 1948 ).

3.Disabilities.
4.— Subsequent.

Where one was under no disability at the time possession was taken of land, the statute of limitations was not suspended under this section by a disability subsequently arising. Combs v. Combs, 200 Ky. 771 , 255 S.W. 704, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 194 ( Ky. 1923 ).

5.— Heirs.

If, at any time after her father’s death, his daughter could have ignored his sale of land and repudiated the title bond by action to recover the land, the same right could have been asserted by her father before his death and, if so, the cause of action to recover the land would have accrued before his death, and suit might then have been brought; therefore, the statute would have commenced to run before his death; consequently, it was not suspended at his death during the time the daughter was a minor. Doty v. Jameson, 93 S.W. 638, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 507 (1906).

Where all remaindermen heirs are under disability at the time of the death of the life tenant, the 15 year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.010 does not begin to run until the disability is removed from all, even the youngest. May v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 184 Ky. 493 , 212 S.W. 131, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Where certain heirs who were remaindermen were sui juris at the time of the death of the life tenant and others were under disability, the 15 year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.010 began to run in favor of grantee of life tenant against all immediately upon the death of the life tenant. May v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 184 Ky. 493 , 212 S.W. 131, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 86 ( Ky. 1919 ).

If any of heirs are free from disability when a right of entry accrues to the heirs, the statute starts and the disability of others does not prevent the statute from running against all of the class. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

When a right of action accrues to heirs, and all of them are under disability at the time, limitation does not begin to run against any of them until it is removed from all of them. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

6.— Class.

Where a cause of action accrues to a class, part of whom are sui juris and part of whom are under disability, the disability of the part does not prevent the statute from running as to the whole. Combs v. Combs, 200 Ky. 771 , 255 S.W. 704, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 194 ( Ky. 1923 ).

7.Beneficiaries of Trusts.

The rule that the statute of limitations runs against a trustee holding legal title to the estate from the time adverse possession begins and when he is barred all equitable estates dependent upon the legal estate are also barred applies where the cestui que trust is an infant and when the estate is for life or remainder. Watkins v. Pfeiffer, 92 S.W. 562, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 97 (1906).

8.Joint Tenants.

Where evidence was that one (1) of four (4) joint owners did not sign deed under which defendant claimed, 30 year statute of limitations did not bar heirs of such owner from bringing action for partition, since defendant in such case was joint tenant with plaintiffs and, in the absence of notice to the plaintiffs, could not claim that his possession was adverse to them. Fordson Coal Co. v. Vanover, 291 Ky. 447 , 164 S.W.2d 966, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where husband and wife occupied property jointly, the possession of neither could be deemed adverse to the rights of the other. Smith v. Hughes, 292 Ky. 723 , 167 S.W.2d 847, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where land was jointly occupied by father and children and the children claimed an interest in the land on the ground that a deed from their deceased mother to their father was invalid, the father could not claim title by adverse possession against the children. Moore v. Terry, 293 Ky. 727 , 170 S.W.2d 29, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 695 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where property is jointly occupied, the possession of neither occupant can be deemed adverse to the rights of the other. Moore v. Terry, 293 Ky. 727 , 170 S.W.2d 29, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 695 ( Ky. 1943 ).

9.Accrual of Right of Action.

A cause of action to restore or perpetuate evidence of title to real estate accrues upon the destruction or mutilation of the deed or writing sought to be supplied and the statute commences to run from such destruction, or at least as soon as the loss is discovered, or could by the exercise of reasonable diligence have been discovered by the plaintiff. Brandenburg v. McGuire, 105 Ky. 10 , 44 S.W. 96, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1598 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Since the remainderman has no right of possession until the particular estate is terminated, the general rule is that laches, estoppel, or the statute of limitations will not run against a remainderman prior to the termination of the life tenancy. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

The rights of the life tenant in the land may be terminated or extinguished other than by his death. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where mortgagor conveyed mortgaged realty to daughter-in-law for life with remainder to son’s heirs and then the mortgagee foreclosed, bought in land at sale, ousted life tenant and remaindermen and took possession under a commissioner’s deed, there was a “falling in” of the life estate at that time and action by remaindermen to recover land 49 years later was barred by the statute of limitations even though the life tenant had died only seven years before. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where plaintiff and her brother entered into an agreement for division of realty of deceased father in 1911 and plaintiff moved on the portion allotted to her and lived there for over 30 years before instituting action to claim portion allotted to her brother under the agreement and which her brother had sold in 1914 with her knowledge, her right of action, if there ever was one, accrued in 1914 when her brother sold the portion allotted to him and, since that was 35 years prior to her action, it was barred by this section. Burchett v. James, 246 S.W.2d 461, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 633 ( Ky. 1952 ).

10.No Extension Past Thirty Years.

No disability because of infancy, or because war exists between the claimant’s country and that of the defendant, or because of any other “disability whatever,” can save the right to bring an action for the recovery of real property adversely held for a longer period than 30 years from the time the right of action first accrued to them. Stilwell v. Leavy, 84 Ky. 379 , 1 S.W. 590 ( Ky. 1886 ).

The 30-year statute is a complete bar to actions for the recovery of real estate regardless of disabilities. Bradley v. Burgess, 87 Ky. 648 , 10 S.W. 5, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 701 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1888 ). See Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Thompson, 105 Ky. 190 , 48 S.W. 990, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1110 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 196 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Under this section the period within which an action for the recovery of real property may be brought shall not, in any case, be extended beyond 30 years from the time the cause of action accrued by reason of any death or the existence or continuance of any disability and the statute, in this case, having begun to run, and more than 30 years having elapsed after the cause of action accrued, the bar of the statute was complete. Rose v. Ware, 115 Ky. 420 , 74 S.W. 188, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2321 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 118 ( Ky. 1903 ).

The statute of limitations must be expressly pleaded and relied on in the answer if defendants are to have the benefit of it; it is not enough to say that defendants have been in the adverse possession of the land in controversy for more than 30 years. Uniontown v. Berry, 76 S.W. 145, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 598 (1903).

The 30 year statute bars all claims, without regard to disability, where there was a right of action in the claimants. Dixon v. Harris, 105 S.W. 451, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 275 (1907).

When grantee entered and held land adversely under a void deed, the cause of action to recover land accrued to grantee and, when she died, it descended to her daughter and no action to recover the land having been brought in 30 years after the cause of action accrued, further actions were barred although all the parties were at all times under disability. Foust v. Hill, 215 Ky. 364 , 285 S.W. 235, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 745 ( Ky. 1926 ).

No disability whatever can save right to bring an action for recovery of real property adversely held for a longer period than 30 years from time the right of action first accrued. Turner v. Begley, 239 Ky. 281 , 39 S.W.2d 504, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where evidence showed actual, visible, adverse possession of disputed land began during life of alleged owner, the statute of limitations as to him commenced in his lifetime and infancy of his children occurring after the commencement of the operation of the statute of limitations did not suspend the statute of limitations, so an action by his children to recover the land brought more than 30 years after the commencement of the statute of limitations would be barred by this section. Edwards v. Clark, 261 Ky. 749 , 88 S.W.2d 914, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Where patentee’s heirs and vendees occupied for nearly 45 years tract for which patent had been issued, such occupation, although patent was void, was under color of title extending to boundaries and hence they acquired title by adverse possession as against claimants under earlier patent for same tract, in view of this section and KRS 413.010 . Gillis v. Martin, 284 Ky. 714 , 145 S.W.2d 1051, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 569 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Baker and Baker, Title Examination in Kentucky, 48 Ky. Bench & B. 12 (1984).

413.040. Claim not to preserve right of action.

No continual claim upon or near real property shall preserve a right to bring an action.

History. 2509.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

0.5.In General.

KRS 413.040 was the proper procedure for residents to bring an action against the county and county fiscal court alleging that the county had unlawfully incorporated the private drive into the county road system; the fiscal court took no formal action of the kind that was appealable under KRS 178.100 . Whitley v. Robertson County, 396 S.W.3d 890, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 2013 ).

1.Continual Claim.

A continual claim of land from the time adverse possessor took possession would be ineffectual to entitle claimant to institute a suit for its possession in the face of an adverse claim of ownership for more than 15 years. Abner v. Creech, 79 S.W. 247, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1981 (1904).

413.050. Limitation on action by city on public easement — On action for possession of public road — Effect of notice.

  1. The limitations mentioned in KRS 413.010 to 413.040 shall not begin to run in respect to actions by a city for the recovery of any part of any street, alley or other public easement or the use thereof in the city, until the legislative body of the city has been notified in writing by the party in possession or about to take possession that his possession will be adverse to the right or title of the city. Until such notice is given, all possession of any part of any street, alley or public easement in any city shall be deemed amicable, and the person in possession the tenant at will of the city.
  2. Limitation shall not begin to run in favor of any person in the possession of any part of any public road until written notice is given to the county judge/executive of the county in which the road is situated that the possession is adverse to the right of the public to the use of the road.

History. 2546, 2547: amend. Acts 1978, ch. 384, § 520, effective June 17, 1978.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The principle allowing the acquisition of easements in streets by adverse user of the public and the loss of such easements by the public by adverse possession of another of a street dedicated to the public use remains unchanged, except for the law, which provided that the statute of limitations will not begin to run in favor of an individual against a town or city for the use or possession of a street until the party who relies or intends to rely upon adverse possession of it has given the authorities of the municipality notice of his intentions. Home Laundry Co. v. Louisville, 168 Ky. 499 , 182 S.W. 645, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 591 ( Ky. 1916 ).

2.Application.

Where defendant had not had possession of part of city street for 15 years when this section was passed, it applied and, since defendant had not given notice in writing of his claim to part of city street, the city was not barred by the 15 year or 30 year statute when its action was brought alleging defendant had taken possession of part of a city street. Faith v. Owensboro, 145 Ky. 276 , 140 S.W. 312, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 839 ( Ky. 1911 ).

This section did not apply to land owned by the city as a cemetery and held adversely by the Catholic church for over 40 years, as the word “easement” cannot be extended to embrace lands to which the city or town has a fee-simple title without upsetting all recognized definitions of the word “easement.” Franklin v. St. Mary's Roman Catholic Church, 188 Ky. 161 , 221 S.W. 503, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1920 ).

This section is not limited to streets and alleys, but also covers public easements including an easement in an open square for the use and enjoyment of its citizens as shown on a recorded plat which was a sufficient dedication. Morrison v. West Point, 219 Ky. 397 , 292 S.W. 1095, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 343 ( Ky. 1927 ).

This section did not apply to the right by prescription of plaintiff to maintain steps upon sidewalk claimed more than 15 years prior to passage of act but the right to acquire the continued maintenance of sidewalks at their present width could not be so acquired by the abutting owner. Covington v. Averbeck, 244 Ky. 117 , 50 S.W.2d 50, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 386 ( Ky. 1932 ).

This section does not apply for the benefit of a private individual who attempts to assert any privately acquired right, title or interest in a passway, for no litigant has the right to rely upon the provisions of this section in this character of action except a municipality in an action wherein its right to the easement as a public way is contested. Trustees of Calhoun Baptist Church v. Spicer, 260 Ky. 562 , 86 S.W.2d 318, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 522 ( Ky. 1935 ).

3.Presumption of Grant.

A permissive use of road never ripens into presumption of grant but, where road is used as matter of right for 15 years, presumption of grant arises. Bryant v. Penn, 280 Ky. 428 , 133 S.W.2d 521, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 1939 ).

4.Notice.
5.— Required.

The right of adverse possession of an alley dedicated to and accepted by a city can only be acquired by 15 years’ continuous, actual and adverse possession of the alley following notice in writing as required by this section. Hurst v. Swango, 144 Ky. 22 , 137 S.W. 794, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 546 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where plat showed dedication of public ground and landing to low water mark and town was not claiming fee-simple title to the ground and landing which was vested in trustees of the town to be a common or public ground for the use of the inhabitants of the town, the right to this use was a mere easement and notice of adverse possession was required under this section. Wood v. Lewisport, 221 Ky. 566 , 299 S.W. 197, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 777 ( Ky. 1927 ).

In an action to recover damages from city for the alleged wrongful taking of a strip of ground eight feet in width abutting a public highway which was outside the calls of plaintiff’s deed but which plaintiff had fenced, taking in part of the public right of way, it was incumbent on plaintiff, under this section, to prove notice of her adverse holding in the face of the fact that the very survey on which the description of her property was based recognized the public interest in the eight-foot strip of land in question. Ashland v. Wyle, 265 Ky. 340 , 96 S.W.2d 850, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 476 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where the condemnees introduced testimony that for 40 years or more they and their predecessors had used the area in front of their building, up to the edge of the old pavement, for customer parking and as a site for gasoline pumps, such evidence fell far short of showing adverse possession under a claim of ownership, since no written notice of the adverse claim had been given to the county court and the limitation period had not started to run. Commonwealth, Dep't of Highways v. Reynolds, 500 S.W.2d 413, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 215 ( Ky. 1973 ).

6.— Sufficient.

A proposition of compromise in writing and signed notified the city that if the compromise was agreed to, individuals claiming adverse possession would surrender a portion of disputed strip and would retain possession of portion now in controversy for the purpose of erecting and building thereon, together with the minutes of the meeting of the city council accepting the compromise was sufficient compliance with this section and defendants or their predecessors having held possession for over 50 years since the giving of the notice had title to the portion now in controversy by adverse possession and the city’s right of entry was tolled. Paducah v. Taylor Real Estate, 223 Ky. 254 , 3 S.W.2d 620, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 319 ( Ky. 1928 ).

7.— Insufficient.

City’s resolution of 1906, directing its city attorney to notify railroad “to withdraw all obstructions and open for travel” a designated street did not constitute notice under this section to the railroad in writing that the railroad was holding the designated street adversely to the city so as to entitle the railroad to claim the title to the designated street by adverse possession. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Owensboro, 238 S.W.2d 148, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 806 ( Ky. 1951 ).

8.— Failure to Give.

Plaintiff’s predecessors did not hold title to 20-foot alley by adverse possession prior to enactment of this section where recitals in their deeds showed conclusively that they did not so hold it and, since plaintiff had not held the 20-foot alley for more than 15 years when this section was passed and had not given notice as required by this section, he had not obtained title by adverse possession and was not entitled to quiet title to it. Moody-Mitchell Lumber & Bldg. Co. v. Louisville, 169 Ky. 237 , 183 S.W. 481, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 666 ( Ky. 1916 ).

The right of plaintiff to possession of a street claimed by her could not be sustained on the theory it was adversely held by her and those under whom she claimed where evidence showed plaintiff’s grantor had built a fence across a public street after this section was passed with the view of appropriating it as his own but without giving the notice required by this section and that plaintiff had not given the notice required by this section. Henderson v. Yeaman, 169 Ky. 503 , 184 S.W. 878, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 730 ( Ky. 1916 ).

No notice of adverse claim to dedicated street having been given to city since its incorporation in 1878, the statutes of limitation, under this section were inoperative, and whether or not the actual acceptance was made by the municipality by ordinance or improvement or otherwise was immaterial, since the potential right to accept whenever desired had existed under the deed of dedication ever since the incorporation of the city, against which limitation did not run in the absence of the required notice. Arn v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. of Kentucky, 171 Ky. 157 , 188 S.W. 340, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Where no written notice was given to the city as provided by this section, defendant did not acquire adverse possession to alley and defendant and his assignee should be ordered to remove structures from the alley within a reasonable time. Princeton v. Poole, 197 Ky. 248 , 246 S.W. 819, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 643 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Where this section was not complied with, no right to obstruct the road had been acquired by limitation although the gates and other obstructions had long been maintained. Mack v. Leavell, 243 Ky. 275 , 47 S.W.2d 1067, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 77 ( Ky. 1932 ).

This section was not repealed by statute which was held unconstitutional and invalid because it violated the provisions of Ky. Const., § 51, and plaintiff could not obtain title to part of old roadway by adverse possession where he had not given notice as required by this section. Laurel County v. Hubbard, 263 Ky. 381 , 92 S.W.2d 359, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 181 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where tract of land was divided into lots with two (2) streets running north and south and plat was filed in county clerk’s office although the streets were not dedicated in the statutory sense, they were dedicated in the sense that the dedication inured to the benefit of the public and the public, particularly contiguous property owners, had a right to use them and such right could not be destroyed by mere encroachment by the owner of abutting property; thus, in action to compel the removal of obstructions and the opening up of the streets, failure of appellee to comply with this section defeated his contention that he had right to obstruct street because of adverse possession. Salyers v. Tackett, 322 S.W.2d 707, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1958 ).

9.Pleadings.

Failure to allege in petition to recover damages for trespass that plaintiffs had adverse possession for the required time prior to enactment of this statute was cured by verdict in favor of plaintiffs where evidence received without objection showed that for 20 or 25 years prior to enactment of this section, plaintiffs and those through whom they claimed had had that portion of their lot claimed to be a part of the city’s streets inclosed by a fence and the issue of adverse possession for 15 years prior to 1873, when this section was enacted, was submitted to the jury. Hartford v. Nall, 144 Ky. 259 , 137 S.W. 1090, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Notice of Adverse Possession of Road, Form 356.10.

413.060. Person holding land under adverse title for seven years — Extension for disability.

  1. No action shall be brought under or by virtue of an adverse, interfering entry, survey or patent to recover the title or possession of land from an occupant if he, or the person under whom he claims, has a connected title thereto in law or equity, deducible of record from the Commonwealth, and has an actual occupancy of it by settlement thereon, under such title, for seven (7) years before the commencement of the action. This possession of land shall bar the right of entry into it by any person, under an adverse title or claim, and sufficient possession to bar the right to recover it shall vest the title in the occupant or his vendee.
  2. The provisions of subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to a person who is an infant, of unsound mind or out of the United States in the employment of the United States or of this state at the time the cause of action accrued, until seven (7) years after the removal of such disability. The disability of one (1) of several claimants shall save only his own right, and not that of another.

History. 2513.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section does not apply to purchaser at tax sale, as his title is not deducible from the Commonwealth. Griffin v. Sparks, 70 S.W. 30, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 849 (1902).

This section does not apply to or protect an occupant under a void patent, as the claimant under such a patent has no title deducible from the Commonwealth. Sanford v. Lewis, 167 Ky. 459 , 180 S.W. 776, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 856 ( Ky. 1915 ).

2.Essential Requirements.

Occupancy by residence upon the land and a claim to the land deducible of record from the Commonwealth are essential within the meaning of this section. Watson v. Wilson, 150 Ky. 27 , 149 S.W. 1120, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 825 ( Ky. 1912 ).

A remote vendee of the county who had no residence upon the property as required by this section did not acquire title by adverse possession. Evans v. Thomas, 269 Ky. 295 , 106 S.W.2d 1006, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 591 ( Ky. 1937 ).

3.Proving Title from Commonwealth.

An action to quiet title by plaintiff claiming under patentee from the Commonwealth would lie against person claiming by adverse possession by occasional entry on land and cutting of timber under a subsequent void patent although a deed to plaintiff was not produced, where proof satisfactorily showed that it was executed and was lost and the patentee and his heirs acquiesced in plaintiff’s claim of the land for over 50 years and defendant who connected himself in no way with valid patentee’s title was a mere trespasser. Combs v. Combs, 72 S.W. 8, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1691 (1903).

When in a case the issue of proving title from Commonwealth is res adjudicata, or the issue is confined to the location of a single dividing line rather than of an entire boundary, title from Commonwealth need not be proved. Reynolds v. Cobb, 286 Ky. 329 , 150 S.W.2d 702, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 254 ( Ky. 1941 ).

4.Remainder Interests.

Purchase of real property by life tenant at foreclosure sale did not destroy remainder interest of her son in absence of unequivocal renunciation of her life estate and a communicated, unequivocal claim of title or possession adverse to the interest of the remainderman. Wheeler v. Kazee, 253 S.W.2d 378, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1086 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Davies, Children Born Out of Wedlock: Their Time Has Come, Volume 49, No. 2, April 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 10.

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Establish Title by Adverse Possession, Form 303.01.

413.070. Action upon equity of redemption in real property.

After a mortgagee of real property or any person claiming under him has had fifteen (15) years’ continued adverse possession, no action shall be brought by the mortgagor or anyone claiming under him to redeem the property.

History. 2539.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

By analogy to this section, if a mortgagor, by a verbal contract, surrenders the mortgaged land to a mortgagee in satisfaction of the mortgage, and places him in possession, and the mortgagee holds and claims adversely this entry and possession for 15 years, he acquires good title. Winburn v. Witt, 134 Ky. 339 , 120 S.W. 293, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 378 ( Ky. 1909 ).

2.Deeds as Mortgages.

An agreement which allowed the grantor in an absolute deed to have the use and remain in possession of property so long as the grantee desired, free from rent, in consideration of keeping the premises in repair and paying all taxes, did not preclude the conclusion that the instrument was a mortgage. Newsom v. Greer, 314 Ky. 347 , 235 S.W.2d 782, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1288 ( Ky. 1951 ).

3.Commencement of Running of Limitation.

While grantor was in possession, he had the right to regard the deed simply as security until such time as the grantee or his successors in interest deprived or attempted to deprive him of the possession and the statute of limitations would not begin to run or laches be imputed to the grantor until then. Newsom v. Greer, 314 Ky. 347 , 235 S.W.2d 782, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1288 ( Ky. 1951 ).

4.Remainder Interests.

Since the remainderman has no right of possession until the particular estate is terminated, the general rule is that laches, estoppel, or the statute of limitations will not run against a remainderman prior to the termination of the life tenancy. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

The rights of the life tenant in the land may be terminated or extinguished other than by his death. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where mortgagor conveyed mortgaged realty to daughter-in-law for life with remainder to son’s heirs and then the mortgagee foreclosed, bought in land at sale, ousted life tenant and remaindermen and took possession under a commissioner’s deed, there was a “falling in” of the life estate at that time and action by remaindermen to recover land 49 years later was barred by the statute of limitations even though the life tenant had died only seven years before. Brittenum v. Cunningham, 310 Ky. 131 , 220 S.W.2d 100, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 861 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Establish Title by Adverse Possession, Form 303.01.

413.072. Relationship of agricultural and silvicultural operations to law of nuisance and trespass — Preemption of local ordinances — Sustainable agriculture and best management practices.

  1. It is the declared policy of the Commonwealth to conserve, protect, and encourage the development and improvement of its agricultural land and silvicultural land for the production of food, timber, and other agricultural and silvicultural products. When nonagricultural land uses extend into agricultural and silvicultural areas, agricultural and silvicultural operations often become the subject of nuisance suits or legal actions restricting agricultural or silvicultural operations. As a result, agricultural and silvicultural operations are sometimes either curtailed or forced to cease operations. Investments in farm and timber improvements may be discouraged. It is the purpose of this section to reduce the loss to the state of its agricultural and silvicultural resources by clarifying the circumstances under which agricultural and silvicultural operations may be deemed to be a nuisance or interfered with by local ordinances or legal actions.
  2. No agricultural or silvicultural operation or any of its appurtenances shall be or become a nuisance or trespass, private or public, or be in violation of any zoning ordinance, or be subject to any ordinance that would restrict the right of the operator of the agricultural or silvicultural operation to utilize normal and accepted practices, by any changed conditions in or about the locality thereof after the same has been in operation for more than one (1) year, when the operation was not a nuisance at the time the operation began. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply whenever a nuisance, trespass, or zoning violation results from the negligent operation of an agricultural or silvicultural operation or its appurtenances.
    1. For the purposes of this section, “agricultural operation” includes, but is not limited to, any facility for the production of crops, livestock, equine, poultry, livestock products, poultry products, horticultural products, and any generally accepted, reasonable, and prudent method for the operation of a farm to obtain a monetary profit that complies with applicable laws and administrative regulations, and is performed in a reasonable and prudent manner customary among farm operators. Agricultural practices protected by this section shall include, but not be limited to, fertilizer application, the application of pesticides or herbicides that have been approved by public authority, planting, cultivating, mowing, harvesting, land clearing, and constructing farm buildings, roads, lakes, and ponds associated with a farming operation. (3) (a) For the purposes of this section, “agricultural operation” includes, but is not limited to, any facility for the production of crops, livestock, equine, poultry, livestock products, poultry products, horticultural products, and any generally accepted, reasonable, and prudent method for the operation of a farm to obtain a monetary profit that complies with applicable laws and administrative regulations, and is performed in a reasonable and prudent manner customary among farm operators. Agricultural practices protected by this section shall include, but not be limited to, fertilizer application, the application of pesticides or herbicides that have been approved by public authority, planting, cultivating, mowing, harvesting, land clearing, and constructing farm buildings, roads, lakes, and ponds associated with a farming operation.
      1. An agricultural operation may include the practice of sustainable agriculture. (b) 1. An agricultural operation may include the practice of sustainable agriculture.
      2. For purposes of this section, “sustainable agriculture” includes science-based practices that:
        1. Are supported by research and the use of technology;
        2. Are demonstrated to lead to broad outcomes-based performance improvements that meet the needs of the present, and
        3. Improve the ability of future generations to meet their needs while advancing progress toward environmental, social, and economic goals and the well-being of agricultural producers and rural communities.
      3. Sustainable agriculture may use continuous improvement principles, with goals that include:
        1. Increasing agricultural productivity;
        2. Improving human health through access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food, and
        3. Enhancing agricultural and surrounding environments, including water, soil, and air quality, biodiversity, and habitat preservation.
  3. For the purposes of this section, “silvicultural operation” includes timber harvest, site preparation, slash disposal including controlled burning, tree planting, precommercial thinning, release, fertilization, animal damage control, reasonable water resource management, insect and disease control in forest land, and any other generally accepted, reasonable, and prudent practice normally employed in the management of the timber resource for monetary profit. A silvicultural operation inherently includes lengthy periods between harvests and shall be deemed continuously operating so long as the property supports an actual or developing forest.
  4. An agricultural or silvicultural operation shall not lose its status by reason of a change of ownership or a cessation of operation of no more than five (5) years or one (1) year after the expiration of a state or national program contract, either in whole or in part, nor shall it lose its status by reason of changes of crops or methods of production due to the introduction and use of new and generally accepted technologies which allow the operator to continue an existing agricultural or silvicultural corporation, unless the operation is substantially changed.
  5. The provisions of this section shall not affect the right of any person, firm, or corporation to recover damages for any injuries or damages sustained by them on account of pollution of the waters of any stream or ground water of the person, firm, or corporation.
  6. Any and all ordinances of any unit of local government now in effect or hereafter adopted that would make an agricultural or silvicultural operation or its appurtenances a nuisance per se, or providing for abatement thereof as a nuisance, a trespass, or a zoning violation in the circumstance set forth in this section shall be void. However, the provisions of this subsection shall not apply whenever a nuisance results from the negligent operation of any such agricultural operation or any of its appurtenances.
  7. Any administrative regulation promulgated by any agency that establishes standards for harvesting or producing agricultural crops in a sustainable manner shall be based on the principles outlined in this section and shall allow the use of best management practices developed under KRS 224.71-100 to 224.71-140 .

History. Enact. Acts 1980, ch. 214, § 1, effective July 15, 1980; 1996, ch. 91, § 1, effective July 15, 1996; 2010, ch. 100, § 1, effective July 15, 2010.

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(7/15/2010). Under the authority of KRS 7.136(1), the Reviser of Statutes has inserted subparagraph and subdivision designations into subsection (3)(b) of this statute during codification. The meaning of the text was not changed.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Agricultural Uses.

To the extent that Campbell County, Ky., Ordinance 0-18-04 & 0-20-04 require planning commission approval before property can be divided into agricultural parcels, the ordinances are void because they conflict with the statutory wording and scheme of KRS 100.111(22), 100.111(2), 100.203(4), and 100.273 et seq., as well as KRS 413.072 , which prohibits local regulations on agricultural uses; to the extent the ordinances seek to amend the subdivision regulations, they are void because the adoption or amendment of subdivision regulations are functions of the planning commission, at least initially. Nash v. Campbell County Fiscal Court, 345 S.W.3d 811, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 57 ( Ky. 2011 ).

The Right to Farm Act did not bar a suit alleging a nuisance from the operation of swine barns because there was no evidence of changed conditions in the locality surrounding the barns, but rather, the landowners’ residences were in existence when the barns were built and began receiving hogs. Powell v. Tosh, 929 F. Supp. 2d 691, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32229 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

Cited in:

Campbell County Fiscal Court v. Nash, — S.W.3d —, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 373 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Research References and Practice Aids

Journal of Mineral Law & Policy.

Comments, Preservation of Kentucky's Diminishing Farmland: A Statutory Analysis, 5 J.M.L. & P. 305 (1989-90).

413.075. Actions to foreclose liens securing street improvement bonds; five year limitation. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (Enact. Acts 1942, ch. 47, §§ 1 to 3) was repealed by Acts 1968, ch. 152, § 168.

Actions Other Than Those Relating to Real Property

413.080. Action upon equity of redemption in personal property.

After a mortgagee of personal property or any person claiming under him has had five (5) years’ continued adverse possession, no action shall be brought by the mortgagor or any person claiming under him to redeem the property.

History. 2540.

413.090. Action upon judgment, contract, or bond — Fifteen-year limitation — Action for child support arrearages — Time to commence action tolled until obligations cease as to last child on order.

Except as provided in KRS 396.205 , 413.110 , 413.220 , 413.230 and 413.240 , the following actions shall be commenced within fifteen (15) years after the cause of action first accrued:

  1. An action upon a judgment or decree of any court of this state or of the United States, or of any state or territory thereof, the period to be computed from the date of the last execution thereon;
  2. An action upon a recognizance, bond, or written contract , except that actions upon written contracts executed after July 15, 2014, shall be governed by KRS 413.160 ;
  3. An action upon the official bond of a sheriff, marshal, clerk, constable, or any other public officer, or any commissioner, receiver, curator, personal representative, guardian, conservator, or trustee appointed by a court or authority of law;
  4. An action upon an appeal bond or bond given on a supersedeas, attachment, injunction, order of arrest or for the delivery of property or for the forthcoming of property, or to obey or perform an order or judgment of court in an action, or upon a bond for costs, or any other bond taken by a court or judge or by an officer pursuant to the directions of a court or judge, in an action or after judgment or decree, or upon a replevin, sale, or delivery bond taken under execution or decree, upon an indemnifying bond taken under a statute, or upon a bond to suspend a proceeding, or upon a bond or obligation for the payment of money or property or for the performance of any undertaking; and
  5. An action to recover unpaid child support arrearages, which may be initiated as one (1) cumulative action for all child support arrearages owed under a court order, with the time to commence an action under this subsection being tolled until all current child support obligations cease as to the last child covered by that order.

History. 2514: amend. Acts 1976 (Ex. Sess.), ch. 14, § 417, effective January 2, 1978; 1982, ch. 141, § 130, effective July 1, 1982; 1988, ch. 90, § 30, effective July 15, 1988; 2008, ch. 21, § 4, effective July 15, 2008; 2014, ch. 142, § 2, effective July 15, 2014.

Compiler's Notes.

This section was amended by § 141 of Acts 1980, ch. 396, which would have taken effect July 1, 1982; however, Acts 1982, ch. 141, § 146, effective July 1, 1982, repealed Acts 1980, ch. 396.

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(2/15/91). The prior reference to KRS 396.025 near the beginning of this statute was the result of an apparent inadvertent transposition of digits in codifying. See 1988 Ky. Acts Ch. 90, §§ 30 and 26. Pursuant to KRS 7.136 , the text of this statute has been corrected to reflect the appropriate cross reference to KRS 396.205 .

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

0.5.Applicability.

Fifteen-year limitations period of KRS 413.090(2) did not apply to a Medicaid recoupment proceeding against a long-term care facility operator because the action did not sound in contract; throughout the record of the administrative action, the Kentucky Cabinet of Health and Family Services consistently primarily relied upon violations of either federal or state Medicaid and Medicare regulations in seeking to recoup alleged Medicaid overpayments. Commonwealth v. EPI Corp., 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 114 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2006), aff'd, 2008 Ky. Unpub. LEXIS 33 (Ky. Dec. 18, 2008).

Federal district court properly dismissed as time-barred a widow’s action under 29 USCS § 1132(a)(1)(B), which sought to recover survivor benefits under her deceased husband’s retirement plan; the widow’s claim of an invalid waiver of survivor benefits arose from ERISA’s statutory protections rather than from an independent contract between the parties and, thus, the district court properly concluded that the most analogous Kentucky statute of limitations was KRS 413.120(2), which was the five-year statute of limitations for an action upon liability created by statute, rather than KRS 413.090(2), which was the 15-year statute of limitations for breach of a written contract. Redmon v. Sud-Chemie Inc. Ret. Plan for Union Emples., 547 F.3d 531, 2008 FED App. 0407P, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 23713 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

Privilege fees imposed by ordinance for the construction of a sanitary sewer trunk line were in the nature of a special assessment rather than a contractual obligation; thus, a collection action was subject to the five-year limitations period for collecting an assessment qualifying as a statutory liability, and the statute of limitations for contract actions was inapplicable even though some owners had entered into an agreement to pay the fees. Pinnacle Dev. II, LLC v. RML Constr., LLC, 410 S.W.3d 169, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Kentucky’s 15-year limitations period for contracts claims was applicable to retirees’ claims that were based solely on the interpretation of pension plan terms; however, Kentucky’s five-year limitations period for statutory claims applied to the retirees’ claims regarding whether lump-sum benefits were the actuarial equivalent of the basic-form benefit, as required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Clemons v. Norton Healthcare Inc., 890 F.3d 254, 2018 FED App. 0090P, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12226 (6th Cir. Ky. 2018 ).

1.Construction.

In absence of an applicable federal statute, the state statute of limitations controls; thus, this section is the Kentucky statute applicable to an action by the United States for breach of a written contract and, when the action is brought within the 15 year period, it is not barred. Steffen v. United States, 213 F.2d 266, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 4107 (6th Cir. Ky. 1954 ).

Statutes of limitation are construed strictly and the court will not read into them exemptions which are not expressly put there. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Statutes of limitation, though they might be considered as founded in a sound public policy, nevertheless have the effect of destroying all remedy for the enforcement of rights, and for which reason it should plainly appear that a case in which the statute of limitations is pleaded is one to which the limitation relied on is applicable. Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Guthrie, 284 Ky. 583 , 145 S.W.2d 518, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 542 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In respect of issues of which courts of equity have exclusive jurisdiction, where the enforcement of the claim depends upon the conscience of the chancellor, equity may refuse relief by applying the doctrine of laches, even though the claim be not barred by the statute of limitations. But where the issue is a legal one and does not lie within the conscience of the chancellor, the statute fixing the limitation establishes the rule to be applied, and the defense of laches may not be interposed. On issues of which courts of equity and courts of law have concurrent jurisdiction, the statute of limitations will be applied by the court of equity precisely as it operates at law. Gover's Adm'r v. Dunagan, 299 Ky. 38 , 184 S.W.2d 225, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1020 ( Ky. 1944 ).

For purposes of interpreting KRS 413.090(1) “execution” could mean either the act of executing an order or the writ of execution itself, which was the formal document issued by the court authorizing a sheriff to levy upon the property of a judgment debtor, as described in KRS 426.020 . Since the term was not limited to writs of execution, but could include KRS 425.501(4) setting forth the procedure for obtaining garnishments, enforcement of judgments pursuant to KRS 426.381(2), judgment liens under KRS 426.720 , and attachments under KRS 425.526 , the judgment creditor was not time-barred under KRS 413.090(1)’s 15-year limitations period from collecting on a judgment it had against the judgment debtor, as it had pursued some of those enforcement techniques outside of a writ of execution that it had used more than 15 years earlier. Wade v. Poma Glass & Specialty Windows, Inc., 394 S.W.3d 886, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 2012 ).

2.Contracting for Shorter Period.

There is no statute prescribing the time within which a claim for a loss under a policy of indemnity may be filed, or forbidding the surety from placing in the policy a provision limiting the time. J. A. Rudy & Sons v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 267 Ky. 828 , 103 S.W.2d 257, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 379 ( Ky. 1937 ).

A contract providing a shorter limitation period than that prescribed by statute is valid, if the contract period is reasonable. Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 276 Ky. 132 , 122 S.W.2d 990, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1938 ).

It is not contrary to public policy for parties to contract for a reasonably shorter period than that fixed by the statute. Johnson v. Calvert Fire Ins. Co., 298 Ky. 669 , 183 S.W.2d 941, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1071 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Parties dealing at arm’s length may contract for a limitation shorter than that provided by statute, so long as the period is a reasonable one. Prewitt v. Supreme Council, R. A., 302 Ky. 301 , 194 S.W.2d 633, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 663 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where, at time life insurance policy containing a three (3) year limitation clause was issued, Court of Appeals was upholding the rule that parties dealing at arm’s length may contract for a reasonable limitation shorter than the statutory provision, the rule would be applicable in an action on this policy, though at a later date, on which the policy was reissued, the court was temporarily adopting the opposite view, holding it contrary to public policy to contravene the statutory limitation. Prewitt v. Supreme Council, R. A., 302 Ky. 301 , 194 S.W.2d 633, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 663 ( Ky. 1946 ).

There is no conflict between subdivision (2) of this section providing a 15-year statute of limitations for actions on contracts, and a provision in an insurance contract requiring suits be commenced within 12 months, especially in light of KRS 304.14-370 which specifically allows such provisions for contracts by foreign insurers. Webb v. Kentucky Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 577 S.W.2d 17, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 664 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

Although there is a 15 years general statute of limitation affecting contracts, such can, under law, be limited if such restriction is shown to have been the intention of the parties as determined by proper arm’s length bargaining. Green v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 601 S.W.2d 612, 1980 Ky. App. LEXIS 335 (Ky. Ct. App. 1980).

The decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Elkins v. Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 844 S.W.2d 423, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 128 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992), which held that an action against one’s uninsured-motorist carrier must be brought within the two-year period provided by the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act, is not applicable to an action on a first-party insurance contract; the applicable statute of limitations for general actions on a written contract is fifteen (15) years, but insurance companies are not prohibited from contracting with their insureds for a shorter period of time to file a contractual claim, as long as such period of time is “reasonable” as required under Elkins. Gordon v. Kentucky Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 914 S.W.2d 331, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 120 ( Ky. 1995 ).

Circuit court erred in finding an injured police officer’s claim for underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits was time-barred, because a contractual limitation for filing a UIM claim that mirrored the two-year tort statute of limitations period was unreasonable. Thus, the fifteen-year statutory period for contract claims applied. Riggs v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2013 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1009 (Ky. Ct. App. July 19, 2013), rev'd, 484 S.W.3d 724, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 97 ( Ky. 2016 ).

3.Waiver.

The direction in a will to pay the testator’s “just debts” does not waive the bar of limitations, since the term “just debts” meant “legal debts.” Jones' Ex'r v. Jones, 275 Ky. 753 , 122 S.W.2d 779, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 504 ( Ky. 1938 ).

4.Judgments.

A surety who pays a judgment for his principal without taking an assignment of the judgment against the principal that he paid can only recover from his principal upon the implied promise that the law raises in his behalf and he must proceed to obtain relief upon this implied promise within five (5) years from the date of the payment; but, when a surety takes a statutory assignment of a judgment against his principal within five (5) years from its rendition, he steps into the shoes of the judgment plaintiff and has all the rights against his principal that the judgment plaintiff would have. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Sousley, 151 Ky. 39 , 151 S.W. 353, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1912 ).

A judgment dismissing an action on ground that plaintiff’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations is a decision on the merits and is res judicata. Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 276 Ky. 132 , 122 S.W.2d 990, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Although judgment quieting title cannot be enforced because of 15 year limitation, it is still effectual as evidence of the facts which it determined. Creech v. Jenkins, 276 Ky. 163 , 123 S.W.2d 267, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A drainage tax lien is not a liability created by a judgment but one created by statute so an action to enforce the lien is not governed by this section but by KRS 413.120 , the five (5) year statute of limitations. Board of Drainage Comm'rs v. Igleheart, 301 Ky. 596 , 192 S.W.2d 364, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 750 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Although judgment against defendant assigned to another may be barred by the statute of limitations so that it is no longer a personal liability of the defendant or his estate, limitation does not bar the right of recovery on the security of the life insurance policies pledged either as to the debt secured or as to the premiums which were paid by the pledgee. De Long's Adm'r v. Arnold, 306 Ky. 290 , 206 S.W.2d 928, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 989 ( Ky. 1947 ).

County warrants issued for money due various persons for governmental purposes and which had been validated by a judgment were subject to the 15 year statute of limitations rather than the five (5) year statute. Herd v. Lyttle, 310 Ky. 788 , 222 S.W.2d 834, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1026 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where, in order to withdraw from hands of trustee certain funds, a petitioner listed his debts for the benefit of the court, and the court, in allowing the funds to be withdrawn, directed that the petitioner pay the debts, but the creditors were not parties to this action and no judgment was entered in their favor, the debts listed by the petitioner were not put on the footing of judgments in order that the 15 year statute of limitations would apply. Furthermore, the listing of the debts did not constitute a “written contract” within the meaning of subsection (2) of this section; thus, a debt based on an oral contract was barred in five (5) years. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

An action by the husband against the administrator of the estate of his deceased ex-wife and the executor of the estate of his wife’s mother seeking restoration of certain property given by him to his ex-wife during their marriage was held to be an action to enforce a judgment, governed by a 15-year statute of limitations, rather than an action based upon a liability created by statute, which was governed by a 5-year statute of limitations. Siegel v. Nunnelley, 479 S.W.2d 9, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 284 ( Ky. 1972 ).

5.—Child Support Payments.

This section was the applicable statute of limitations on a motion for a judgment on delinquent child support arrearages owing under a divorce decree, and the statute would not begin to run until such time as the delinquency was reduced to a lump sum payment or until emancipation of the child, whichever was the former. Harvey v. McGuire, 635 S.W.2d 8, 1982 Ky. App. LEXIS 220 ( Ky. 1982 ).

Since matters of maintenance and child support have the same effect as a money judgment for which subdivision (1) of this section has established a 15-year period in which an action on such judgment shall be brought, equitable defenses of laches or estoppel by acquiescence are not available to bar collection of maintenance and child support arrearages. Heisley v. Heisley, 676 S.W.2d 477, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 587 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

Trial court properly found that portions of a mother’s claim for delinquent child- support were barred by the 15-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.090 as the limitations period begins to run on a judgment when the judgment becomes executable or from the date of the last execution thereon; for any given child-support installment, the date it becomes executable is the date the installment accrues and goes unpaid. Bollengier v. Charlet, 141 S.W.3d 14, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 157 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

6.—Running of Statute.

Although debtor may have given his sureties the information that they were not liable for the whole amount of the claim which appellee asserted against him and aided them in proving it, yet, as the injunction did not suspend the collection of the judgment as to him, it cannot be said that he obstructed the collection of the judgment, so as to prevent the running of the statute of limitations pending that litigation and the statute of limitations barred plaintiff’s right to maintain an action on the judgment. Proctor v. Bell's Adm'r, 97 Ky. 98 , 30 S.W. 15, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 823 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1895 ).

As more than 15 years had elapsed after return of the first execution before the second execution was issued, the statute of limitations operated as a bar to the latter and it was illegal; thus, partial payment of the second execution did not revive the barred judgment since no act of debtor short of an express or clearly implied promise to satisfy the residue of the judgment, founded on moral obligation to do so, could have operated to revive it or entitle plaintiffs to an execution on it. White v. Moore, 100 Ky. 358 , 38 S.W. 505, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 790 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1897 ), overruled in part, Wade v. Poma Glass & Specialty Windows, Inc., 394 S.W.3d 886, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 199 ( Ky. 2012 ).

An execution issued on a judgment against several judgment debtors after the death of one of the judgment debtors, although good against the survivors, is void as to the deceased judgment debtor, stops the running of the statute of limitations and cannot be enforced against his representative until it is revived. Peoples' Bank of Kentucky's Assignee v. Barbour, 124 Ky. 539 , 99 S.W. 608, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 712 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1907 ).

After an execution on a judgment has been returned “No property found,” the judgment creditor has two (2) ways to keep the judgment alive: (1) he may keep it alive indefinitely by causing executions to issue on it from time to time within the period prescribed by the statute; or (2) he may keep it alive indefinitely by commencing an action on the judgment under subsection (1) of KRS 426.381 within the time and manner prescribed and keeping the action on the docket. Slaughter v. Mattingly, 155 Ky. 407 , 159 S.W. 980, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 279 ( Ky. 1913 ).

An assignment by judgment debtor made in pursuance of a separate agreement and transaction between the parties prior to rendition of the judgment which made no mention of the judgment debt could not be treated as an acknowledgment of the debt evidenced by the judgment sued on so as to toll the statute of limitations. Looney v. Justice, 299 Ky. 729 , 187 S.W.2d 289, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 772 ( Ky. 1945 ).

An execution issued by the clerk solely for the costs of the action, at his own instance and not at instance of judgment creditor, did not have the effect of tolling the statute of limitations against the judgment sued on. Looney v. Justice, 299 Ky. 729 , 187 S.W.2d 289, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 772 ( Ky. 1945 ).

An execution must be issued on the judgment debt itself to toll running of statute of limitations. Looney v. Justice, 299 Ky. 729 , 187 S.W.2d 289, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 772 ( Ky. 1945 ).

A complaint to enforce a judgment was time-barred since Kentucky’s fifteen-year statute of limitations for actions enforcing judgments was not tolled by the issuance of two subpoenas duces tecum fourteen years previously; they did not count as an execution on the amended judgment within the meaning of Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.090(1). Irwin v. O'Bryan, 791 Fed. Appx. 588, 2019 FED App. 575N, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 34219 (6th Cir. Ky. 2019 ).

7.—Pleading.

While ordinarily the defense of the statute of limitations must be pleaded by the defendant, in an action to enforce the satisfaction of judgments, it is necessary for the plaintiff to show affirmatively that the action is based on a return of no property found, made on a valid execution, that is, an execution issued before the judgment was barred by the statute of limitations. Gotee v. Graves, 153 Ky. 26 , 154 S.W. 386, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 767 ( Ky. 1913 ).

8.—Foreign.

The difference between suits on foreign judgments and suits on other actions is crucial and this state has followed the statute of limitations of Kentucky in suits on foreign judgments and the statute of limitations of a foreign state in other actions brought in Kentucky by parties who were residents of a foreign state when the action accrued. Koeppe v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 250 F.2d 270, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4137 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ). See Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ); Mutual Trust & Deposit Co. v. Boone, 267 S.W.2d 751, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 870 ( Ky. 1954 ).

In an action on a foreign judgment brought in this state, there being no issue of fact, whether the foreign judgment is barred by limitations must be determined by the statutes of limitation in force in this state. Hoerter v. Garrity, 155 Ky. 260 , 159 S.W. 815, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1913 ).

In an action brought in Kentucky to enforce a judgment of a court of another state whose statute of limitations is for a longer period, the statute of limitations of Kentucky governs; thus, an action to enforce a Florida judgment was barred by the 15 year statute of limitations under this section although the applicable Florida statute was 20 years. Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where a discovery proceeding was filed in Indiana in an effort to find property out of which a previously awarded judgment could be satisfied, it did not toll the Kentucky statute of limitations as to an action brought in Kentucky on the Indiana judgment. Mutual Trust & Deposit Co. v. Boone, 267 S.W.2d 751, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 870 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where a suit is brought in Kentucky on a judgment recovered in Indiana, the Kentucky statute of limitations applies. Mutual Trust & Deposit Co. v. Boone, 267 S.W.2d 751, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 870 ( Ky. 1954 ).

The Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act is subject to this section; thus, an action by a judgment creditor on a foreign judgment that is still valid in the state in which it was entered is subject to Kentucky’s fifteen-year statute of limitations on foreign judgments. Fairbanks v. Large, 957 S.W.2d 307, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 127 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

9.Bonds.
9.5.—Property distribution.

Doctrine of equitable estoppel precluded the husband from invoking the 15-year statute of limitation set out in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.090(1) to bar the wife’s right to the portion of the husband’s pension she was awarded in the decree dissolving their marriage because application of the statute unjustly enriched the husband. Specifically, because the husband failed to execute the QDRO as required under the dissolution decree, equity demanded that he be estopped from invoking the statute to bar the wife’s attempt to remedy the result of his failure to act. Satterfield v. Satterfield, 608 S.W.3d 171, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 77 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

10.—Investment.

Although plaintiff conceded recovery upon some of coupons to county bonds in aid of railroads was barred by the statute of limitations, the judgment should be modified so as to require the circuit court to ascertain what coupons were barred and to enter judgment for the remainder and for the principal of the bonds with interest in both cases. Green County v. Quinlan, 211 U.S. 582, 29 S. Ct. 162, 53 L. Ed. 335, 1909 U.S. LEXIS 1789 (U.S. 1909).

Action to enforce collection of past-due principal and interest on certain revenue bonds held by the plaintiffs and intervenor, being essentially an action against the city for breach of its written obligation to collect revenues from the sewer system and apply them to the payment of the bonds, is controlled by the 15 year limitation as provided by subsection (2) of this section and not the five (5) year limitation of KRS 413.120 , as it is not an action seeking to enforce a financial obligation. Erlanger v. Berkemeyer, 207 F.2d 832, U.S. App. LEXIS 2983 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 346 U.S. 915, 74 S. Ct. 275, 98 L. Ed. 411, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 1370 (U.S. 1953).

This section applies to an action against a city for violation of its written agreement to collect assessments and apply them to the payment of street improvement bonds and, where bonds had been in default more than 15 years at the time an action was brought against a city for erroneously applying money collected to satisfy certain bonds rather than pro-rating the money collected to all the bonds, the action was barred by this section. Heydinger v. Catlettsburg, 114 F. Supp. 294, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3963 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

The statute of limitations starts to run against an interest coupon on a bond only from the date it falls due. Pensacola & A. R. Co. v. Hilton's Trustee, 147 Ky. 553 , 144 S.W. 1077, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 305 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Bridge and road bonds issued by the county are covered by this section as long as they have not matured and an offer of redemption been made. Tandy's Ex'rs v. Carlisle County, 296 Ky. 743 , 178 S.W.2d 591, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 631 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Action by holder of street improvement bonds against city to recover pro rata share of assessments collected by city but not properly applied in payment of bonds was an action on the bonds, governed by this section, and not an action on a liability created by statute within the meaning of KRS 413.120 . Corbin v. Becker, 297 Ky. 485 , 180 S.W.2d 419, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 764 ( Ky. 1944 ).

11.—Official.

Statutes of limitation in this state distinguish between different types of action and this section requires that actions upon official bonds be commenced within 15 years and, where 20 years had passed from the time of discovery of alleged fraud in settlement of estate, counterclaim of widow was barred by the statute of limitations. Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ).

An action on the bond for the faithful discharge of duties as county judge is not an injury to the rights of plaintiff not arising on the contract under the five (5) year statute of limitations but is an action on the bond and the limitation is 15 years under this section. Commonwealth v. Tilton, 111 Ky. 341 , 63 S.W. 602, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 753 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 198 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

An action against a sheriff on his bond for his official misconduct in attaching property under process against a third person is barred in 15 years, the misconduct not being a tort within KRS 413.120 . Hill v. Ragland, 114 Ky. 209 , 70 S.W. 634, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1053 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1902 ).

The official bond of an officer does not cover the obligation to return money illegally received by him, so an action against a circuit court clerk and his surety to recover money illegally paid by the county to him was an action on an implied obligation to repay money illegally received and not an action on his official bond, and the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 applied and not the 15 year statute of limitations under this section. Wolfe County v. Smith, 283 Ky. 483 , 141 S.W.2d 874, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where police officers were sued upon their official bonds for an alleged assault and battery committed in the course of making an arrest, this section provided the applicable statute of limitations. Coy v. Hardin, 556 S.W.2d 447, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1977 ).

12.—Master Commissioners.

The plaintiff’s cause of action against sureties on official bond of master commissioner of circuit court accrued when master commissioner failed to pay over funds as ordered by the court. Head's Adm'x v. Commonwealth, 254 Ky. 687 , 72 S.W.2d 60, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1934 ).

13.—Court-appointed Trustee.

The 15 year statute of limitations applied to and barred right of creditor to bring and maintain action on bond of court-appointed trustee for accounting by assignee. Richardson v. Whitaker, 103 Ky. 425 , 45 S.W. 774 ( Ky. 1898 ).

14.—Guardian.

Under KRS 413.170 , right of action on guardian’s bond accrued at the time the ward became of age and under this section was barred 15 years after it accrued. Blake v. Wolfe, 105 Ky. 380 , 49 S.W. 19, 50 S.W. 2, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1212 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1899 ).

In a suit on a guardian’s bond, the 15 year statute of limitations applies if no final settlement has been filed. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The statute of limitations does not begin to run on a guardian’s bond until the ward has arrived of age. Poynter v. Smith, 290 Ky. 169 , 160 S.W.2d 380, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1942 ).

15.—Personal Representative.

A cause of action accrues to a distributee upon an administrator’s bond when the administrator may distribute the estate of the decedent, regardless of whether the administrator has settled his accounts, and, unless exercised within 15 years following, time bars him of an action upon the bond of the administrator. Robinson's Committee v. Elam's Ex'x, 90 Ky. 300 , 14 S.W. 84, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 271 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 87 ( Ky. 1890 ).

An action against a principal in an administrator’s bond is barred under this section after 15 years from the time the cause of action accrues with the exception of continuing and subsisting trusts to which KRS 413.340 applies. Baugh's Adm'x v. Baugh's Adm'r, 159 Ky. 320 , 167 S.W. 124, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 783 ( Ky. 1914 ).

KRS 413.230 and not this section applied to action against surety on administrator’s bond seeking to have judgment of final settlement set aside on the ground of fraud or collusion and the suspension of the running of the statute of limitations under KRS 413.230 could only be effected by some of the acts or conduct enumerated in KRS 413.240 . Tucker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 270 Ky. 723 , 110 S.W.2d 649, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1937 ).

16.—Title.

An action to enforce title bond is an action upon a written obligation signed by the parties to be charged and this section applied and not KRS 413.160 providing aten (10)year statute of limitations for relief not provided for by statute. Eversole v. Huff, 205 Ky. 314 , 265 S.W. 797, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1924 ).

17.—Judicial Sale.

Action on a sale bond taken by a court commissioner was barred after the lapse of more than 15 years from the maturity of the bond. French v. Bowling, 85 S.W. 1182, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 639 (1905).

This section applied to a judicial sale bond executed by purchaser of farm in father’s estate to be collected when infant child became 21 years of age, which child died within a short time, barring the father’s descendants and the child’s mother as her administratrix where they failed to file action on the bond within 15 years, and conveyance of the land to the mother, who had no personal interest in the land or in the proceeds of the bond, did not have the effect of extending the period of limitation. Jameson v. Jameson, 280 Ky. 554 , 133 S.W.2d 923, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 172 ( Ky. 1939 ).

18.—Injunction.

Subsection (4) of this section expressly provides that the 15 year limitation applies in an action on an injunction bond. Campbell v. Chriswell's Adm'r, 298 Ky. 583 , 183 S.W.2d 639, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 959 ( Ky. 1944 ).

19.—Supersedeas.

By the express terms of this section, the period of limitation applicable to a suit on a supersedeas bond is 15 years. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Oman, 165 Ky. 778 , 178 S.W. 1090, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 611 ( Ky. 1915 ).

20.Written Contracts.

Since the statute of limitations affected the remedy only, an action on a contract was governed by the statute of the state in which the action was brought, and not by that in which the contract was made. Graves v. Graves's Ex'r, 5 Ky. 207 , 1810 Ky. LEXIS 90 ( Ky. 1810 ). See Bennett v. Devlin, 56 Ky. 353 , 1856 Ky. LEXIS 37 ( Ky. 1856 ) (decided under prior law).

Where one residing in another state executed a note as surety to be paid in this state, the statute of limitations of this state governs the case. Kellar v. Sinton's Ex'r, 53 Ky. 307 ( Ky. 1853 ) (decided under prior law).

21.—Governing Law.

The Kentucky statute of limitations applies as well in equity as at law, and it is now too late to enter into an argument or to cite authority to prove that the limitation of the forum, and not of the place where the contract was made or the wrong done, is to govern. Graves v. Trimble's Assignee, 10 Ky. Op. 893, 1 Ky. L. Rptr. 416 , 1880 Ky. LEXIS 462 (Ky. Ct. App. Nov. 23, 1880).

Since the statute of limitations affects the remedy only, an action on a contract is governed by the statute of the state in which the action is brought and not by that in which the contract was made. Farmers & Traders’ Nat. Bank v. Lovell, 1 S.W. 426, 8 Ky. L. Rptr. 261 (1886).

22.—Not Within Statute.

Where a written pledge contract of insurance policies to secure a debt and payment of premiums contemplated payment out of proceeds of insurance at the death of the insured, the defense of limitations was unavailable. Pollock's Adm'r v. Smith, 107 Ky. 509 , 54 S.W. 740, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1227 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1900 ).

The ordinary covenant of general warranty in a deed only applies to the title and not to the quantity of land conveyed so as to constitute a writing upon which to base an action for shortage in acreage; therefore, a recovery for the shortage in acreage would have to be on the implied assumpsit that the money received under a mistake would be refunded and the action would be barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 rather than the 15 year statute of limitations under this section. Burton v. Cowles' Adm'x, 156 Ky. 100 , 160 S.W. 782, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1913 ).

The modification of a contract in writing, not required to be by statute, by a subsequent parol agreement of the parties, which goes to a material part thereof, should operate to reduce it to the status of a contract by parol, in determining the applicability of statutes of limitations making the five (5) year limitation apply rather than the 15 year statute. Homire v. Stratton & Terstegge Co., 157 Ky. 822 , 164 S.W. 67, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 367 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Letter of client to attorney to send bill for services and, if same was reasonable and just, she would pay same which specifically referred to the suit in which attorney was employed was not a written promise to pay for services distinct from that suit so as to bring the claim within the 15 year statute of limitations. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Article in power company’s license to construct and maintain a power plant that licensee should be liable for all damages occasioned to the property of others by the construction and in no event should the United States be liable therefor was not for the benefit of all persons who might be damaged by the construction and operation of the power plant so as to make the 15 year statute of limitations applicable but was inserted in the license for the sole purpose of protecting the United States. Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

An action to recover overcharge for switching cars of grain and grain products was not for the breach of a written contract, although it sprang from the contracts, where the petition alleged the correct rate was established by tariffs and the contracts were to render a service for a stipulated sum with no provision for refund of any overcharge; thus, this section was inapplicable. Barnes v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 283 Ky. 261 , 140 S.W.2d 1041, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 313 ( Ky. 1940 ).

The 15 year statute of limitations did not apply to right of action for specific performance of written contract of sale of minerals where every required act had been done to pass perfect equitable title insofar as the title bond was concerned and there remained only the placing of the legal title in the name of the equitable holder. Hamilton v. Harkins, 302 Ky. 340 , 194 S.W.2d 646, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 668 ( Ky. 1946 ).

A surety on a contractor’s bond who failed to obtain an assignment of an obligation paid by it and who failed to sue the contractor within five (5) years could not assert its subrogation rights against the contractor under a written agreement between the contractor and the city to come under the 15-year period of limitation provided by this section and avoid the contractor’s plea that the claim was barred by the five (5) year period of limitation provided by KRS 413.120 , since the surety’s insistence on subrogation was not to furnish him a better or different remedy or to protect an equity. Payne v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co., 259 S.W.2d 491, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1157 ( Ky. 1952 ).

An action to recover damages for injury to cattle of owner’s tenant occurring during the construction of pipeline across the field in which they were pastured was barred by subsection (1)(b) of KRS 413.140 , and the provisions of subsection (2) of this section were not made applicable by the existence of an easement agreement between the owner of the land and the pipeline company which provided that the pipeline company would not damage other property off of the right-of-way of the easement. Carr v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 344 S.W.2d 619, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1961 ).

To the extent that an insurer, as a subrogee for an insured, was seeking contractual relief against the supplier, the claims were governed by the statute of limitations period set forth in KRS 355.2-725 because the agreement was a contract for the sale of goods. The 15-year statute of limitations period for contractual claims set forth in KRS 413.090 did not apply. Elec. Ins. Co. v. Freudenberg-NOK, Gen. P'ship., 487 F. Supp. 2d 894, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17292 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

23.— —Foreclosure of Mortgages.

There is no statute of limitations as to liens and a mortgage lien exists coinciding with the debt it is intended to secure; thus, as long as an action may be maintained on the debt, the lien is in force, although more than 15 years has elapsed since the execution of the mortgage. Clift v. Williams, 105 Ky. 559 , 49 S.W. 328, 1899 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1899 ).

An action to foreclose a mortgage executed as security for payment of money borrowed on account without execution of a note, instituted within five (5) years after a partial payment was made, with a writing by mortgagor showing the balance due, is unaffected by the statute of limitations, as the right of action is extended five (5) years from the date of the partial payment. Russell v. Centers, 153 Ky. 469 , 155 S.W. 1149, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 864 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where the mortgage sued on contained no independent agreement to pay the money secured, it was barred after five (5) years. Allen v. Shepherd, 162 Ky. 756 , 173 S.W. 135, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1915 ).

24.—Within Statute.

The fifteen (15) and not the five (5) year statute of limitations applied to action based upon an alleged written contract where instructions aptly and correctly submitted the issue of whether there was a written contract to the jury and there was sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. Durrett v. Rider's Adm'x, 219 Ky. 695 , 294 S.W. 156, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 407 ( Ky. 1927 ).

An oral agreement may be reduced to writing to make this section applicable rather than the five (5) year limitation under KRS 413.120 . Lyons v. Moise's Ex'r, 298 Ky. 858 , 183 S.W.2d 493, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 936 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A written contract not stating the amount but constituting a definite promise to pay is controlled by this section. Lyons v. Moise's Ex'r, 298 Ky. 858 , 183 S.W.2d 493, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 936 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A written instrument which sets forth the undertaking of the persons executing it or discloses terms from which such an undertaking can be imported and which shows the consideration for the undertaking, and which identifies the parties thereto, will be considered a contract in writing and to be within this section. Mills v. McGaffee, 254 S.W.2d 716, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 608 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Since the cause of action in a suit by an insured against the insurance carrier to recover an overpayment of premium was predicated upon a contract in writing, the limitation period for commencement of the action was 15 years after the accrual of it. Spurlin v. Ranier, 457 S.W.2d 491, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 208 ( Ky. 1970 ).

Adversary proceeding a title company filed against a Chapter 7 debtor, seeking a determination that a debt the debtor owed the company was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C.S. § 523 because the debtor fraudulently signed a mortgage on property he did not own, was subject to the 15-year statute of limitations prescribed in KRS 413.090 because the mortgage was a written contract. Stewart Title Guar. Co. v. Santa Cruz (In re Santa Cruz), 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 2566 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. June 11, 2014).

25.— —Due Bills.

A due bill is a “written contract,” within the 15 year statute of limitations. Tabor v. Hardin, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 .

An action on a due bill showing the balance due on the debt executed by mortgagor recognizing and evidencing the debt previously created and secured by the mortgagee and constituting a promise to pay what remained to be paid on the mortgage would not be barred by the statute of limitations until after the lapse of 15 years. Russell v. Centers, 153 Ky. 469 , 155 S.W. 1149, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 864 ( Ky. 1913 ).

26.— —Dividends.

Cause of action to recover dividends accrued under this section when each dividend was declared as an obligation in writing for payment of money where declaration by law was required to be entered on the corporate records. Winchester & Lexington Turnpike Co. v. Wickliffe's Adm'r, 100 Ky. 531 , 38 S.W. 866, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 964 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 23 ( Ky. 1897 ).

27.— —Benefits Under Insurance Policy.

Delay in commencement or prosecution of action for disability benefits under insurance policy, short of 15 year statute of limitations provided by this section, was no defense where no equitable relief was sought and claim was enforceable at law. State Mut. Life Assurance Co. v. Heine, 141 F.2d 741, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3786 (6th Cir. Ky. 1944 ).

If a demand is made for a paid-up policy on default in paying premiums within five (5) years from the time it accrued, it saves the right at any time within 15 years thereafter to bring a suit for a paid-up policy during the life of the insured, or to recover the amount that paid-up policy should have been issued for in the event the insured dies before the expiration of the 15 years. Equitable Life Assurance Soc. v. Amos, 145 Ky. 167 , 140 S.W. 172, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 818 ( Ky. 1911 ).

28.— —Shipping.

When a connecting rail carrier accepted hogs under a written contract made by the shipper with the initial carrier providing that initial carrier would deliver the hogs to the connecting carrier as shipping agent, it bound itself to transport the hogs to its destination, the legal effect of which was the same as if the connecting carrier had in the first place signed the contract and an action could be brought on the contract within the 15 year period of limitations against the connecting carrier for injury to the hogs. Richardson v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 129 Ky. 449 , 111 S.W. 343, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 158 ( Ky. 1908 ).

29.— —Warrants.

Where the board of trustees of sixth-class city by an order, signed by the chairman of the board and attested by the clerk, entered of record in December 1895, allowed plaintiff his claim of $140 and the clerk of the board was directed to and did issue a warrant in favor of plaintiff for that amount on which $59.00 was paid and plaintiff was also allowed a claim for services but no warrant was issued, an action instituted in May 1908 upon these claims was not barred since the action was on a written contract and the 15 year statute applied. Hardin v. Highland Park, 144 Ky. 489 , 139 S.W. 765, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 656 ( Ky. 1911 ).

30.— —Timber.

Where defendant by written contract with plaintiffs sold timber upon land which he did not own, plaintiff’s action for damages was not based on fraud or mistake but upon the implied warranty embraced within the contract that defendant had title to the timber sold which was an action upon a written contract to which the 15 year statute of limitations applied. Strubbe v. Lewis, 76 S.W. 150, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 605 (1903).

31.— —Actions by Stockholders for Accounting.

In action by stockholder for an accounting, neither party to the action questioned the fact that a cause of action might be governed by the 15 year statute of limitations under this section, governing written contracts. Roush v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 310 Ky. 408 , 220 S.W.2d 984, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1949 ).

32.— —Leases.

Although appellee delayed from 1929 to 1936 in bringing action for underground royalties by intervention in receivership filed within the 15 year statutory period provided by this section and within a month after the order in receivership subjecting the assets, it was not barred. Hospelhorn v. Circle City Coal Co., 117 F.2d 166, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4706 (6th Cir. Ky. 1941 ).

Where appellant pleaded the 15 year statute of limitations under this section, although district judge did not expressly refer to the defense, he necessarily rejected it in awarding judgment to plaintiff in action to recover unpaid royalties and minerals under a mining lease executed by it. Walter Bledsoe & Co. v. Elkhorn Land Co., 219 F.2d 556, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4857 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

Lessor’s action under gas lease to recover greater royalties allegedly due under terms of lease, without any showing in evidence that lessor was misled by false statements and vouchers of lessee as to amount due, was with respect to claims against lessee more than 15 years old, barred by the 15 year statute of limitations. Lafitte Co. v. United Fuel Gas Co., 177 F. Supp. 52, 1959 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2612 (D. Ky. 1959 ), aff'd, 284 F.2d 845, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 3047 (6th Cir. Ky. 1960 ).

Purchaser by accepting lease bound itself in writing to perform the conditions thereof, and it assumed the obligation to apply the earnings of leased road for the payment of interest on bonds and for a sinking fund, and the right to enforce it would be barred only by the 15 year statute of limitations. Schmidt v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 139 Ky. 81 , 129 S.W. 332, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 11 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Litigation for rentals growing out of a written lease of land for oil and gas was not barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations but was an action on a written contract to which the 15 year statute applied. Southeastern Gas Co. v. Estepp, 269 Ky. 147 , 106 S.W.2d 142, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1936 ).

An action by an assignee of a coal mining lease against the lessor for a breach of an implied warranty of quiet enjoyment and possession is an action deemed based on a written contract, and is governed by this section. Creson v. Scott, 275 S.W.2d 406, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 350 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where the subject of a suit was a written contract for the assignment of a 15 percent interest in oil leases, the 15 year statute of limitations applied even to additional claims asserted by amended complaint. Koplin v. Kelrick, 443 S.W.2d 644, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1969 ).

33.— —Between City and Contractor.

KRS 413.120 does not apply to an action upon a writing, for such action is expressly excepted from its operation; thus, it did not apply to a written contract entered into between a city and a contractor to improve a certain street by original construction for which contractor was to have a certain compensation and an action by the contractor for the cost not collected from the abutting owners was not an action created by statute but was based upon the written contract entered into between the city and the contractor and the 15 years statute of limitations under this section applied. Louisville v. McNaughton, 114 Ky. 333 , 70 S.W. 841, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1153 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 161 ( Ky. 1902 ).

An action on a contract made by a city and a paving contractor is controlled by the 15 year statute. Hunt v. Ashland, 274 Ky. 567 , 119 S.W.2d 640, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 300 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Action by contractor against city to recover street assessments owed by the city is an action on contract, this section, not an action on a liability created by statute, KRS 413.120 . Ashland v. Brown's Adm'x, 290 Ky. 740 , 162 S.W.2d 552, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 485 ( Ky. 1942 ).

34.— —Foreclosure of Mortgages.

The debt secured being barred by limitations, the lien or action to foreclose mortgage is barred. Jones v. Scott, 12 Ky. Op. 583, 5 Ky. L. Rptr. 858 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 252 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 1884). See 3 S.W. 12, 8 Ky. L. Rptr. 690 ; 47 S.W. 448, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 701 ; McCormick v. Perry, 93 S.W. 607, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 420 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 365 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906); Allen v. Shepherd, 162 Ky. 756 , 173 S.W. 135, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1915 ); Paintsville Nat'l Bank v. Robinson, 220 Ky. 418 , 295 S.W. 412, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 543 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Even though mortgage contained no express promise to pay, where it was made to secure the payment of a note which was not barred after five (5) years, the five (5) year statute of limitations was not applicable. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

If mortgage had operated solely for the benefit of the sureties, there might have been merit in the contention that it was barred by the seven (7) year statute of limitations applicable to sureties but, where mortgage was executed not only for the purpose of indemnifying sureties but for the further purpose of securing note and was to become void only in the event the note was not paid, mortgage lien continued until the note was barred and suit having been brought within less than 15 years after the maturity of the note, it followed that neither the note nor the mortgage was barred by limitation. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The fact that purchaser of real estate, who had made an oral assumption of mortgage, was relieved of personal liability on note secured by the mortgage because more than five (5) years had elapsed without any payment being made on the note did not prevent enforcement of mortgage lien, since note itself was not barred by limitation but only purchaser’s liability on the assumption agreement. Yeiser v. Webb, 300 Ky. 26 , 187 S.W.2d 831, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 811 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Action by heir of deceased mortgagee, based on constructive trust arising out of alleged conversion by mortgagor of assets of mortgagee’s estate, was not barred by limitations insofar as it sought to recover value of mortgage, where 15 years had not elapsed between date of mortgage and date of mortgagee’s death. Fresh v. Dunakin, 306 Ky. 87 , 206 S.W.2d 203, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 960 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Defendants who did not sign note but only mortgaged their property to secure the debt were not sureties within the meaning of KRS 413.220 , the seven (7) year statute, since the 15 year statute of limitations applied to an action to enforce the lien. Dinsmore v. Warfield, 295 S.W.2d 566, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1956 ).

35.— —Deeds.

This section applies to an action for damages for breach of covenant of warranty of title to real property. Thomas v. Bland, 91 Ky. 1 , 14 S.W. 955, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 640 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 149 ( Ky. 1 890 ).

Where, in an action to subject real property held by son to judgment against him as administrator of his father’s estate, son pleaded and filed a written release from his father discharging the son from payment of any part of the debt owed by his father which the son had agreed to pay as consideration for transfer of the real property to him by his father and the release was executed without any valuable consideration withinten (10)years prior to the commencement of action, the release manifestly was not, nor could with reasonable diligence have been, discovered by plaintiff until filed and the plea of limitations could not avail, but this section applied to the original written agreement between the son and his father. Bement v. Ohio Valley Banking & Trust Co., 99 Ky. 109 , 35 S.W. 139, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 37 , 1896 Ky. LEXIS 61 ( Ky. 1896 ).

A cause of action against a railroad company for failure to erect, establish and maintain a station on a strip of land based upon a deed accepted by the railroad company was not barred until 15 years after the cause of action accrued. Louisville, H. S. L. R. Co. v. Baskett, 104 S.W. 695, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1035 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907).

In an action for a breach of the express terms in the deed which stated that the grantee would not take any walnut or poplar trees or any trees which were over 14 inches in diameter, the claim was based on a breach of contract rather than a trespass to real property; therefore, the applicable statute of limitations was 15 years, as specified in subdivision (2) of this section. Hatton v. Falcon Coal Co., 734 S.W.2d 806, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 464 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

36.— —Vendor's Lien.

The right of action to enforce vendor’s lien on land was barred by the 15 year statute of limitations where no time was fixed in the deed reciting a sum was due and payable, since it became due and payable when created and the limitation began as of that date and the fact the deed was not recorded was immaterial as it did not prevent or hinder collection of the sum due. Hemmingway v. Tong, 66 S.W. 278, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1757 (1902).

37.— —Collective Bargaining Agreements.

Since congress embodied in § 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act no statute of limitations under the established federal rule, the appropriate state statute would in any event be applied and the district court’s error was not in applying the Kentucky statutes of limitation to an action by employee for breach of collective bargaining agreement by failing to provide workers’ compensation benefits but in applying theone (1) year limitation covering injuries rather than the 15 year limitation applicable to written contracts. Reliford v. Eastern Coal Corp., 260 F.2d 447, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5104 (6th Cir. 1958).

An action by employee against his former employer for breach of its obligation under a contract with a union, of which he was a member, to provide the protection and coverage of the benefits under workers’ compensation and occupational disease laws existing in Kentucky, being on a written contract, was governed by the 15 year statute under this section and not KRS 342.185 and subsection (3) of KRS 342.316 contained in the workers’ compensation act or KRS 413.140 which applies to personal injuries. Blankenship v. Majestic Collieries Co., 399 S.W.2d 699, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 474 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Where a contract is made up of a union constitution and its bylaws, an individual’s application for membership and its acceptance by the union constitute a written contract so that an employee’s action under such a contract falls within the 15 year statute of limitations of subdivision (2) of this section. Gray v. International Asso. of Heat & Frost Insulators & Asbestos Workers, 447 F.2d 1118, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8179 (6th Cir. Ky. 1971 ).

38.— —Employment Contracts.

In an action by a teacher against the public school system for various increments in the teacher’s salary and retirement benefit credit due to his military service, the school system’s liability arose through the employment contracts, not simply because of the statutes; therefore, the 15-year statute of limitations in this section applied, and the claim was not barred. Watkins v. Oldham, 731 S.W.2d 829, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

In an action where the union claimed that the employer breached a labor agreement by failing to pay accumulated vacation pay to its employees, this section was applicable. Ison v. Benham Coal, Inc., 668 F. Supp. 594, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13822 (E.D. Ky. 1987 ).

39.—Notes.

The five (5) year limitation provided in KRS 413.120 was applicable only to note negotiated before maturity and in the hands of a third party, the 15 year statute being applicable as to the principals and the seven (7) year statute as to the sureties so long as the instrument remains in the hands of the original payee. Southern Nat'l Bank v. Schimpeler, 160 Ky. 813 , 170 S.W. 178, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 539 ( Ky. 1914 ).

40.— —Governing Law.

The law of this state governs, when a suit is brought here on a note executed in Ohio, as to whether our statute of limitations applies. Ehrman v. Stoll, 10 Ky. Op. 592, 1880 Ky. LEXIS 247 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 27, 1880).

The statute of limitations affects the remedy only and the right to recover on a note is governed by the state where the suit is brought and not by the statute of limitations of the state in which the note is executed, delivered and payable. Oliver v. Crewdson's Adm'r, 256 Ky. 797 , 77 S.W.2d 20, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 489 ( Ky. 1934 ).

Where the deceased creditor and the debtor understood that payment on an undated note was to have been made in Kentucky, since creditor was a resident of Kentucky when the loan was made and continued to reside there until his death, the applicable statute of limitations to administrators’ suit in Oklahoma to recover on the note was the 15-year Kentucky statute of limitations rather than a five-year Oklahoma statute. Perkins v. Perkins, 1975 OK CIV APP 55, 541 P.2d 379, 1975 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 168 (Okla. Ct. App. 1975).

41.— —Not Within Statute.

Corporation’s indorsement and delivery of note to officer thereof before maturity and for valuable consideration placed it on footing of foreign bill of exchange as to which the five-year and not the 15-year limitation statute applied. Holt Bros. Mining Co. v. Stewart, 250 Ky. 199 , 61 S.W.2d 1073, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 643 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where original petition, stating cause of action on note and filed less than five (5) years after accrual of right, was amended more than five (5) years after accrual of right, to state cause of action on implied promise to pay, defendant moved to compel plaintiff to elect, and plaintiff elected to sue on implied promise, without objecting or excepting to defendant’s motion, plaintiff had abandoned cause of action stated in original petition, and amended petition was barred by five-year statute of limitations. Warning's Ex'x v. Tabeling, 280 Ky. 232 , 133 S.W.2d 65, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 118 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Although action on notes is governed by 15-year statute, an action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance by the maker of the notes and to subject the property to the payment of the notes is an action for relief from fraud, governed by the five (5) year statute. Sword v. Scott, 293 Ky. 630 , 169 S.W.2d 825, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 676 ( Ky. 1943 ).

42.— —Within Statute.

Written instruments were not due bills but promissory notes to which the 15 year statute applied. White's Adm'r v. Curd, 86 Ky. 191 , 5 S.W. 553, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 505 , 1887 Ky. LEXIS 124 ( Ky. 1887 ).

Where, at the time wife signed and executed a note, in payment of reaper purchased by her husband two (2) years previously, at her husband’s request with the understanding she was only surety for him, she gave him the note expecting him to sign as principal and he did not, she made him her agent to deliver the note and was bound by his representation that she signed as principal and the limitations of this section applied to an action against her on the note and not KRS 413.220 providing that a surety in such an action shall be discharged from liability when seven (7) years have elapsed without such action having been filed after the cause of action accrued. Wm. Deering & Co. v. Veal, 78 S.W. 886, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1809 (1904).

A note made payable to the order of a bank in payment of a debt was not a bill of exchange and the 15 year statute of limitations and not the five (5) year statute of limitations barred a recovery on the note, although it included discounted interest and the bank’s charter provided that notes discounted by it were placed on the same footing as foreign bills of exchange. Bramblette v. Deposit Bank of Carlisle, 79 S.W. 193, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1850 (1904).

The 15 year statute and not the five (5) year statute applied to an action founded upon corporation’s note given to insurance company to pay assessments as the liability was based on the note itself. Equitable Mut. Fire Ins. Corp.'s Receiver v. Murray, 131 Ky. 740 , 115 S.W. 816, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1909 ).

Payee in negotiable instrument who repurchases the paper is in the same attitude as it it had never been negotiated and is subject to all the defenses existing between the original parties, and the note is therefore not on the footing of a foreign bill of exchange and is governed by the 15 year statute of limitations provided by this section. Sweeney v. Taylor's Ex'r, 205 Ky. 390 , 266 S.W. 665, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Where a surety took an assignment of the principal’s note, his cause of action against the principal on the note was controlled by this section as being on the assigned note and not by KRS 413.120 applicable to the implied common-law obligation of the principal to indemnify the surety. Redford v. Crowe's Adm'x, 225 Ky. 142 , 7 S.W.2d 842, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 713 ( Ky. 1928 ). See Napier v. Duff, 281 Ky. 779 , 136 S.W.2d 1083, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The evidence being sufficient to show that payment on note was made at instance of testator, the maker of the note, and the claim having been asserted by action within less than 15 years from date of payment, it follows that the plea of limitation was not available. Richardson's Adm'r v. Morgan, 233 Ky. 540 , 26 S.W.2d 32, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Where promissory note was never placed on footing of bill of exchange, 15 year statute of limitations applied. Richardson's Adm'r v. Morgan, 233 Ky. 540 , 26 S.W.2d 32, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1930 ).

There being no evidence that note was placed on the footing of a bill of exchange by being actually negotiated in good faith for value before maturity, the 15 year statute of limitations and not the five (5) year statute applied. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where a note had been placed on the footing of a bill of exchange, an action on the note was barred by the statute of limitations and, when a new promise in writing to pay the debt was executed, the statute of limitations for a contract in writing rather than the statute for bills of exchange applied to the new promise. Thornton's Adm'r v. Minton's Ex'r, 250 Ky. 805 , 64 S.W.2d 158, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1933 ).

This section applied to the portion of a note that was not required to discharge the debt of pledgee bank where the note was obtained by payee through fraud and was pledged to the bank without knowledge of the fraud and was sold by bank’s trustee in bankruptcy to a purchaser who knew of the fraud and the five (5) year statute applied to the balance of the note. Thomas v. Siddens, 261 Ky. 613 , 88 S.W.2d 277, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 695 ( Ky. 1935 ).

In respect of the statute of limitations, the same rule is applied to time loan deposit certificates as is applied to promissory notes. Gould v. Bank of Independence, 264 Ky. 511 , 94 S.W.2d 991, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 331 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where note constituting part of assets of bank was transferred to new corporation in reorganization and consolidation plan, note was not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange, and 15 year statute applied. National Bank of Lima v. Deaton, 279 Ky. 606 , 131 S.W.2d 495, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 318 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The 15 year statute of limitations under this section and not the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 applied to action on note representing a straight borrowing from plaintiff bank on a note and not a bill of exchange. Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Guthrie, 284 Ky. 583 , 145 S.W.2d 518, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 542 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Limitation of action on promissory note which was never negotiated is governed by subsection (2) of this section. Root v. Rowland, 287 Ky. 728 , 155 S.W.2d 203, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1941 ).

The only way a note may be placed on the footing of a bill of exchange is by its negotiation in good faith for value before maturity and, as this note was never placed on the footing of a bill of exchange by being negotiated, this section, not KRS 413.120 , applies. Williamson v. Payne, 300 Ky. 161 , 188 S.W.2d 96, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 507 ( Ky. 1945 ).

In an action on notes, the pledging of the notes as security for the payee’s indebtedness to the bank did not place them on the footing of a bill of exchange where they were never negotiated, the bank never became a holder in due course and it acquired no right to bring an action on any of the notes until they matured, so the 15 year statute of limitations under this section rather than the five (5) year statute (KRS 413.120 ) applied. Bellevue Commercial & Sav. Bank v. Highfill, 305 Ky. 315 , 202 S.W.2d 732, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 747 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where notes were transferred by payee after maturity, they were not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange and the 15 year statute of limitations applied. Barnes v. Kennedy, 242 S.W.2d 616, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1054 ( Ky. 1951 ).

43.— —Accrual of Action.

No cause of action accrued on note until its maturity and, as payee filed his answer and cross petition within less than 15 years from that time, it followed that the note was not barred by limitations. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A note in which the date of maturity is fixed at a specified future time is not due until the date of maturity and the statute of limitations does not begin to run until after that date. Gould v. Bank of Independence, 264 Ky. 511 , 94 S.W.2d 991, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 331 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where a time loan certificate of deposit was payable at a certain date, it was in effect a promissory note and it matured at the expiration of the time stated at which time the cause of action to collect the proceeds accrued and the statute of limitations commenced to run. Gould v. Bank of Independence, 264 Ky. 511 , 94 S.W.2d 991, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 331 ( Ky. 1936 ).

No action accrued on note until the date of maturity; thus, the statute of limitations was not a bar where action on note was commenced within 15 years after maturity. Dinsmore v. Warfield, 295 S.W.2d 566, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1956 ).

44.— —Running of Statute.

Remote vendees are protected as to the running of the statute of limitations although the statute of limitations does not run as between the immediate parties to the debt sued on; therefore, commencement of action by vendor of land against the purchaser on note and seeking to enforce mortgage lien did not stop limitations running as to remote vendees of the purchaser. Walker's Ex'r v. Luxon's Adm'r, 138 Ky. 14 , 127 S.W. 489, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 34 ( Ky. 1910 ).

A suit on notes was barred by the 15-year statute of limitations, an action brought within time having been discontinued. Phillips v. Arnett, 164 Ky. 426 , 175 S.W. 660, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1915 ).

A note payable on demand is payable immediately and the statute begins to run from the date of the instrument. Hodges' Adm'r v. Asher, 224 Ky. 431 , 6 S.W.2d 451, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Suretyship on bond of administrator and guardian of payee and his infant child, respectively, alone was not sufficient to estop maker of note from pleading the statute of limitations where it was not claimed that he ever did or said a single thing or neglected to do or say anything calculated to deceive his principal or induce him to postpone action on note. Hodges' Adm'r v. Asher, 224 Ky. 431 , 6 S.W.2d 451, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1928 ).

A note payable on demand is treated as a due note and it is the settled rule that the statute of limitations begins to run at the date of the note. Gould v. Bank of Independence, 264 Ky. 511 , 94 S.W.2d 991, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 331 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Statute of limitations never commenced in decedent’s lifetime because payments due on note for purchase of land were not due until demand was made for a deed to the property for the purchase of which the money was advanced or for repayment of the money so advanced and statute of limitations does not operate against the right to recover the purchase money until the vendor refuses to execute the conveyance and, as long as there was no demand, there could be no refusal and in this case heirs, through the personal representative, chose to sue for the alleged paid purchase price rather than for reconveyance. Lamaster v. Dean, 301 Ky. 141 , 191 S.W.2d 228, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 717 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Plaintiff had a right to commence action on note within the 15 year statutory period provided by this section even though a defense existed until the note was listed for taxation and the taxes were paid as provided by KRS 132.300 ; thus, her note was not barred, although it was not listed for taxation until after the 15 year statutory period. De Long v. Owsley, 239 S.W.2d 58, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 838 ( Ky. 1951 ).

The statute of limitations was properly applied and note properly held to have been barred where no evidence as to the date of the transfer was introduced by either party. Johnson's Adm'r v. Johnson, 244 S.W.2d 969, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1252 ( Ky. 1951 ).

45.— — —Payments.

The rule that a partial payment made by the original vendee on a note for the purchase money within 15 years would have the effect, as to him, to suspend operation of the statute of limitations between accrual of the action on the note and the date of payment could not be applied to the prejudice of a remote vendee not a party to the transaction. Kendall v. Clark, 90 Ky. 178 , 13 S.W. 583, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 980 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 65 ( Ky. 1890 ).

The expiration of 15 years before institution of suit on the note does not bar a recovery thereon, when it appears that payments have been made on it from time to time within the statutory period. Fields v. Fields, 29 S.W. 322, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 534 (1895).

Answer alleging affirmatively that on a certain day within 15 years before suit defendant had made a payment on the note prevented the running of the statute and defeated the plea of limitation. Abner v. York, 41 S.W. 309, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 643 (1897).

Payments made by purchaser on purchase-money notes operated to extend the notes from the date of the payment and the vendor’s lien being an incident existed, even against subsequent purchaser of property in lien, as long as the debt was not barred. Cook v. Union Trust Co., 106 Ky. 803 , 51 S.W. 600, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 454 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1899 ).

When a deed retains a lien to secure the payment of a purchase-money note, although the record discloses that more than 15 years elapsed since the maturity of the note, the lien still exists if there have been payments made on the note keeping it alive and renewing the purchase-money note from time to time has the same effect. Hamilton v. Wright, 87 S.W. 1093, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 1144 (1905).

The mere putting a credit on a note, unless there is evidence showing that the amount represented by the credit was paid by the debtor on the note, will not be sufficient to stop the statute from running. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Although note sued on became due more than 15 years before suit, as interest was paid thereon by the obligor within 15 years before suit, the action was not barred by the 15-year statute of limitations. Radford's Adm'rs v. Harris, 144 Ky. 809 , 139 S.W. 963, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 729 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Payment on a note made within 15 years after its maturity had the legal effect to postpone 15 years from its date the bar provided by the statute. Sisk's Adm'r v. Sisk's Adm'r, 192 Ky. 672 , 234 S.W. 296, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Indorsement and payment of holder’s note by maker of three (3) notes constituted a payment of maker’s own three (3) notes as of the time of his indorsement of holder’s notes which suspended the running of the statute of limitations. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 197 Ky. 784 , 248 S.W. 182, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 721 ( Ky. 1923 ).

In the case of a promissory note not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange, the period of limitation is 15 years but a payment on the note is a sufficient acknowledgment of the debt to stop the running of the statute up to that time, and the period of limitation will then be computed from the date of the payment. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 197 Ky. 784 , 248 S.W. 182, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 721 ( Ky. 1923 ).

There was sufficient acknowledgment of the debt to suspend the running of the statute of limitations up to that time where a sum received by the holder from a person other than the maker was credited on a note as a gift by way of indorsement under an agreement between the maker and the holder. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 197 Ky. 784 , 248 S.W. 182, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 721 ( Ky. 1923 ).

To stop the running of the statute of limitations on a note, if payments represented by the credits on the note are denied by the maker, the burden is on the holder of the note to show that the payments were made at the time they purport to have been made, or at least within 15 years from the time the note became due. Kennedy v. Kennedy, 197 Ky. 784 , 248 S.W. 182, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 721 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Where payment on note is denied, mere putting of credit on note does not stop statute from running, unless evidence shows amount represented by credit was paid by debtor. Richardson's Adm'r v. Morgan, 233 Ky. 540 , 26 S.W.2d 32, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1930 ).

46.— — —New Promises.

Even if statement made by maker of note had constituted a new promise, action on note was barred by statute of limitations where plaintiff elected to sue on note and not on the new promise. Brannen v. Lally's Adm'r, 260 Ky. 302 , 85 S.W.2d 667, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 461 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Statement by plaintiff’s father, the maker of the note, “that he wanted this note paid” was certainly not a new promise giving rise to a new cause of action which would stop the running of the statute of limitations. Brannen v. Lally's Adm'r, 260 Ky. 302 , 85 S.W.2d 667, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 461 ( Ky. 1935 ).

In action against administratrix on four (4) promissory notes based on new promise to pay the notes made after expiration of 15-year limitation from the date they were due, evidence supported verdict of jury. Gover's Adm'r v. Dunagan, 299 Ky. 38 , 184 S.W.2d 225, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1020 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where notes were not barred at the time a new promise was made by maker to pay them if given a little additional time as he was then beginning to make some money, the new promise started the 15-year statute of limitations running against them making defendant’s plea of limitation fail. Barnes v. Kennedy, 242 S.W.2d 616, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1054 ( Ky. 1951 ).

47.— —Pleading.

Where petition brought on a note more than 15 years after its maturity set out that credits which took the action out of the 15-year statute of limitations were paid by the defendant, a traverse of defendant’s plea of limitation which denied making the payments was sufficient. Taylor County v. Bank of Campbellsville, 145 Ky. 389 , 140 S.W. 680, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 887 ( Ky. 1911 ).

In bank’s action on note to enforce the mortgage lien securing it where committee for holder of prior note and mortgage intervened, the bank could plead intervenor’s note and mortgage were barred by the statute of limitations. Kingman's Committee v. First Nat'l Bank, 246 Ky. 404 , 55 S.W.2d 39, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 770 ( Ky. 1932 ).

In an action to recover on a promissory note, where plaintiff’s claim on the note and defendant’s defense of payment were both originally items of the same open account and both grew out of the mutuality of interrelated business dealings between these parties, the trial court committed prejudicial error in directing a verdict for plaintiff based upon the assumed merit of the plaintiff’s reply in which he pleaded limitations as a complete bar against the defense of payment set up by the defendant. The court should have submitted the whole case, including defendant’s defense of payment of the note, to the jury for decision. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

35.— —Deeds.

Statute of limitations for breach of contract claims by a coal property owner against the holder of oil and gas interests began to run when a well was drilled, not when it was mined, as any breach of deeds occurred by the holder drilling the wells without approval and in a manner that interfered more than as little as reasonably possible with the owner’s coal operations. While there may have been some uncertainty about specific amount of damages, that did not mean that the owner did not have a cognizable cause of damages for breach of contract. EQT Prod. Co. v. Big Sandy Co., L.P., 590 S.W.3d 275, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 200 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

48.Running of Statute.

Where a husband has a right of action in him to reduce the chose in action of his wife to possession, the statute of limitations runs, although he does not assert this right. Duvall v. Parepoint, 168 Ky. 11 , 181 S.W. 653, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 503 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Where a woman, the payee of a note secured by a mortgage, married in 1890, before maturity, her husband was then entitled to enforce collection, and, after passage of KRS 404.010 to 404.050 , she was entitled to enforce collection; hence the running of the 15 year statute was not tolled by KRS 413.170 . Duvall v. Parepoint, 168 Ky. 11 , 181 S.W. 653, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 503 ( Ky. 1916 ).

49.—Commencement.

If an instrument is payable on demand at a specified time and place, the statute of limitations begins to run at its maturity, as payment could be immediately demanded, and, if refused, suit brought and failure to present and demand payment does not defeat the operation of the statute of limitations. Wurth v. Paducah, 116 Ky. 403 , 76 S.W. 143, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 586 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 201 ( Ky. 1903 ).

Covenant in deed of railroad right of way to renew when necessary and maintain retaining wall along the line of grantor’s property was by its nature a continuing contract not affected by the statute of limitations until after the covenantor refused to repair or renew and it could be specifically enforced. Flege v. Covington & C. E. R. & T. & B. Co., 122 Ky. 348 , 91 S.W. 738, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1257 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 51 ( Ky. 1906 ).

A railroad company was entitled to a reasonable time to establish and maintain a station in consideration of a strip of land conveyed to it and the statute of limitations did not being to run against grantor until after lapse of a reasonable time for this purpose. Louisville, H. S. L. R. Co. v. Baskett, 104 S.W. 695, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1035 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1907).

Where railway company covenanted to make two (2) passways under or across its tracks for benefit of grantor who had conveyed right of way, the covenant was one running with the land and, in absence of provision limiting time for construction of passways, limitation of time for enforcement of covenant did not begin to run until demand for performance and refusal thereof, and fact that demand was not made within a reasonable time was immaterial. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Pierce, 313 Ky. 189 , 230 S.W.2d 430, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 812 ( Ky. 1950 ).

50.—Payments.

A part payment, in order to take the case out of the statute of limitations, must appear to have been made on account of a sum admitted to be due accompanied by a promise to pay the remainder. Richardson v. Whitaker, 103 Ky. 425 , 45 S.W. 774 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Claim of contractor was upon written contract to erect a college building and payment by the college for some brick for which the contractor owed prevented the 15 year statute of limitations from defeating the claim as the statute began to run from the date of the payment. Pleasant J. Potter College v. George A. Collett & Bro., 142 Ky. 322 , 134 S.W. 173, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1911 ).

When the creditor owes a claim or demand to the debtor, he cannot, without the consent or direction of the debtor, apply what he owes as a credit on the note or demand he holds against the debtor and if he makes the application without the consent of the debtor, it will not interrupt the running of the statute of limitations. Samuel v. Samuel's Adm'r, 151 Ky. 235 , 151 S.W. 676, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 795 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Payment stops running of statute. Richardson's Adm'r v. Morgan, 233 Ky. 540 , 26 S.W.2d 32, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1930 ).

In action against widow and heirs at law to foreclose mortgage upon real estate of decedent, the burden was on plaintiff to establish payments by competent evidence in view of defendant’s denial and the evidence submitted was insufficient to show payments which would toll the bar of the statute of limitations. Combs v. Todd, 254 S.W.2d 486, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 590 ( Ky. 1953 ).

51.— —Acknowledgments or Promises.

An acknowledgment of a debt, to take the case out of the statute of limitations, or bar by lapse of time, must be made not to a mere stranger but to the creditor or someone acting for him, and upon which the creditor is to act and confide. Hargis v. Sewell's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 63 , 7 S.W. 557, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 920 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1888 ). See Davis v. Strange, 156 Ky. 420 , 161 S.W. 217, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 447 ( Ky. 1913 ).

There can be no recovery on a promise to pay a debt barred by limitations unless the promise is clear, absolute, and unconditional and therefore it is error to instruct the jury to find for plaintiff if they believe defendant, after the debt was barred, “acknowledged the same as a subsisting demand.” Chism v. Barnes, 104 Ky. 310 , 47 S.W. 232, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 569 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 165 ( Ky. 1898 ).

While there was no express promise to pay debt in mortgage, one was implied from the unqualified acknowledgment of the debt which took it out of the operation of the statute of limitations. Maddox v. Walker's Ex'x, 74 S.W. 741, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 124 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 367 (Ky. Ct. App. 1903).

In order to take an action out of the statute of limitations, an express acknowledgment of the debt as a debt due at that time (coupled with the original consideration) or an express promise to pay it must be proven to have been made by the debtor within the time prescribed by the statute. Davis v. Strange, 156 Ky. 420 , 161 S.W. 217, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 447 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Husband’s verbal agreement to keep a mortgage, merely executed by his wife on her property to secure his note for $1,000 due four (4) months from date, alive and in full force and effect during their joint lives without her consent did not stop the running of the statute of limitations in her favor since she did nothing to stop it. Bradley v. Bradley's Adm'r, 159 Ky. 84 , 166 S.W. 773, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1914 ).

To stop the running of the statute, payments or promises to pay a debt secured by a mortgage must be made within 15 years of date suit is brought. Duvall v. Parepoint, 168 Ky. 11 , 181 S.W. 653, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 503 ( Ky. 1916 ).

There was sufficient evidence of acknowledgment of the debt to defeat the running of the statute of limitations where appellants telephoned payee of note to meet them for purpose of effecting a settlement and acknowledged the debt but did not pay it because they claimed a credit which payee would not allow. Lamkin v. Cambron's Adm'rs, 194 Ky. 246 , 238 S.W. 766, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Where the action is upon a new promise to pay a debt that is barred, the acknowledgment by the debtor must be so positive and unqualified as unquestionably to raise an implied promise, if it does not contain an express promise. Lamkin v. Cambron's Adm'rs, 194 Ky. 246 , 238 S.W. 766, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Where defendant unqualifiedly acknowledged liability on check, statute of limitations was inapplicable, whether or not acknowledgment was made after statute had run. Sumrall's Ex'rs v. James, 221 Ky. 498 , 299 S.W. 207, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 781 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Written acknowledgment of notes within 15 years from suit stopped running of statute of limitations. Sumrall's Ex'rs v. James, 221 Ky. 498 , 299 S.W. 207, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 781 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Where a settlement of accounts was made and the obligation reduced to writing and signed by obligor and acknowledged by the obligor in affixing his signature to obligee’s itemized account eight (8) years before obligor’s death, the written acknowledgment tolled the running of the statute of limitations until the day after the acknowledgment of the debt. Lamaster v. Dean, 301 Ky. 141 , 191 S.W.2d 228, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 717 ( Ky. 1945 ).

An acknowledgment of pre-existing debt barred by limitations may support a new promise to pay it, but it must be made to the debtor or someone acting in his behalf. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Where, in order to withdraw from hands of trustee certain funds, a petitioner made a statement to the court that, among certain other obligations, he owed a certain debt, the statement was not such an acknowledgment of the debt to remove the bar of limitations. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

52.—Absence from State or Obstruction.

When a cause of action mentioned in this section and KRS 413.160 accrues against a resident of this state and, he by absconding or concealing himself or by any other indirect means, obstructs the prosecution of the action, the time of the continuance of the absence from the state or obstruction shall not be computed as any part of the period within which the action shall be commenced but this saving shall not prevent the limitation from operating in favor of any other person not so acting, whether he is a necessary party to the action or not. St. Clair v. Bardstown Transfer Line, Inc., 310 Ky. 776 , 221 S.W.2d 679, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1274 ( Ky. 1949 ).

53.—Filing of Action.

Filing of suit to sell property and apply the proceeds of sale to satisfaction of mortgage tolled the running of the statute of limitations although no lis pendens was filed under KRS 382.440 , judgment was not entered for three (3) years and the property was not offered for sale until 22 years after the suit was filed and purchaser at commissioner’s sale had good title as against purchaser from mortgagor where deed from mortgagor contained provision that the purchaser was to assume existing mortgages. Jones v. Arthur, 244 S.W.2d 469, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1289 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Filing a claim against the executrix of an estate does not constitute the institution of an action so as to toll the running of the statute of limitations against the claimant. Kentucky-Virginia Stone Co. v. Ball, 426 S.W.2d 455, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 650 ( Ky. 1968 ).

54.—Cross Petition.

In an action to enforce mortgage calling on defendants to assert liens, the filing within the 15-year statutory period by defendant of a cross petition setting forth an improvement lien interrupted the running of the statute of limitations even though a summons was not issued on the cross complaint, since no personal judgment was sought and plaintiff was barred from a plea of limitations in a subsequent consolidated action. Ideal Sav., Loan & Bldg. Ass'n v. Park Hills, 281 Ky. 571 , 136 S.W.2d 748, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 64 ( Ky. 1940 ).

55.—Death Prior to.

Where the debtor dies more thanone (1) year before the time limited for the commencement of the action, and an administrator is appointed more thanone (1) year before the time limited for the commencement of the action, the time in which the action may be brought is limited to the time prescribed in this section or KRS 413.120 , whichever may be applicable, and the six-month impediment to the bringing of a suit provided in law requiring period of five (5) months after qualification of a personal representative before an action can be brought against an administrator or executor does not prevent the statute from running during that six (6) months. Johnson v. Hogg, 165 Ky. 1 , 176 S.W. 350, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 469 ( Ky. 1 915).

If a person against whom any action mentioned in this section dies before the expiration of the time limited for its commencement and the cause of action survives, the proper limitation is provided in subsection (3) of KRS 413.180 . Witherspoon v. Salm, 346 S.W.2d 48, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1961 ). (Decision prior to 1988 amendment).

56.Pleadings.

After an action against executrix and mortgage creditor, in which creditor properly set up his debt long before the 15 year statutory period ran out, was consolidated with action by widow for settlement of estate in which she alleged the justice of the mortgage debt, it was unnecessary for the mortgage creditor to answer in the second action and set out his debt again in order to stop the running of the statute of limitations and the heirs could not appear in the second action 15 years after the mortgage was executed and defeat it by a plea of limitation. Beddow v. Wilson, 90 S.W. 228, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 661 (1906).

Where defendant responded in his answer to the original petition in a suit to set aside a deed and compel an accounting and, in addition to traversing the allegations of the petition, pleaded and relied on the statute of limitations and plaintiff joined issues thereon, this traverse of the plea of the statute of limitations was bad and it interposed no real defense to the plea. Jolly v. Miller, 124 Ky. 100 , 98 S.W. 326, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 341 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1906 ).

In this jurisdiction the defense of limitations cannot, as a general rule, be raised by demurrer but must be pleaded. Gabbard v. Gabbard, 294 Ky. 572 , 172 S.W.2d 214, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 492 ( Ky. 1943 ). See Markwell v. Kahlkoff, 258 Ky. 231 , 79 S.W.2d 984, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1935 ); Crady v. Hubrich, 299 Ky. 461 , 185 S.W.2d 949, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where defense of limitations is shown on the face of the complaint, it may be taken advantage of by a motion to dismiss. Carr v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 344 S.W.2d 619, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1961 ).

57.—Amendment.

While the trial court has a broad discretion in allowing amended pleadings, a defendant may amend his answer at any time before judgment to plead limitation. Wyrick v. Wyrick, 243 S.W.2d 1004, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1195 ( Ky. 1951 ).

58.—Avoidance.

A reply which set up acknowledgment of the indebtedness within the period of limitations and a promise at that time to pay did not change the cause of action set up in the original petition, but constituted a matter of avoidance. Lamkin v. Cambron's Adm'rs, 194 Ky. 246 , 238 S.W. 766, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1922 ).

59.Proof.

In order to continue liability on a note beyond the statutory period of 15 years, the burden rested on the plaintiff to show, the fact being denied, that the amount indorsed upon the note as a credit was a partial payment made by the defendant. Kendall v. Clark, 90 Ky. 178 , 13 S.W. 583, 11 Ky. L. Rptr. 980 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 65 ( Ky. 1890 ).

Where the proof necessary to establish the breach of contract had already been presented in support of the breach of warranty claim without objection, CR 15.02 was appropriately used to amend the pleadings to include a breach of contract claim. Nucor Corp. v. General Electric Co., 812 S.W.2d 136, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 54 ( Ky. 1991 ).

Applied in

Dearborn v. City of Frankfort, 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 902 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 9, 2016).

Cited in:

Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ); Security Trust Co. v. Wilson, 307 Ky. 152 , 210 S.W.2d 336, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 701 ( Ky. 1948 ); Stenger’s Adm’r v. Lockman, 311 Ky. 209 , 223 S.W.2d 907, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1113 ( Ky. 1949 ); Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ); Leiserson & Adler, Inc. v. Keam, 266 S.W.2d 352, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 822 ( Ky. 1954 ); Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ); Lemmons v. Ransom, 670 S.W.2d 478, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1984 ); Salyers v. Allied Corp., 642 F. Supp. 442, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27726 (E.D. Ky. 1986 ); Paine v. La Quinta Motor Inns, Inc., 736 S.W.2d 355, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 558 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987), overruled, Oliver v. Schultz, 885 S.W.2d 699, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1994 ); Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ); Jackson v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co., 837 S.W.2d 496, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1992 ); Mauk v. Mauk, 873 S.W.2d 213, 1994 Ky. App. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. 1994); Stamper v. Cmty. Fin. Servs., 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 175 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Written Contracts.
2.—Within Statute.

Unpublished decision: Where appellate court found that because the underinsured policy limitation did not conflict with the period of time prescribed by Kentucky law, KRS § 413.090 , for filing a personal injury claim that arose from a vehicle accident, the court concluded that the policy was reasonable and enforceable. Pike v. Gov't Emples. Ins. Co., 174 Fed. Appx. 311, FED App. 0222N, U.S. App. LEXIS 7910 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 881, 127 S. Ct. 369, 166 L. Ed. 2d 142, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 7151 (U.S. 2006).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action on revenue bond of sheriff, KRS 134.270 .

Device to prefer creditor subject to equity action, limitation, KRS 378.070 .

Journal of Mineral Law & Policy.

Comments, Hatton v. Falcon Coal: Breach of Contract or Trespass to Realty, 5 J.M.L. & P. 195 (1989-90).

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Wolff, Defending Credit Card Collection Lawsuits, Vol. 76, No. 6, November 2012, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Cooper, Uninsured Motorist Coverage — Charting the Kentucky Course, 62 Ky. L.J. 467 (1973-74).

Treatises

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Enforcement of Mortgage Liens, § 301.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Support of Children (On Dissolution), § 27.12.

Collateral References.

ALR

Insurer’s failure to pay amount of admitted liability as precluding reliance on statute of limitations. 41 A.L.R.3d 1111.

413.100. Lienee not to extend limitation as against purchasers or creditors — Exception.

No promise, acknowledgment or payment of money by any person bound on any bond or obligation for the payment of money secured by a lien shall operate as a prolongation or extension of the time within which the lien may be enforced as against purchasers or creditors, unless the promisor and the holder of the lien, before fifteen (15) years after the maturity of the debt, enters a memorandum on the margin of the record of the deed or mortgage, attested by the clerk, showing that the debt is extended, for what time it is extended and the amount still due thereon. The payee shall pay the clerk a fee pursuant to KRS 64.012 for his services.

History. 2514: amend. Acts 2006, ch. 255, § 37, effective January 1, 2007.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The fundamental principle back of these recording statutes is to protect bona fide purchasers and creditors without notice. Head v. Oldham Bank & Trust Co., 249 Ky. 292 , 60 S.W.2d 621, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 513 ( Ky. 1933 ).

This section was not intended to and does not operate to affect the prolongation of a lien indebtedness as between the parties, but left that untouched, the purpose and intent of this section being for the protection of third parties and to require that a record of the prolongation of lien indebtedness be made as required by the statute so that those who do not have actual knowledge thereof may rely on what the record discloses. Barriger v. Martin, 259 Ky. 406 , 82 S.W.2d 450, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 318 ( Ky. 1935 ).

2.Construction.

By failing to except chattel mortgages from the provisions of this section, it would indicate Legislature considered chattel mortgages as being valid for a period of 15 years. In re Ciabattari, 29 F. Supp. 573, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2082 (D. Ky. 1939 ).

While it is true this section does not have incorporated the words “without notice” or words of like import after the words “purchaser” or “purchasers and creditors,” the intent of the Legislature was to invalidate extensions caused by payments on or acknowledgments of lien debts only as to purchasers and creditors without notice. American Nat'l Bank v. Stark, 246 Ky. 225 , 54 S.W.2d 906, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 736 ( Ky. 1932 ).

3.Prior to Fifteen Years Before Maturity.

The rights of subsequent mortgagee under mortgage acquired before 15 years after maturity of prior mortgage indebtedness and her rights under this section were fixed as of that date and did not operate to give her priority over prior mortgage merely because of subsequent failure of the parties to the prior mortgage to comply with this section. Barriger v. Martin, 259 Ky. 406 , 82 S.W.2d 450, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 318 ( Ky. 1935 ).

4.Pleadings.

Mortgage executed in 1885 and duly recorded was superior to a subsequent mortgage executed on the property in 1925 although no memorandum on the margin of the record was ever entered showing that the debt was extended or for what time or the amount due thereon where the pleadings disclosed the subsequent mortgagee took with actual knowledge of the 1885 mortgage lien and the affirmative defense of bona fide purchaser for value without notice was not set up in the pleadings. Head v. Oldham Bank & Trust Co., 249 Ky. 292 , 60 S.W.2d 621, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 513 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

A county clerk, or deputy thereof, is not required to allow entry into the margin of a mortgage, a memorandum concerning the extension thereof. OAG 94-32 .

Research References and Practice Aids

ALR

51 Am Jur. 2d, Limitation of Actions, §§ 40, 41.

413.110. Action against county on bonded obligation — Three year limitation — Action on state warrant — Two year limitation.

  1. A cause of action existing against a county by virtue of its bonded obligation for the payment of money, after the county has in good faith offered to redeem the obligations that have matured by the payment in full of all principal and interest due, expires and becomes ineffective at the end of three (3) years after the offer.
  2. A cause of action for payment of any warrant of the Commonwealth expires and becomes noneffective unless brought within two (2) years after the Commonwealth has in good faith offered to redeem the warrant by payment in full of all interest and principal due.

History. 2514: amend. Acts 1942, ch. 6, §§ 1, 2; 1966, ch. 255, § 270.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The purpose of this section was to enable counties in financial difficulty because of large bond issues, some of which were in default, to stop the running of interest and to force the holders of county bonds to present them for payment. Tandy's Ex'rs v. Carlisle County, 296 Ky. 743 , 178 S.W.2d 591, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 631 ( Ky. 1944 ).

2.Offer to Redeem.

This section requires something more than the mere deposit of money with the bank named as the place of payment; the offer must be communicated to the holder of the bonds or his agent. Tandy's Ex'rs v. Carlisle County, 296 Ky. 743 , 178 S.W.2d 591, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 631 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Cited:

Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ), appeal denied, 295 F.2d 107, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468 (6th Cir. Ky. 1961 ).

413.120. Actions to be brought within five years.

The following actions shall be commenced within five (5) years after the cause of action accrued:

  1. An action upon a contract not in writing, express or implied.
  2. An action upon a liability created by statute, when no other time is fixed by the statute creating the liability.
  3. An action for a penalty or forfeiture when no time is fixed by the statute prescribing it.
  4. An action for trespass on real or personal property.
  5. An action for the profits of or damages for withholding real or personal property.
  6. An action for an injury to the rights of the plaintiff, not arising on contract and not otherwise enumerated.
  7. An action upon a bill of exchange, check, draft or order, or any endorsement thereof, or upon a promissory note, placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange.
  8. An action to enforce the liability of a steamboat or other vessel.
  9. An action upon a merchant’s account for goods sold and delivered, or any article charged in such store account.
  10. An action upon an account concerning the trade of merchandise, between merchant and merchant or their agents.
  11. An action for relief or damages on the ground of fraud or mistake.
  12. An action to enforce the liability of bail.
  13. An action for personal injuries suffered by any person against the builder of a home or other improvements. This cause of action shall be deemed to accrue at the time of original occupancy of the improvements which the builder caused to be erected.

HISTORY: 2515, 2518: amend. Acts 1964, ch. 124, § 1; 1988, ch. 224, § 6, effective July 15, 1988; 1998, ch. 196, § 25, effective July 15, 1998; 2015 ch. 121, § 3, effective June 24, 2015.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Construction.

Statutes of limitation are statutes of repose. Kentucky River Coal & Feed Co. v. McConkey, 271 Ky. 261 , 111 S.W.2d 418, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1937 ).

A plea of limitations is an affirmative defense; this is especially so where the case involves a continuing trust. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The object rather than the form of the action controls in determining the period of limitation; thus, where a statute limits the time in which an action for injuries to the person may be brought, the statute is applicable for all actions the real purpose of which is to recover for an injury to the person, whether based upon contract or tort, in preference to a general statute limiting the time for bringing actions ex contractu. Columbus Mining Co. v. Walker, 271 S.W.2d 276, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1040 ( Ky. 1954 ), overruled, Louisville Trust Co. v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 580 S.W.2d 497, 1979 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1979 ).

Two-year limitations period under KRS 413.125 regarding damage to personal property applied to a case where the driver motored through a red light and struck the trucking company’s truck and, thus, the trucking company’s action brought beyond that time was time barred. Although the trucking company tried to claim that KRS 413.120 ’s five-year limitations period applied, that statute involved actions for trespass to chattels, which was an intentional tort not involved in the case. Ingram Trucking, Inc. v. Allen, 372 S.W.3d 870, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

2.What Constitutes “Action.”

An “action” within the meaning of this statute of limitations involves judicial proceedings. Metts v. Frankfort, 665 S.W.2d 318, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 477 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

The set-off procedure authorized by KRS 44.030 by which the Commonwealth may withhold money it owes to a debtor of the Commonwealth is not an “action” within the scope of the statutes of limitations. Metts v. Frankfort, 665 S.W.2d 318, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 477 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

3.Statute Applicable.

An action by buyer of coal against seller to recover treble damages under federal price discrimination act was not an action to enforce coal purchase contracts nor to recover damages for any alleged breach but an action sounding in tort arising out of payment of commissions subsequent to the effective date of the Robinson-Patman act (June 19, 1936) and, where the action was filed within five (5) years of the effective date of that act (June 19, 1936), it was not barred under this section. Kentucky-Tennessee Light & Power Co. v. Nashville Coal Co., 37 F. Supp. 728, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3555 (D. Ky. 1941 ).

Now the statute of limitations applies to all actions, whether at law or in equity, and the chancellor can exercise no discretion on the subject, but must apply the statute, when properly pleaded. Hargis v. Sewell's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 63 , 7 S.W. 557, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 920 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1888 ).

This section and KRS 413.130 apply to actions and not defenses. Louisville Banking Co. v. Buchanan, 117 Ky. 975 , 80 S.W. 193, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2167 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Law that prescribed the procedure for obtaining a permit from proper authorities to construct transmission lines and appliances along and across public roads and to execute bond had no application to power company’s construction of power plant and dam and failure to comply with it did not render construction unlawful so as to make the 15 year statute of limitations instead of the five-year statute of limitations under this section applicable in an action for damages from flooding. Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

This section applied to action by wards against county judge under KRS 446.070 for failure of guardian to pay amounts due from their grandfather’s estate and defendant should have been allowed to show, if he could, that each of the children became 21 years of age and cause of action accrued, if it did, more than (5) years before action was commenced. Langston v. Kelly, 272 Ky. 109 , 113 S.W.2d 471, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Attack on claims allowed by personal representative was action for settlement and distribution under KRS 395.300 and must be made within five (5) years. Schott v. Schott's Ex'r, 286 Ky. 208 , 149 S.W.2d 782, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 2 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Subsection (2) of this section applying to liabilities created by statute did not impliedly repeal existing statutes of limitation nor was it intended to pre-empt the field occupied by other statutes. It was designed to deal with new liabilities created by statute as to which no existing statute of limitations was applicable. Robinson v. Hardaway, 293 Ky. 627 , 169 S.W.2d 823, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1943 ).

At common law, although statutes of limitation did not run against the Commonwealth, where a suit was brought in the name of the state, a defense of laches or limitations could be made when its name was used to enforce a right which inured to the benefit of an individual or corporation and the state had no real interest in the litigation. Department of Welfare v. Fox, 240 S.W.2d 65, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 944 ( Ky. 1951 ).

KRS 413.150 makes the Commonwealth subject to this section except where a different time is fixed by statute. Department of Welfare v. Fox, 240 S.W.2d 65, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 944 ( Ky. 1951 ).

There is no specific statutory provision providing a statute of limitations for an action alleging breach of fiduciary duties by an attorney-in-fact, therefore KRS 413.120(7), providing a five-year limitation for actions not arising on contract and not otherwise enumerated, governs. Ingram v. Cates, 74 S.W.3d 783, 2002 Ky. App. LEXIS 769 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).

Limitations periods of KRS 413.120(7) and 413.140(1)(c) were applicable to claims for breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste, and the aiding and abetting corporate waste claims, brought under 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 544(b), 547, and 548(a)(1)(A) and (B), and under KRS 378.010 and a civil conspiracy claim against insiders KRS 378.020 . Liquidating Trustee of App Fuels Creditors Trust v. Energy Coal Res., Inc. (In re Appalachian Fuels, LLC), 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 4290 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Sept. 14, 2012).

Privilege fees imposed by ordinance for the construction of a sanitary sewer trunk line were in the nature of a special assessment rather than a contractual obligation; thus, a collection action was subject to the five-year limitations period for collecting an assessment qualifying as a statutory liability, and the statute of limitations for contract actions was inapplicable even though some owners had entered into an agreement to pay the fees. Pinnacle Dev. II, LLC v. RML Constr., LLC, 410 S.W.3d 169, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

Appellant's action to reform its mortgage on debtors' property was barred by Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.120(12), the five-year statute of limitations; as appellant could have discovered with reasonable diligence the mistake in the mortgage's legal description, the 10-year statute of limitations, Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.130(3), did not apply. Assocs. First Capital Corp. v. Hensley (In re Hensley), 578 Fed. Appx. 530, 2014 FED App. 0671N, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16859 (6th Cir. Ky. 2014 ).

Statute of limitations for contractual claims, rather than statute of limitations for personal injury claims, applied when a passenger sued a taxicab company for breach of an oral contract of safe passage after the driver of a taxicab sexually assaulted the passenger, because liability was based upon the taxicab company’s oral contract with the passenger and its corresponding duty of safe passage implied by that contract. The fact that the passenger sought damages for personal injuries was not determinative of the nature of the claim. Kendall v. Cmty. Cab Co., 610 S.W.3d 694, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

4.—Mental Institutions.

This section applied to action by asylum commissioners to subject subsequently acquired estate of patient admitted as a pauper; and, the cause of action accrued upon the acquisition of the property which could be subjected to debt at which time the statutory period of limitation began to run against the asylum’s cause of action, at least to the extent of the property then acquired. Schroer v. Central Kentucky Asylum for Insane, 113 Ky. 288 , 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 150 , 68 S.W. 150, 1902 Ky. LEXIS 57 ( Ky. 1902 ) (see subsection (2) of KRS 210.330 ).

As liability for support of persons in asylums was created by statute, the five-year statute of limitations applied and department of public welfare could subject trust estate for a period of five (5) years only, not at the rate fixed by the department, but in the amount which person confined to state asylum had the right to demand and receive from the trust fund. Department of Public Welfare v. Meek, 264 Ky. 771 , 95 S.W.2d 599, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 401 ( Ky. 1936 ) (see subsection (2) of KRS 210.330 ).

Enforcement against decedent’s estate of a liability for board and maintenance of wife in state mental hospital has been declared to be barred by the running of the statute of limitations after the lapse of five (5) years following accrual of the cause of action but the plea of limitations was not a good defense against any claim of hospital accruing within the five (5) year period immediately before litigation. Central Hospital of Kentucky v. Powell, 301 Ky. 808 , 193 S.W.2d 456, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1946 ) (see subsection (2) of KRS 210.330 ).

Subsection (2) of KRS 210.330 was constitutional and it specifically provided that the period of limitation should not run against actions to recover for maintenance and board of incompetents having the status of paupers in state mental hospitals until such time as an estate which would be subject thereto was acquired by the pauper; therefore, the department of welfare might collect for all back charges against a pauper patient in a mental institution within five (5) years from the time he subsequently acquired an estate of his own. Department of Welfare v. Fox, 240 S.W.2d 65, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 944 ( Ky. 1951 ).

5.—Taxes.

A tax is a “liability created by statute,” within the meaning of subsection (2) of this section. Louisville v. Johnson, 14 Ky. L. Rptr. 813 (1893).

A proceeding by an auditor’s agent to recover back taxes on an annuity was barred after five (5) years from the time when the property should have been assessed. Commonwealth v. Nute, 115 Ky. 239 , 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2138 , 72 S.W. 1090, 1903 Ky. LEXIS 90 ( Ky. 1903 ). See Citizens’ Nat’l Bank v. Commonwealth, 118 Ky. 51 , 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2254 , 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 62 , 80 S.W. 479, 81 S.W. 686, 1904 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1904 ); Farmers’ Nat’l Bank v. Commonwealth, 80 S.W. 1193 (1904); Marion Nat’l Bank v. Commonwealth, 80 S.W. 1193 (1904) (see subsection (2) of KRS 132.290 ).

The five (5) year statute of limitations was applicable to proceedings for the assessment of lands which the owner had failed to list with the assessor for taxation. Falls Branch Jellico Land & Improv. Co. v. Commonwealth, 83 S.W. 108, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 1028 (1904) (see KRS 132.290 and 134.420 ).

Taxes assessed by a city on omitted property were “a liability imposed by statute,” and were barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations which was pleaded. Muir's Adm'rs v. Bardstown, 120 Ky. 739 , 87 S.W. 1096, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 1150 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1905 ) (see KRS 134.420 ).

Actions brought to recover franchise taxes are governed by this section, providing a limitation of five (5) years on liabilities created by statute. Illinois C. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 128 Ky. 268 , 108 S.W. 245, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 1112 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 52 ( Ky. 1908 ), aff'd, 218 U.S. 551, 31 S. Ct. 95, 54 L. Ed. 1147, 1910 U.S. LEXIS 2049 (U.S. 1910).

A claim of mortgagee for taxes paid under a mortgage executed to secure a debt was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Platt's Ex'r v. Locke, 139 Ky. 72 , 129 S.W. 329, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Taxes are a “liability created by statute,” within this section, limiting an action on a liability created by statute, and taxes for 1905, though levied by a city of the first class as of September 1, 1904, were not distrainable until August 20, 1905, even though the property had been alienated after September 1, 1904, and an action to enforce a lien for taxes, brought within five (5) years after the accrual of the cause of action on August 20, 1905, was in time. Chatterson v. Louisville, 145 Ky. 485 , 140 S.W. 647, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 873 ( Ky. 1911 ) (see KRS 91.350 and 134.420 ).

Action to recover inheritance tax is barred in five (5) years under this section, providing such limitation period for statutory liabilities where no other time is fixed, and KRS 413.150 , making such limitation period applicable to actions by Commonwealth. Ritcher v. Commonwealth, 180 Ky. 4 , 201 S.W. 456, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1918 ) (see subsection (3) of KRS 140.160 ).

Law extending time for retrospectively assessing omitted personal property from the five-year period theretofore existing to 10 years did not affect the question of limitation on the right to collect a tax after assessment had been made. Powell County v. Clay City Nat'l Bank, 246 Ky. 326 , 55 S.W.2d 10, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 760 ( Ky. 1932 ).

The right to collect the tax levied on shares of national banks under KRS 136.270 (now repealed) may be barred in five (5) years after assessment. Powell County v. Clay City Nat'l Bank, 246 Ky. 326 , 55 S.W.2d 10, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 760 ( Ky. 1932 ).

In a suit by property owner against city to quiet title to property be removing the city’s tax lien therefrom, the plaintiff cannot plead affirmatively the statute of limitations running against the city’s tax claim, where defense could be asserted in suits filed by the city to enforce the tax claims. Title Ins. & Trust Co. v. Paducah, 275 Ky. 392 , 121 S.W.2d 932, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 440 ( Ky. 1938 ) (see KRS 134.420 ).

Taxes for 1932 were not barred by five (5) year statute of limitations under this section although they became in arrears November 1, 1932, and suit was not instituted by city until February 10, 1938, where sale to enforce collection of delinquent taxes was not declared invalid prior to litigation to have such taxes declared liens on taxpayers’ realty. Richmond v. Goodloe, 287 Ky. 379 , 153 S.W.2d 921, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 558 ( Ky. 1941 ) (see KRS 134.420 , 134.540 and 134.560 ).

An action to recover refunds of a business license tax paid to a city pursuant to an occupational license fee ordinance was properly characterized as a claim for recovery of damages for wrongfully withholding personal property under subsection (5) or as an action for injuries to the rights of the defendants not arising under contract and not otherwise enumerated under subsection (7) and, therefore, the action was subject to a five (5) year statute of limitations. Maximum Mach. Co. v. City of Shepherdsville, 17 S.W.3d 890, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 2000 ).

6.—Street Improvement Assessments.

This section applied to an action against a city wherein its liability arose because of its failure to enact proper assessment ordinances making it guilty of negligent breach of duty. Heydinger v. Catlettsburg, 114 F. Supp. 294, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3963 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

Cause of action against the owner of property sought to be subjected to lien for a street improvement by a city of the third class accrued when the common council received and approved the work under contract and, as an action was not instituted within five (5) years from that date, the statute of limitations presented a complete bar to any recovery. Waggoner v. Board of Councilmen, 99 S.W. 918, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 847 (1907).

An action by a city to recover assessments for street improvements was a liability created by statute to which the five-year statute of limitations applied. Covington v. Patterson, 191 Ky. 370 , 230 S.W. 542, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 329 ( Ky. 1921 ).

To suspend or stop the statute of new limitations, an acknowledgment or new promise of taxpayer to pay street improvement assessment must be proven to have been made to the city, or someone acting for it, with authority to enforce the liens or to collect and receipt for the assessment taxes. Thornton's Adm'r v. Minton's Ex'r, 250 Ky. 805 , 64 S.W.2d 158, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1933 ). See Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

As each annual installment of street improvement assessment matured, to prevent the running of the five-year statute of limitations as to an installment in default, the holder of the bond was under the duty to enforce the collection thereof within five (5) years and 30 days after its maturity; otherwise, the same would be barred, at the expiration of five (5) years, by the five-year statute of limitations. Middlesboro v. Terrell, 259 Ky. 47 , 81 S.W.2d 865, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 1934 ).

The lien on owner’s lots for paving assessments is purely a statutory one and exists independently of owner’s written agreement to pay the assessments on the ten-year installment plan; thus, the five-year statute of limitations applies and any installments which mature within the five (5) years immediately preceding action to enforce or collect them are not barred by the five-year statute of limitations. Middlesboro v. Terrell, 259 Ky. 47 , 81 S.W.2d 865, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 1934 ). See City of Middlesboro v. Evans, 261 Ky. 303 , 87 S.W.2d 352, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 613 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Five-year statute of limitations applies to a cause of action by bondholders against city for damages for negligent breach of duty in failing to enforce collection of assessments. Catlettsburg v. Trapp, 261 Ky. 347 , 87 S.W.2d 621, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 644 ( Ky. 1935 ).

The liability of property for the costs of street improvements is statutory and the limitations prescribed by this section which is applicable and controlling begins to run 30 days after the first installment on each improvement is due. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Action on a contract made by a city and a paving contractor, pursuant to street improvement law, is not an action based on “a liability created by statute,” within the meaning of this section. Hunt v. Ashland, 274 Ky. 567 , 119 S.W.2d 640, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 300 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Although a lien for a street improvement in a first-class city exists from the date of the apportionment warrant and a suit to enforce the lien must be instituted within five (5) years from the date the warrant is issued, suit instituted to correct the apportionment soon after it was made tolled the statute of limitations during the litigation. Breslin v. Gray, 283 Ky. 785 , 143 S.W.2d 452, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 409 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In order to toll the statute of limitations on an action to foreclose street improvement lien, it must be shown the property owner unequivocally acknowledged the claim and that the person with whom he offered to settle was authorized to act for the city. Olive Hill v. Gearhart, 289 Ky. 53 , 157 S.W.2d 481, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1941 ).

In suit by city against abutting property owners seeking to enforce street improvement liens, it was incumbent upon defendants pleading the five (5) year statute of limitations to produce evidence concerning assessments and payments thereon to sustain their plea and, having failed, it was properly denied and, where defendant’s allegation was negative in form, plaintiff’s denial in the same form was deemed sufficient and it was not a negative pregnant admitting the plea. Jordan v. Olive Hill, 290 Ky. 828 , 162 S.W.2d 229, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 473 ( Ky. 1942 ).

7.—Drainage Assessments.

A drainage assessment lien is a liability created by statute, rather than one created by judgment, so an action to enforce the lien is governed by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Board of Drainage Comm'rs v. Igleheart, 301 Ky. 596 , 192 S.W.2d 364, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 750 ( Ky. 1945 ). (See KRS 267.370 .).

8.—Right of Dower.

In equitable action seeking “dower” and damages for cutting of timber and appropriation of rents and profits from the land under KRS 392.020 to which defendant pleaded the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section, the petition was bad on general demurrer where plaintiff did not negate the exception contained in KRS 392.020 giving him his cause of action by averring he had not sold or transferred his right of “dower” or that the same had not been “barred, forfeited or relinquished.” Rudd v. Dunn, 266 S.W.2d 318, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 799 ( Ky. 1954 ).

9.—Stockholders’ Double Liability.

Action by receiver of insolvent national bank to enforce liability of stockholders under comptroller’s assessment is governed by statute of limitations of state in which action is brought. Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

By means of the “borrowing statutes” of Ohio and Pennsylvania, this section was applied to defeat suit commenced more than five (5) years after date fixed by comptroller for payment against Ohio and Pennsylvania residents to enforce their statutory double liability on shares of an insolvent Kentucky national bank. Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

Cause of action against stockholder of defunct national bank, to recover on assessment against stockholders made by comptroller of currency, arose in Kentucky where bank was authorized to operate, where receiver’s office was located and where shareholders were notified by the receiver to pay, with result that action was governed by Kentucky statute of limitations because of provision, in statute of limitations of state in which stockholder resided and in which action was brought, barring action in such state when barred in state in which cause of action arose. Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

In an action by receiver of insolvent national bank to enforce liability of stockholders under comptroller’s assessment, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the day fixed by the comptroller for payment. Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

A suit to enforce statutory double liability of owners of stock in national bank, by receiver, against stockholders of bank holding company was based on the assessment and not on any agreement that was made, whether fraudulent or not fraudulent. Anderson v. Abbott, 23 F. Supp. 265, 1938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2154 (D. Ky. 1938 ).

Suit was not barred by this section where assessment was levied on February 20, 1931, payable on April 1, 1931, and suit was commenced on February 19, 1936, since right of action accrued April 1, 1931. Anderson v. Abbott, 23 F. Supp. 265, 1938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2154 (D. Ky. 1938 ).

Action against bank stockholder for double liability assessment did not accrue until an order of court was made. Denny v. Kennedy, 229 Ky. 178 , 16 S.W.2d 1030, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 717 ( Ky. 1929 ).

“Date on which cause of action accrues” against bank stockholders for statutory liability means first date on which suit could be filed. Denny v. Kennedy, 229 Ky. 178 , 16 S.W.2d 1030, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 717 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Statute of limitations does not begin to run against commissioner’s action against bank stockholder for double liability assessment until judicial ascertainment of bank’s insolvency. Denny v. Kennedy, 229 Ky. 178 , 16 S.W.2d 1030, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 717 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Action by banking commissioner to recover assessments against bank stockholders based on KRS 287.360 (now repealed) which is often called “the double liability statute” is a liability vested by statute which must be enforced within five (5) years after the cause of action accrues which is when the liquidating officer is directed to make the assessment. Redwine v. Dorman, 254 Ky. 348 , 70 S.W.2d 933, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 3 ( Ky. 1934 ). See Cope v. Anderson, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

10.—Unfair Representation by Labor Union.

The limitation contained in subsection (2) of this section is applicable to actions for unfair representation brought against a local union under the labor management relations act. Gray v. International Asso. of Heat & Frost Insulators & Asbestos Workers, 416 F.2d 313, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10621 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

The three (3) year statute of limitations of the District of Columbia and not the five (5) year statute of limitations of Kentucky was applicable in an action against a union for breach of their fiduciary duty to fairly represent the matters of plaintiffs and other members of the class in the course of collective bargaining and alleging railroad participated in the alleged breach and wrongfully discharged plaintiffs and other persons similarly situated, where plaintiffs who had ceased to be employees of the railroad company commenced action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the action was transferred, for convenience of parties and witnesses, to the United States District Court for the District of Kentucky. Hargrove v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 153 F. Supp. 681, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3280 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

11.—Contribution.

Five (5) year statute of limitations as between sureties begins to run upon the satisfaction of the judgment or common debt by any of them, for the right to enforce contribution does not otherwise arise or become complete. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where a motorist struck a child running after an ice cream vending truck and the motorist settled with the child and then sued the vending company and its driver for contribution, the five (5) year statute of limitations for liabilities created by statute applied to the suit for contribution. Baker v. Richeson, 440 S.W.2d 272, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1969 ).

Truck manufacturer’s settlement with an injured party did not preclude its indemnity claim against the manufacturer of the ladder, and because the five-year period of limitations set forth in KRS 413.120(7) was the applicable period within which to commence an action for common law indemnity in Kentucky, the truck manufacturer’s claim was not barred by limitations. Ford Motor Co. v. Manning Equip., Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15940 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 3, 2005).

12.—Execution Creditor.

Action by execution creditor purchasing at a sale of mortgaged real property to enforce lien was an “action upon a liability created by statute,” barred unless commenced within five (5) years. Due v. Bankhardt, 151 Ky. 624 , 152 S.W. 786, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 556 ( Ky. 1913 ).

13.—Sale of Mortgaged Property.

The period of limitation applicable to the right created by KRS 376.060 for sale of mortgaged property subject to lien is not the period provided in KRS 376.090 , applicable to the enforcement of mechanics’ and materialmen’s liens, but the period of five (5) years provided in this section for an action upon a liability created by statute when no other time is fixed by the statute creating the liability. Paterson v. Miller, 283 Ky. 60 , 140 S.W.2d 379, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1940 ).

14.—Payments Under Workers’ Compensation.

Subsection (2) of this section applied to an action by employer’s workers’ compensation carrier to recover compensation paid employee by carrier from an employee who had recovered damages from a third-party tortfeasor, since the liability was created by KRS 342.055 (now repealed) which fixes no time within which the action created by it may be brought. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Snyder, 291 S.W.2d 14, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1956 ), overruled, Charles Seligman Distributing Co. v. Brown, 360 S.W.2d 509, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 221 ( Ky. 1962 ).

15.—Violation of Duties of Officers and Directors.

Cause of action by depositor against officers and directors of bank based on violation of liabilities created by statute accrued at latest when the bank suspended business because of insolvency and its affairs were taken over by the banking commissioner, which was more than five (5) years before the action was instituted, and under the pleadings chancellor correctly concluded that the right of action was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Purcell v. Baker, 270 Ky. 772 , 110 S.W.2d 1079, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 162 ( Ky. 1937 ).

16.—Surcharge Sheriff’s Settlement.

The right of action of the county to surcharge the settlement of a sheriff with taxes collected for a year before he received the books of his predecessor was not barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations because the action accrued on the entry of the order of the fiscal court approving the settlement and not when sheriff’s predecessor turned over the books. Knox County v. Lewis' Adm'r, 253 Ky. 652 , 69 S.W.2d 1000, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 693 ( Ky. 1934 ).

17.—Civil Rights Action.

Where plaintiff’s civil rights action was brought pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983, which did not provide for a statute of limitations, the federal court applied the most analogous state statute of limitations and held that plaintiff was not barred by KRS 413.140 and was entitled to pursue her action under subsection (2) of this section. Garner v. Stephens, 460 F.2d 1144, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9258 (6th Cir. Ky. 1972 ), disapproved, Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 105 S. Ct. 1938, 85 L. Ed. 2d 254, 1985 U.S. LEXIS 1 (U.S. 1985).

Sixth Circuit decisions dictate that the district court may not adopt across the board, in federal civil rights cases, the Kentucky five-year limitations period for a liability based on statute, as it would otherwise be inclined to do, rather, a more detailed analysis must be made in each case to determine if some other state cause of action is more analogous to the federal cause of action. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

The two (2) primary factors to be considered in attempting to analogize a federal civil rights claim to a state claim for the purpose of selecting an appropriate statute of limitations are the interest of plaintiff sought to be protected, and the operative facts comprising the claim. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

An action under 42 USCS §§ 1981 and 1983 alleging racial discrimination with regard to recruitment, entry level testing, selection and hiring of city policemen was subject to the five-year statute of limitations under this section. Louisville Black Police Officers Organization, Inc. v. Louisville, 511 F. Supp. 825, 1979 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9723 (W.D. Ky. 1979 ), aff'd, 700 F.2d 268, 1983 U.S. App. LEXIS 30766 (6th Cir. Ky. 1983 ).

The time limitation for filing complaints found in subsection (1) of KRS 344.200 is a procedural requirement only for invoking the administrative process; it does not apply to actions commenced in the courts. The proper statute to be applied in actions of a civil rights nature is subsection (2) of this section. Clifton v. Midway College, 702 S.W.2d 835, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 268 ( Ky. 1985 ).

The five-year statute of limitations for statutory claims under subdivision (2) of this section is the proper limit to be placed upon awards of back pay in employment discrimination cases. Kentucky Com. on Human Rights v. Owensboro, 750 S.W.2d 422, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 12 ( Ky. 1988 ).

Where plaintiffs sued for attorney’s fees under 20 USCS § 1415(e)(4)(B) nine (9) months after prevailing on a claim under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the five-year statute of limitations was appropriate because the claim was based on statutory liability and independent of the underlying action; moreover the lengthy five-year statute is consistent with the policies underlying the IDEA in that it promotes participation on behalf of parents who know they will have adequate time to recover their attorney’s fees as the prevailing party. King v. Floyd County Bd. of Educ., 5 F. Supp. 2d 504, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6922 (E.D. Ky. 1998 ), rev'd, 228 F.3d 622, 2000 FED App. 0347P, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 24490 (6th Cir. Ky. 2000 ).

Circuit court properly granted summary judgment in favor of an employer on an employee's claims of racial discrimination and retaliation because counsel's blanket citation was inadequate, the employee's 1989, 1990, and 2001 claims were untimely where they were “discrete acts” that were distinct in time and in circumstance, the employee failed to raise a genuine issue of fact as to whether the employer's reasons were pretextual, the employee's retaliation claim did not show but-for causation, and his evidence was inadmissible hearsay. Walker v. Ky. Educ. TV, 503 S.W.3d 165, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 46 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).

18.—Emotional Distress.

One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress, and if bodily harm to the other results from it, for such bodily harm; there is a right to be free of emotional distress arising from conduct by another. Because the essence of the tort is the interference with this right and not whether any bodily harm results, the five-year statute of limitations of this section applies, rather than the one-year limit of KRS 413.140 . Craft v. Rice, 671 S.W.2d 247, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 254 ( Ky. 1984 ).

In appellant’s adversary action in which he claimed that a bankruptcy trustee, while acting on behalf of a corporation’s bankruptcy estate, engaged in actionable outrage or intentional infliction of emotional distress, the applicable statute of limitations was the five-year limitations period set forth in KRS 413.120(7). Heavrin v. Schilling, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22198 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 26, 2007), aff'd, 519 F.3d 575, 2008 FED App. 0113P, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 5632 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

19.—Wrongful Discharge.

In action for wrongful discharge, the one-year statute of limitations for injury to the person contained in KRS 413.140(1)(a) was not the appropriate limitations statute; the essence of the tort alleged by the employee was an interference with a right, not a bodily injury, and the appropriate statute of limitations was subdivision (2) of this section. Pike v. Harold (Chubby) Baird Gate Co., 705 S.W.2d 947, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1050 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

The five-year statute of limitations set out in this section applies to the tort of wrongful discharge. Bednarek v. United Food & Commercial Workers International Union, Local Union 227, 780 S.W.2d 630, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 90 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

20.—Paternity Actions.

The invalidation of KRS 406.031 leaves this Commonwealth without a statute of limitations in paternity actions; therefore, as a paternity action is a cause of action created by statute, in the absence of any other time limit fixed by statute, the five-year time limit set out in subdivision (2) of this section shall apply to actions brought pursuant to subsection (1) of KRS 406.021 . Alexander v. Commonwealth, 708 S.W.2d 102, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986) (decision prior to 1986 amendment of KRS 406.031 ).

21.—Equal Opportunities Act.

Subdivision (2) of this section states that an action upon a liability created by statute, when no other time is fixed by the statute creating the liability shall be commenced within five (5) years after the cause of action accrued and as KRS 207.230 , concerning citizen suits under the equal opportunities act, creates a liability, the five-year statute of limitations in this section is applicable thereto. Day v. Alcan Aluminum Corp., 675 F. Supp. 1508, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12276 (W.D. Ky. 1987 ).

21.5.—ERISA Actions.

Kentucky’s 15-year limitations period for contracts claims was applicable to retirees’ claims that were based solely on the interpretation of pension plan terms; however, Kentucky’s five-year limitations period for statutory claims applied to the retirees’ claims regarding whether lump-sum benefits were the actuarial equivalent of the basic-form benefit, as required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Clemons v. Norton Healthcare Inc., 890 F.3d 254, 2018 FED App. 0090P, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12226 (6th Cir. Ky. 2018 ).

KRS 413.120(2) applied to an ERISA action because the employees’ claims under 29 USCS § 1132 arose from ERISA statutory protections rather than from an independent promise or contract. As such, all but one of the employees’ claims were time barred because the employees failed to begin the process of appealing the determination of the benefits payment within five (5) years of the date on which the claims accrued. Fallin v. Commonwealth Indus., 521 F. Supp. 2d 592, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83956 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Federal district court properly dismissed as time-barred a widow’s action under 29 USCS § 1132(a)(1)(B), which sought to recover survivor benefits under her deceased husband’s retirement plan; the widow’s claim of an invalid waiver of survivor benefits arose from ERISA’s statutory protections rather than from an independent contract between the parties and, thus, the district court properly concluded that the most analogous Kentucky statute of limitations was KRS 413.120(2), which was the five-year statute of limitations for an action upon liability created by statute, rather than KRS 413.090(2), which was the 15-year statute of limitations for breach of a written contract. Redmon v. Sud-Chemie Inc. Ret. Plan for Union Emples., 547 F.3d 531, 2008 FED App. 0407P, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 23713 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

Under Kentucky law, the statutory liability provision under KRS 413.120(2) is the most analogous statute of limitations to a claim under 29 USCS § 1132 that alleges a violation of statutory protections under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 USCS § 1001 et seq. Redmon v. Sud-Chemie Inc. Ret. Plan for Union Emples., 547 F.3d 531, 2008 FED App. 0407P, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 23713 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

Retirees’ suits under 29 U.S.C.S. 1132(a)(1)(B) for additional pension benefits were untimely under KRS 413.120(2), the most analogous state statute of limitations, because the retirees did not file administrative claims until more than five years after they received lump-sum benefits payments. Another retiree’s suit was timely, as the limitations period was tolled while the retiree pursued administrative remedies. Fallin v. Commonwealth Indus., 695 F.3d 512, 2012 FED App. 0281P, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17852 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

22.—Employment Rights.

In cases involving employment rights or employment discrimination, the Sixth Circuit has applied the five-year statute of limitations contained in subsection (2) of this section for actions “upon a liability created by statute” in actions under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. Alcorn v. Gordon, 762 S.W.2d 809, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 115 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

22.5.—Public Employee Rights.

When the deputy sheriff merit board ordered that a deputy sheriff be reinstated with back pay, and the sheriff refused to comply with the order, the deputy’s suit to enforce the board’s order was subject to a five-year limitations period, under KRS 413.120(2), because no specific statute of limitations was provided in the statutes creating the board. Cherry v. Augustus, 245 S.W.3d 766, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 205 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Where firefighters challenged a city’s calculations of their overtime pay, the five-year limitations period of KRS 413.120 was not equitably tolled by operation of KRS 413.190(2), as there was no evidence the city concealed its overtime pay calculations or obstructed the prosecution of firefighters’ claims regarding overtime pay. Commonwealth v. Hasken, 265 S.W.3d 215, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 244 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

23.—Trusts.

In an action challenging the transfer of trust assets, a Kentucky district court had to apply Kentucky limitation period to the trust beneficiaries’ claims, even though the cause of action arose in Illinois, since Illinois’ limitation period was not shorter than Kentucky's. Boyd v. LaMaster, 927 F.2d 237, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 3592 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ).

Where a beneficiary asserted claims for failure to perform statutorily prescribed fiduciary duties, breach of fiduciary duties, and gross negligence and the trustees moved to dismiss for failure to state claim, those claims were untimely under Kentucky's five-year statute of limitations. Watkins v. Trust Under Will of Bullitt, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132523 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 22, 2014).

24.—Third Party Indemnity Claim.

Five-year period in this section governed a third party indemnity claim against a construction project’s engineers for substandard engineering services. Affholder, Inc. v. Preston Carroll Co., 27 F.3d 232, 1994 FED App. 0221P, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 15392 (6th Cir. Ky. 1994 ).

The statute of limitations set forth in subsection (7) applies to an action for common law indemnity. Degener v. Hall Contr. Corp., 27 S.W.3d 775, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 2000 ).

A third-party plaintiff’s indemnity claims against college employees and a student who spilled bacteria, which allegedly harmed another student, in a college microbiology laboratory class was timely filed; the five-year period of limitations set forth in KRS 413.120(7) applied to the indemnity claims. Sprague v. Gammon, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38355 (W.D. Ky. Aug. 17, 2005).

To the extent applicable to claims involving a leaking waste water tank, which accrued when the leak was discovered, KRS 413.245 would not bar an indemnity claim, which had a five-year limitations period under KRS 413.120 ; however, § 413.245 would apply to claims for breach of warranty, Kentucky Building Code violations, and negligent misrepresentation because those claims arose out of professional services. ISP Chems. LLC v. Dutchland, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7675 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 25, 2011).

24.5.—Medicaid Recoupment.

Five-year limitations period of KRS 413.120(2) applied to a Medicaid recoupment proceeding for the cost year 1996 against a long-term care facility operator because the liability was created by statute and no other limitation period applied; a 21-month recoupment limitation previously in 907 KAR. 1:110, § 2 was removed from 907 KAR 1:671, § 2, which applied to 1996, and was not replaced with a new limitation period. Commonwealth v. EPI Corp., 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 114 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2006), aff'd, 2008 Ky. Unpub. LEXIS 33 (Ky. Dec. 18, 2008).

25.Statute Inapplicable.

Where, under the circumstances, grantor could not have relied upon the statute of limitations during his lifetime if a dispute had arisen between him and grantee, the statute was not available to one claiming through him. McCarty v. McCarty's Adm'r, 258 Ky. 666 , 81 S.W.2d 8, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 225 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Plaintiff’s claim for inheritance against his putative father’s estate was not barred by five (5) year or ten (10) year statute of limitations after he reached the age of majority, because at those times his putative father was still living, he was an adult and could not bring action for support, and illegitimate children were absolutely prohibited from inheriting from putative fathers. Ellis v. Ellis, 752 S.W.2d 781, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1988 ).

Five-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.120(2) did not apply to insurer’s auto property damage subrogation action against the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident with an insured; the action was not an action based on a statute. Am. Premier Ins. Co. v. McBride, 159 S.W.3d 342, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 291 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

Property owners’ claim against a Cabinet was properly dismissed as time-barred because, (1) while the claim did not have to be filed with the Board of Claims within one year, as a filing in the wrong forum in due time suspended the one-year period of waiver of immunity, the claim had to be filed within one year of accrual, as the savings statute’s qualifier, “If an action is commenced in due time” meant filing within the statutory period of waiver of immunity, not the five-year statute of limitations for property damage claims, since the savings statute only conferred jurisdiction, rather than waiving immunity, and (2) the claim was not filed within one year. Commonwealth v. Harmon, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 83 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2019 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 768 (Ky. Ct. App. May 10, 2019).

26.—Defenses.

Where defendant entered a plea of discharge in bankruptcy and plaintiff replied that the note was procured by fraud and was unaffected under the bankruptcy act, the defendant could not plead the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section as a defense because the plea went to the effect of the discharge in bankruptcy and not to the cause of action. Louisville Banking Co. v. Buchanan, 117 Ky. 975 , 80 S.W. 193, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2167 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Since this section applies to actions and not to defenses, insurer could not defend an action on a life insurance policy on the ground of fraud in the procurement brought within five (5) years after the policy was issued where the policy contained a clause that the policy would be incontestable after one (1) year. Citizens' Life Ins. Co. v. McClure, 138 Ky. 138 , 127 S.W. 749, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 52 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The general rule is that statutes of limitation are not applicable to defenses, at least where the defense grew out of a transaction connected with the plaintiff’s claim. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

27.—Bonds.

An action on the official bond of a clerk or other public officer is covered by KRS 413.090 , and subsection (12) of this section and KRS 413.130 do not apply to such an action. Schwerman v. Commonwealth, 99 Ky. 296 , 38 S.W. 146 ( Ky. 1896 ).

An action against a sheriff for a wrongful act in attaching property of a third person, done by him under color and by virtue of his office, acting under a writ which by law he was permitted and authorized to execute, was an action for breach of his bond allowing 15 years within which to commence the action under KRS 413.090 and consequently this section, applicable ordinarily to torts, did not apply. Hill v. Ragland, 114 Ky. 209 , 70 S.W. 634, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1053 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1902 ).

KRS 413.230 , regarding sureties who are discharged after five (5) years, as limited by KRS 413.240 , providing for actions against surety and when the limitation does not run, and not subsection (12) of this section, applied to action brought against surety on administrator’s bond for sums allegedly distributed through fraud and collusion in final settlement of estate. Tucker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 270 Ky. 723 , 110 S.W.2d 649, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Road and bridge bonds issued by the county are not covered by this section. Tandy's Ex'rs v. Carlisle County, 296 Ky. 743 , 178 S.W.2d 591, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 631 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Action by holder of street improvement bonds, against city, to recover pro rate share of assessments collected by city but not properly applied in payment bonds, was an action on the bonds, governed by KRS 413.090 , and not an action on a liability created by statute within the meaning of this section. Corbin v. Becker, 297 Ky. 485 , 180 S.W.2d 419, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 764 ( Ky. 1944 ).

This section does not control limitation of action on bonds. McBride v. Dewey Portland Cement Co., 297 Ky. 662 , 181 S.W.2d 46, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 790 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The 15-year limitation under KRS 413.090 applied to action to recover damages on injunction bond executed in a prior action enjoining trespass upon or cutting or removal of timber from property in dispute between the parties and not the five (5) year limitation of this section. Campbell v. Chriswell's Adm'r, 298 Ky. 583 , 183 S.W.2d 639, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 959 ( Ky. 1944 ).

28.—Marriage Relation.

Criminal conversation, enticement and alienation of affections, which constitute torts that are interferences with the marriage relation, come under KRS 413.140 rather than this section. Skaggs v. Stanton, 532 S.W.2d 442, 1975 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1975 ).

29.—Personal Injuries.

The five-year statute of limitations applicable to action on liability created by statute or on contract does not apply to injuries resulting from eating or drinking contaminated food, as suits for physical injuries caused by the negligent acts of another or his agent must be commenced within the period of one (1) year from the date of the alleged injury and the fact that the parties stand in contractual relation to each other or that the tortfeasor violates a statute causing the injury does not operate to change the rule or extend the time for commencement of such actions. Finck v. Albers Super Markets, Inc., 136 F.2d 191, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2994 (6th Cir. Ky. 1943 ).

Where object of action by passenger against bus company was to recover damages for injuries to her person sustained in an accident in which the bus was involved, the action was governed by the one (1) year statute relating to actions for personal injuries, and plaintiff could not escape the one (1) year limitation by attempting to base suit on theory of breach of implied contract by bus company to furnish safe carriage. Vandevoir v. Southeastern Greyhound Lines, 152 F.2d 150, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2254 (7th Cir. Ind. 1945), cert. denied, 327 U.S. 789, 66 S. Ct. 811, 90 L. Ed. 1016, 1946 U.S. LEXIS 2681 (U.S. 1946).

A husband’s right of action to recover damages for the loss of services and consortium of his wife due to injuries sustained while a passenger on a railroad is barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations and the five (5) year statute is not applicable on the basis the injuries grew out of a violation of a contract of carriage. Cravens v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 188 Ky. 579 , 222 S.W. 930, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 326 ( Ky. 1920 ).

An action against the parent of a minor, under KRS 186.590 , for personal injuries arising from negligent operation of an automobile by the minor is an action for personal injuries governed by the one (1) year period of limitation fixed by subsection (1)(a) of KRS 413.140 , and not an action upon a liability created by statute for which a five (5) year period of limitation is fixed by subsection (2) of this section. The facts that a judgment has been obtained against the minor and that the judgment may be conclusive against the parent on the questions of negligence and damages make no difference. Robinson v. Hardaway, 293 Ky. 627 , 169 S.W.2d 823, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1943 ).

The application of this section to bar an action for damages for injuries and death allegedly caused by building contractor’s negligent construction of a fireplace was constitutionally impermissible in that its application destroyed the common-law right to bring an action for negligence that proximately caused personal injury or death and violated the spirit and language of §§ 14, 54, and 241 of the Constitution of Kentucky. Saylor v. Hall, 497 S.W.2d 218, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 304 ( Ky. 1973 ).

Passenger, suing for injuries incurred in boating accident she claimed was caused by intoxicated driver, could not have benefit of the five-year statute of limitations of subsection (13) of this section for her cause of action for the tort of outrageous conduct because the physical harm claimed was not incidental to the emotional distress and claim was dismissed. Lynch v. McFarland, 893 F. Supp. 707, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11091 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ), rev'd, 111 F.3d 131, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 12970 (6th Cir. Ky. 1997 ).

One or two-year limitation periods for personal injury actions, and not the five-year period for a cause of action created by statute, applied to a suit against a health care facility alleging personal injury and violation of a resident’s rights; accordingly, the suit, filed over three years after the resident died, was untimely. Kindred Nursing Ctrs. Ltd. P'ship v. Overstreet, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 124 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2013), aff'd, 479 S.W.3d 69, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 1754 ( Ky. 2015 ).

30.—Mortgages.

While it is true that the mortgage executed to secure the original debt, which, at the time, was but a mere account for borrowed money, being a mere incident to the demand, would not ordinarily have been enforceable after five (5) years from its date under the statute of limitations, as the subsequently executed due bill evidenced the debt secured by the mortgage or what remained due of it, it became written evidence of the debt, and, having been executed within five (5) years next after the execution of the mortgage, its legal effect was to extend the mortgagees’ right to enforce the lien thereby given as long as they had a right of action upon the due bill. Russell v. Centers, 153 Ky. 469 , 155 S.W. 1149, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 864 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Unless a mortgage contains words of promise, it is barred by the same limitation as the debt it secures so, where mortgage secured payment of a note which was not barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section, the five (5) year statute of limitations was inapplicable to the mortgage. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

31.—Judgments.

The statute of limitations did not begin to run in favor of vendee who had acquired all the stock of a railroad company and the conveyance was subject to “all the bonded indebtedness and other indebtedness” for a tort of the vendor railroad company until a judgment had been obtained against the vendor company. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Biddell, 112 Ky. 494 , 66 S.W. 34, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1702 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1902 ).

This section did not apply to an action by an administrator on a judgment assigned to his decedent where his decedent had indorsed and discounted a note, had paid a judgment against himself and the payee in an action brought after the maker failed to pay the note, had taken the assignment of the judgment and acquired all the rights of the judgment creditor. Lee's Adm'rs v. Thompson, 132 Ky. 608 , 116 S.W. 775, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1909 ).

Where father and son sold land jointly owned but purchaser asserted counterclaim against father only, son’s right of action against father accrued when judgment was rendered applying his money to father’s debt and not from execution of the deed and the action was not barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Smith v. Smith, 231 Ky. 229 , 21 S.W.2d 246, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1929 ).

An action by the husband against the administrator of the estate of his deceased ex-wife and the executor of the estate of his wife’s mother seeking restoration of certain property given by him to his ex-wife during their marriage was held to be an action to enforce a judgment, governed by a 15-year statute of limitations, rather than an action based upon a liability created by statute, which was governed by a 5-year statute of limitations. Siegel v. Nunnelley, 479 S.W.2d 9, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 284 ( Ky. 1972 ).

32.—Written Contracts.

An action to enforce collection and payment of past-due principal and interest on certain revenue bonds held by the plaintiffs and intervenor, being essentially an action against the city for breach of its written obligation to collect revenues from the sewer system and apply them to payment of the bonds, is controlled by the 15 year limitation as provided by subsection (2) of KRS 413.090 and not the five (5) year limitation of subsection (8) of this section as it is not an action seeking to enforce a financial obligation. Erlanger v. Berkemeyer, 207 F.2d 832, U.S. App. LEXIS 2983 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 346 U.S. 915, 74 S. Ct. 275, 98 L. Ed. 411, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 1370 (U.S. 1953).

Action based on construction of a written contract without any allegation of fraud or mistake was not subject to Kentucky five (5) year statute of limitations. Lafitte Co. v. United Fuel Gas Co., 177 F. Supp. 52, 1959 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2612 (D. Ky. 1959 ), aff'd, 284 F.2d 845, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 3047 (6th Cir. Ky. 1960 ).

Cause of action to recover dividends on corporate stock accrues at the time when the dividend is declared and not at the time demand for payment is made and the 15 year statute of limitations under KRS 413.090 applies and not the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section. Winchester & Lexington Turnpike Co. v. Wickliffe's Adm'r, 100 Ky. 531 , 38 S.W. 866, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 964 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 23 ( Ky. 1897 ).

The duty and liability for failure under a railroad company charter, when it became necessary to pass through land of another, “to provide for such person proper wagon ways across said railroad, from one part of the land to the other, and if said company shall fail to provide proper wagon ways across said road, as provided in this section, it shall be lawful for any person to sue said company, and be entitled to such damage as a jury may think him or her entitled to for such neglect” were continuing, accruing when the necessity became known although 30 years after construction of the railroad, but damages were limited to those within five (5) years before institution of action. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Pittman, 53 S.W. 1040, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1037 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 589 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

A contract pledging policies of insurance to secure a debt as well as the premiums pledgee might pay was not barred in the lifetime of the pledgor, as to so hold would destroy the very right parties contracted for; thus, court of equity refused to apply the rule that where a debt is barred the lien is barred. Pollock's Adm'r v. Smith, 107 Ky. 509 , 54 S.W. 740, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1227 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 122 ( Ky. 1900 ).

This section does not apply to an action upon a writing, for such action is expressly excepted from its operation; thus, although the five (5) year statute of limitations applies to actions created by statute against abutting property owners for the cost of street improvements, it does not apply to an action upon a written contract between a city and a contractor wherein city agrees to pay the cost of street improvement not collectible against abutting owners which is governed by the 15-year statute of limitations. Louisville v. McNaughton, 114 Ky. 333 , 70 S.W. 841, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1153 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 161 ( Ky. 1902 ).

In an action for the amount due on orders for warrants entered of record by the board of trustees of a sixth-class city, the orders constituted contracts and the 15 year statute of limitations applied rather than this section. Hardin v. Highland Park, 144 Ky. 489 , 139 S.W. 765, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 656 ( Ky. 1911 ).

A contract binding one to rear and maintain another’s child was a continuing one contemplating the period of the child’s minority and became due and payable at the expiration of that period or when his education was completed to which the statute of limitations could not be invoked. Myers v. Saltry, 163 Ky. 481 , 173 S.W. 1138, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 249 ( Ky. 1915 ).

An action to recover oil and gas rentals due under a lease is an action on a written contract and the applicable limitation is the 15 year statute under KRS 413.090 and not the five (5) year statute under this section. Southeastern Gas Co. v. Estepp, 269 Ky. 147 , 106 S.W.2d 142, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 778 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Action by contractor against city to recover street assessments owed by the city is an action on contract, governed by KRS 413.090 , not an action on a liability created by statute. Ashland v. Brown's Adm'x, 290 Ky. 740 , 162 S.W.2d 552, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 485 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Action was on a written contract under KRS 413.090 and was not barred by the five (5) year limitation of this section where evidence showed that both the note and mortgage were signed by mortgagor by her mark and that her signature was witnessed by the county clerk who then took both her and her husband’s acknowledgment. Hackworth v. Trimble, 293 Ky. 647 , 169 S.W.2d 843, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 682 ( Ky. 1943 ).

County warrants issued for money due various persons for governmental purposes and which had been transferred and assigned by their original owners were not negotiable instruments placed on the footing of bills of exchange and thus subject to the five (5) year statute of limitations, but, rather, were, in effect, written orders for the allowance of money and therefore a contract in writing subject to the 15 year statute of limitations. Herd v. Lyttle, 310 Ky. 788 , 222 S.W.2d 834, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1026 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where the subject of a suit was a written contract for the assignment of a 15 percent interest in oil leases, the 15 year statute of limitations applied even to additional claims asserted by amended complaint. Koplin v. Kelrick, 443 S.W.2d 644, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1969 ).

33.—Notes.

The statute of limitations had no application to an action seeking the surrender of a note executed without consideration in renewal of other notes which had been paid by collection of a fee by payee to which maker was entitled. Avritt v. Russell, 58 S.W. 811, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 752 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 247 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

The five-year statute had no application to a promissory note which had not been placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange and an action to enforce the note was not barred by limitation. Magoffin v. Boyle Nat'l Bank, 69 S.W. 702, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 585 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 491 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902).

An action by a receiver on a capital stock note to enforce liability for calls made is founded upon the note which is a promise in writing to pay the assessments properly made by the corporation and it necessarily follows that the 15-year statute of limitations and not the five-year statute is applicable. Equitable Mut. Fire Ins. Corp.'s Receiver v. Murray, 131 Ky. 740 , 115 S.W. 816, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1909 ).

The liability of the assignor of a promissory note implied by law from the contract of assignment was barred by the lapse of five (5) years after the maker of the note was prosecuted to insolvency. Arnett v. Howard, 156 Ky. 458 , 161 S.W. 531, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where promissory note was never placed on footing of bill of exchange, 15-year statute of limitations applied. Richardson's Adm'r v. Morgan, 233 Ky. 540 , 26 S.W.2d 32, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Where an action on a note placed on the footing of a bill of exchange was barred by the five-year statute of limitations and a new promise in writing to pay the debt was executed, the 15-year statute of limitations for a contract in writing rather than the five-year statute of limitations for a bill of exchange applied to the new promise. Thornton's Adm'r v. Minton's Ex'r, 250 Ky. 805 , 64 S.W.2d 158, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where it was shown by uncontradicted evidence that there was no delivery until after the maturity of notes, presumption arising by statute or otherwise that the notes were negotiated before overdue was overcome and notes were not subject to the five-year limitation of this section as being upon the same footing as bills of exchange. Tandy v. Wolfe, 270 Ky. 556 , 110 S.W.2d 277, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 117 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Plaintiff, who was bona fide purchaser of note and mortgage executed by executor, without authority to bind estate, and testator’s widow to bank to replace notes testator had executed to bank, but who elected to stand on original notes of testator, was not barred by five (5) year statute of limitations as an action on note “placed on the footing of a bill of exchange.” Welch v. Mann, 273 Ky. 341 , 116 S.W.2d 663, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 641 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where note constituting part of assets of bank was transferred to new corporation in reorganization and consolidation plan, note was not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange, and 15-year statute applied. National Bank of Lima v. Deaton, 279 Ky. 606 , 131 S.W.2d 495, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 318 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The five-year limitations of this section did not apply to note evidencing balance of a straight borrowing from bank, since obligation sued on never became clothed with the habiliments of a bill of exchange. Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Guthrie, 284 Ky. 583 , 145 S.W.2d 518, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 542 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Indorsement of note by payee in connection with use of note as collateral for loan, and reindorsement by lender on payment of collateral note, did not constitute such a negotiation as would bring the note within the rule that an assignment before maturity places a note of the footing of a bill of exchange and makes it subject to the five-year statute of limitations. Combs v. Salyer, 291 Ky. 592 , 165 S.W.2d 40, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where a demand note payable to the order of a bank was given by the bank into the possession of another bank under a liquidation agreement, which agreement provided that the first bank would make any necessary indorsements, but the note was never indorsed and later was returned to the first bank, the note was never negotiated so as to be placed upon a bill of exchange within the meaning of this section, and therefore was not subject to the five-year statute of limitations. Bank of Commerce v. Abell, 298 Ky. 736 , 184 S.W.2d 86, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 995 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The only way a note may be placed on the footing of a bill of exchange is by its negotiation in good faith for value before maturity and, as this note was never placed on the footing of a bill of exchange by being negotiated, KRS 413.090 applies and not this section. Williamson v. Payne, 300 Ky. 161 , 188 S.W.2d 96, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 507 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Notes of third party pledged under an agreement that no effort would be made to collect them unless pledgor defaulted in the payment of his notes were not delivered to the pledgee bank so as to make the bank a holder in due course or “negotiated” to the bank and, therefore, were not placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange to which the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section would have applied rather than the 15 year statute of limitations under KRS 413.090 . Bellevue Commercial & Sav. Bank v. Highfill, 305 Ky. 315 , 202 S.W.2d 732, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 747 ( Ky. 1947 ).

34.—Malpractice.

An action against a physician to recover damages for alleged malpractice in amputating an arm without proper care or skill was an action for the breach of a duty assumed by the physician accruing when there was a breach of duty and for which assumpsit lay at common law and therefore covered by this section and not the one (1) year statute of limitations for “action for an injury to the person” under KRS 413.140 . Menefee v. Alexander, 107 Ky. 279 , 53 S.W. 653, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 980 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 164 ( Ky. 1899 ), limited, Howard v. Middlesborough Hospital, 242 Ky. 602 , 47 S.W.2d 77, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1932 ). See Jones v. Furnell, 406 S.W.2d 154, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1966 ).

A malpractice action against a surgeon is barred by the one (1) year provision of subsections (1) and (3) of KRS 413.140 and not by the five (5) year provisions of subsection (1) of this section notwithstanding the fact that the complaint alleged a special contract. Jones v. Furnell, 406 S.W.2d 154, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1966 ), overruled in part, Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ). See Menefee v. Alexander, 107 Ky. 279 , 53 S.W. 653, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 980 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 164 ( Ky. 1899 ), limited, Howard v. Middlesborough Hospital, 242 Ky. 602 , 47 S.W.2d 77, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1932 ).

That a property owner might be due damages by the contractor for a subdivision project which was delayed by an engineering firm did not mean that the owner and contractor’s consolidated malpractice suit against the engineering firm was an indemnity action, because neither the owner nor contractor admitted liability or were found liable to the other. Therefore, the statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 was inapplicable. Matherly Land Surveying, Inc. v. Gardiner Park Dev., LLC, 230 S.W.3d 586, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 2007 ).

KRS 413.120 was inapplicable unless the actions of the attorney and law firms were intentional given that fraud must be intentional, and KRS 413.120 (12) specifically refers to fraud and mistake, not misrepresentation as averred by the client in their complaint, that the attorney and law firms committed misrepresentations relating to communications with the clients; the clients could not change their legal negligence case to a fraud case to obtain a better statute of limitations. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Clients argued that KRS 413.120 governed their misrepresentation claim, but the court noted that authority existed that KRS 413.245 applied to any claim against an attorney arising from his status, regardless of the form in which the claim was pleaded. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Because KRS 413.245 relates exclusively to civil actions brought against providers of professional services, such as attorneys, for injury arising out of that service, it is more specific than the general, five-year limitation; claims brought by clients against attorneys for acts or omissions arising out of the rendition of professional services are governed exclusively by the one-year limitation periods, and KRS 413.120 is not applicable. Abel v. Austin, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

35.—Disbarment of Attorney.

Subsection (12) of this section was not applicable to bar proceeding for disbarment of an attorney on ground that license to practice law in Kentucky was obtained by fraud. In re Taylor, 309 Ky. 388 , 217 S.W.2d 954, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 714 ( Ky. 1949 ).

36.—Disciplinary Proceedings.

The provisions of this statute are not applicable to disciplinary procedures conducted against an attorney since all procedure and practices concerning discipline are inherently a judicial function and legislative enactments have only an advisory, and not a binding effect. Kentucky Bar Asso. v. Vincent, 538 S.W.2d 39, 1976 Ky. LEXIS 61 ( Ky. 1976 ).

The statute of limitations does not bar the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against an attorney, and the failure to apply such statute does not deny him equal protection or due process. Kentucky Bar Asso. v. Signer, 558 S.W.2d 582, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 535 ( Ky. 1977 ).

36.5.—Professional License Regulation.

Five-year limitations period in KRS 413.120(3) did not apply to the insurance department’s decision denying the insurance agent’s application for a license. The insurance department did not act arbitrarily in concluding that protecting the public allowed it to deny the application pursuant to KRS 304.9-440 (f) given the insurance agent’s federal felony offense convictions. Vance v. Ky. Office of Ins., 240 S.W.3d 675, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 458 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

37.—Trusts.

Limitation does not run during existence of an express trust. Missionary Board of Brethren Church v. Trustees of Brethren Church, 247 Ky. 398 , 57 S.W.2d 25, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 874 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Subsection (5) of this section is not the appropriate statute of limitations to be applied where suing beneficiaries seek damages for breach of a fiduciary duty while the trust is continuing and subsisting. First Ky. Trust Co. v. Christian, 849 S.W.2d 534, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 58 ( Ky. 1993 ).

38.—Recovery of Personal Property.

Oil and gas lessee was not entitled to five (5) year period in which to bring action to recover possession of fixtures and machinery, since he must remove fixtures and machinery from lands within a reasonable time after expiration of lease or they will be forfeited to lessor. Wilson v. Wilson, 280 Ky. 461 , 133 S.W.2d 722, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 152 ( Ky. 1939 ).

39.—Grantee in Possession.

Petition to reform deeds to conform to division line and alleging plaintiff’s possession to the line which they claimed was sufficient to remove the case from the application of the five (5) year statute of limitations which does not apply where a grantee under a deed, which by mutual mistake does not describe the property granted, has been in possession of the land. Hamblin v. Johnson, 254 S.W.2d 76, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1128 ( Ky. 1952 ).

40.—Enjoyment of Land.

An action to enjoin defendant from cutting trees and to quiet title to property was merely one for plaintiff’s protection in the enjoyment of his property where he was in possession of it and the five (5) year limitations for fraud under this section did not apply to the action, although defendant cut the timber under a conveyance obtained from plaintiff through fraud. Burt & Brabb Lumber Co. v. Bailey, 60 S.W. 485, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1264 (1901).

41.—Operation of Railroad.

Limitation of five (5) years did not protect railroad from liability for injuries to real estate where their road was not constructed under proper municipal authority. Klosterman v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 56 S.W. 820, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 192 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 461 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

The five-year statute of limitations did not apply in a suit for damages resulting to a portion of a lot of land not taken or occupied, from the unauthorized occupation for railroad purposes of another part of said lot, the right or recovery being based upon the wrongful operation of the road through the lot. The owners of the lot were entitled to recover incidental damages for the injury to the value of that part of the lot not taken, precisely as they would have been entitled in a condemnation suit to damages for the injury to the remaining land, in addition to the value of the land taken. Trustees Common School Dist. v. Nashville, C. & S. L. R. Co., 56 S.W. 990, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 243 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 595 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

42.—Construction of Deed.

Where latent ambiguity in deed required its construction, the action for such construction did not constitute an action for reformation of an instrument so as to be barred by KRS 413.120 and 413.130 . Berryman v. Elmore, 402 S.W.2d 102, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1966 ).

43.—Quiet Title.

Action to quiet title to oil, gas and mineral rights in a certain tract of land was not an action for relief from fraud and was not barred by the statute of limitations. Hudson v. Harvey, 282 S.W.2d 844, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1955 ).

44.—Unions.

An action against a union local alleging a breach of the duty imposed by the local’s constitution to secure employment for its members is not based on a duty created by statute and the limitation contained in subsection (2) of this section is not applicable. Gray v. International Asso. of Heat & Frost Insulators & Asbestos Workers, 416 F.2d 313, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10621 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

45.—Blue Sky Law.

The two-year limitation period fixed by the Blue Sky Law (KRS 292.480 ) applied to sale of worthless bonds by a bank rather than subsection (12) of this section relative to recovery on the ground of fraud. First State Bank v. Slusher, 267 Ky. 190 , 101 S.W.2d 661, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1937 ). (Decision prior to 1972 amendment of KRS 292.480 ).

Federal court applied the Blue Sky Law limitation period of KRS 292.480 to bar federal securities fraud claims rather than the general fraud statute of this section. Herm v. Stafford, 455 F. Supp. 650, 1978 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20246 (W.D. Ky. 1978 ), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 663 F.2d 669, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 16372 (6th Cir. Ky. 1981 ); Herm v. Stafford, 455 F. Supp. 657, 1978 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15888 (W.D. Ky. 1978 ), aff'd, 663 F.2d 669, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 16372 (6th Cir. Ky. 1981 ).

46.—Federal Securities Law.

In action for misrepresentations and omissions in tender offer in violation of 15 USCS § 78j(b) and SEC Rule 10b-5 since the language of this section is nearly identical to SEC Rule 10b-5, both have the same purpose and neither requires the plaintiff to prove all that is required under common law of misrepresentation, the proper statute of limitations is the three-year statute of subsection (3) of KRS 292.480 . Carothers v. Rice, 633 F.2d 7, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14108 (6th Cir. Ky. 1980 ), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 998, 101 S. Ct. 1702, 68 L. Ed. 2d 199, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 1351 (U.S. 1981).

Where plaintiffs brought action as defrauded sellers of securities under SEC Rule 10b-5 and 15 USCS 78j(b), the three-year statute of limitations of KRS 292.480 applied rather than the five-year statute of limitations for fraud (subsection (12) of this section) since an implied remedy for defrauded sellers is available under KRS 292.320 which is governed by the statute of limitations in subsection (3) of KRS 292.480 . Carothers v. Rice, 633 F.2d 7, 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14108 (6th Cir. Ky. 1980 ), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 998, 101 S. Ct. 1702, 68 L. Ed. 2d 199, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 1351 (U.S. 1981).

A claim brought under the Investment Company Act, 15 USCS § 80a-1 is subject to the three-year statute of limitations contained in KRS 292.480 rather than the five-year limit in this section. Herm v. Stafford, 663 F.2d 669, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 16372 (6th Cir. Ky. 1981 ).

A claim brought under 15 USCS § 78t(a) alleging the joint and several liability of controlling persons in a violation of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 is subject to the three-year statute of limitations under KRS 292.480 rather than the five-year limit contained in this section. Herm v. Stafford, 663 F.2d 669, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 16372 (6th Cir. Ky. 1981 ).

The three-year statute of limitations under KRS 292.480 rather than the five-year limitation of this section applies to violations of 15 USCS § 77q. Herm v. Stafford, 663 F.2d 669, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 16372 (6th Cir. Ky. 1981 ).

47.—Subrogation Under Workers’ Compensation.

The one-year limitation under KRS 413.140 and not the five-year limitation under this section applies to the right of employer or insurer to subrogation of employee’s rights against third parties under KRS 342.055 (now repealed), a part of the workers’ compensation act. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Brown Wood Preserving Co., 298 Ky. 194 , 182 S.W.2d 30, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 844 ( Ky. 194 4 ).

48.—Wrongful Death.

The one-year limitation prescribed in KRS 413.140 , and not that in this section, applied to an action by a widow to recover damages for the wanton shooting of her husband. Irwin v. Smith, 150 Ky. 147 , 150 S.W. 22, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 850 ( Ky. 1912 ).

49.—Collection of Tax.

Equitable action by sheriff to enforce collection of tax after “return no property found” was properly brought under the ten-year limitation of KRS 135.040 and was not barred by the five-year limitation of this section. Klein v. Commonwealth, 271 Ky. 756 , 113 S.W.2d 20, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1938 ).

50.—Conspiring To Bring False Charges.

A complaint under 42 USCS §§ 1983 and 1985 alleging that plaintiffs’ neighbors and local officials had conspired to bring false charges against plaintiffs was most closely analogous to a state action for malicious prosecution, and therefore KRS 413.140 rather than this section provided the applicable statute of limitations. Carmicle v. Weddle, 555 F.2d 554, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13295 (6th Cir. Ky. 1977 ).

51.—Action for Slander.

Although an action for deprivation of due process in connection with failure to renew a nontenured teacher’s contract could not be brought in the absence of the employment relation and a legitimate expectancy of reemployment, the primary interest which the due process right served to protect was the interest in plaintiff’s reputation, and not a contractual interest; thus the civil rights action was analogous to a state cause of action for slander and was therefore subject to the one-year statute of limitations. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

52.—Nondischargeability Complaint.

Nondischargeability complaint was not barred by five-year statute of limitations, since within such five-year statutory period the debtor entered into a consent judgment with plaintiff which settled the lawsuit plaintiff had filed against the debtor for the alleged conversion of plaintiff’s property, and the nondischargeability complaint could not be barred by the statute of limitations since the suit for the underlying debt was not itself time barred. In re Soules, 49 B.R. 577, 1985 Bankr. LEXIS 6016 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1985 ).

53.—Civil Rights.

Where a civil rights action is brought pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983, said action is governed by the one-year limitation of subdivision (1)(a) of KRS 413.140 , and not by the five-year limitation period of subdivision (6) of this section, as subdivision (6) of this section is not a statute for personal injury actions. Hambrick v. Davies, 711 F. Supp. 884, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10856 (E.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 886 F.2d 1315, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14982 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

54.— —1983 Actions.

Civil rights actions brought in Kentucky pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983 are limited by the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1)(a). Collard v. Kentucky Bd. of Nursing, 896 F.2d 179, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 553 (6th Cir. Ky. 1990 ).

In a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which defendants argued that the claims were time-barred, plaintiffs unsuccessfully argued that five-year statute of limitations in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.120 applied, rather than the one-year statute of limitations in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.140 . Fleet v. Commonwealth Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40165 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 25, 2016).

55.Contracts Not in Writing.

Action for damages for railroad’s mutilation of corpse through negligent dropping of casket was “action on contract.” Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Hall, 219 Ky. 528 , 293 S.W. 1091, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 395 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Where life tenant paid taxes and insurance premiums directed to be paid by the remaindermen under a testamentary provision, the life tenant could have maintained an action against the remaindermen for such sums as paid each year, and claims accruing more than five (5) years before the filing of action were barred by this section. Thornton v. Black, 295 Ky. 72 , 173 S.W.2d 819, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1943 ).

If the contract be partly oral and partly in writing or if a written agreement is so indefinite as to necessitate a resort to parol testimony to make it complete, this section concerning contracts not in writing would be applicable just as though the contract had rested entirely in parol. Mills v. McGaffee, 254 S.W.2d 716, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 608 ( Ky. 1953 ).

Agent’s suit, alleging he was owed a percentage of a yearly gifted stud fee for the stud career of a horse defendant jockey had raced, was dismissed as time barred because the oral agency contract between the jockey and the agent was terminated in November of 1999, and the agent did not file suit against the jockey until May of 2005, approximately six (6) months after the statute of limitations ran on any claim under the agency contract. Adika v. Smith, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27205 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 7, 2005), aff'd, 466 F.3d 503, 2006 FED App. 0391P, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26279 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

56.—Rents and Royalties.

In action for rents on a tract of land sold in parol, kept for seven (7) years and surrendered back, the five (5) year statute of limitations applied to all claims for rents for any years prior to five (5) before suit was instituted. Carter v. Sanderson, 41 S.W. 306, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 620 (1897).

Under this section an action by the heirs of a donor of a life estate with a failed disposition over to recover the rents and profits from the life tenant’s administrator with the will annexed was barred after five (5) years from the date of death of the life tenant, since the administrator with the will annexed held them upon an implied contract to pay them to persons entitled thereto. Kelly's Ex'r v. Pettus, 145 Ky. 250 , 140 S.W. 189, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 826 ( Ky. 1911 ).

An action for rent which was due more than five (5) years prior to institution of the action was barred by the statute of limitations. Burks v. Douglass, 156 Ky. 462 , 161 S.W. 225, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 450 ( Ky. 1913 ).

In an action to quiet title to oil royalty interest, the purchaser at mortgage foreclosure sale was barred by this section from recovering royalty for more than five (5) years prior to the bringing of action from defendants who had collected the royalty as alleged purchaser from mortgagor. Williams' Adm'r v. Union Bank & Trust Co., 283 Ky. 644 , 143 S.W.2d 297, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 408 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In appeal from action to recover the difference between the per ton royalty received under a coal mining lease and the minimum royalty specified therein, where the trial court adjudged the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section applied to and barred the action since none of the leases or assignments were signed or executed by defendant, Court of Appeals reversed on ground lessors were estopped by accepting royalties on a per ton basis and by their acquiescence encouraging lessee in belief they had waived the minimum annual royalty payment. P. V. & K. Coal Co. v. Kelly, 301 Ky. 180 , 191 S.W.2d 231, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 718 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where lessee mining company was forced into receivership in 1930, its assets were sold at receiver’s sale to son of one of the joint lessors who transferred them to his father, who organized a new mining company and used the assets to mine the land under a parol lease with the joint owners until the second company was forced into receivership in 1939, at which time the father used part of the equipment in other mines and left part of it at the abandoned mine of the second company, an action brought in 1951 by one of the joint lessors to recover one-fourth (1/4) interest in the mining equipment under lien reserved to secure payment of royalties was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Johnson v. Chavies Coal Co., 299 S.W.2d 629, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1957 ).

57.—Recovery of Purchase Money.

Purchaser’s right of action to recover purchase money paid under parol contract did not accrue until there was a refusal upon the part of the representatives of decedent to carry out the contract and where, from the time of that refusal until plaintiff filed his petition five (5) years had not elapsed, the statute of limitations did not bar his recovery. Lyttle v. Davidson, 67 S.W. 34, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2262 (1902).

Right of action by purchaser to recover purchase money accrued on seller’s repudiation of verbal contract to execute a written contract for sale of the land and purchaser’s right to recover the money paid was barred after five (5) years. Elliott v. Walker, 145 Ky. 71 , 140 S.W. 51, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Where amount and terms of payment of purchase price of real estate were fixed by verbal contract, action to enforce implied vendor’s lien resulting by reason of such contract must be brought within same limitation period as action to recover purchase price would have to be brought, which would be five (5) years from the date the purchase price was due. Sparkman v. Triplett, 292 Ky. 569 , 167 S.W.2d 323, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1942 ).

58.—Repayment of Money Illegally Received.

An action by a county to recover from a county judge and his sureties excess salary paid him contrary to law and various sums placed in his hands in his official capacity which he failed to account for was simply a case arising on an implied contract on the part of the judge to pay back to the county that which he had no right to receive and was therefore governed by this section. Clark v. Logan County, 138 Ky. 676 , 128 S.W. 1079, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 119 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The burden of proof was on defendant, in an action by a county against a county judge to recover salary illegally paid him, to show the action was barred by this section as the salary was paid more than five (5) years prior to the institution of the action. Clark v. Logan County, 138 Ky. 676 , 128 S.W. 1079, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 119 ( Ky. 1910 ).

An action by a county to recover money collected by a county attorney in excess of the constitutional limit and retained by him is based on an implied contract to return the money to which subsection (1) of this section applies. Jefferson County v. Chilton, 253 Ky. 221 , 69 S.W.2d 338, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 636 ( Ky. 1934 ).

The official bond of an officer does not cover the obligation to return money illegally received by the officer. Suit by county against circuit court clerk to recover sums illegally paid him for acting as librarian was a suit on an implied promise to repay rather than on his official bond, and the five (5) year statute of limitations applied. Wolfe County v. Smith, 283 Ky. 483 , 141 S.W.2d 874, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In action to recover from former county attorney the sum of $900 paid him in excess of maximum salary of $5,000, the amount paid county attorneys at that time, any cause of action arising in connection with payment to county attorney accrued when he made his settlement with the county and failed to include $900 item in computing $5,000 he was entitled to retain as salary. Wehrman v. Wegener, 264 S.W.2d 855, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 694 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Claim of county against county clerk who had never been required to make annual settlement for money allegedly received by him in excess of his salary was based on an implied contract and, as five (5) year statute of limitations began to run from the date clerk’s settlement with county was due, January 1, 1946, where county brought suit on August 2, 1951, for surplus allegedly owing for 1945, claim was barred. Greenup County v. Millis, 303 S.W.2d 898, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 272 ( Ky. 1957 ).

59.—Telegrams.

An action in which the recovery was based upon the ground that a telegraph company negligently failed to transmit and deliver a telegram was an action on a contract to transmit and deliver message within a reasonable time controlled by the five (5) year limitation of this section. Western Union Tel. Co. v. Witt, 110 S.W. 889, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 685 (1908).

60.—Mortgages.

The debt secured being barred by limitations, the lien or action to foreclose mortgage is barred. Jones v. Scott, 12 Ky. Op. 583, 5 Ky. L. Rptr. 858 , 1884 Ky. LEXIS 252 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 17, 1884). See 3 S.W. 12, 8 Ky. L. Rptr. 690 ; 47 S.W. 448, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 701 ; McCormick v. Perry, 93 S.W. 607, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 420 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 365 (Ky. Ct. App. 1906); Allen v. Shepherd, 162 Ky. 756 , 173 S.W. 135, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1915 ); Paintsville Nat'l Bank v. Robinson, 220 Ky. 418 , 295 S.W. 412, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 543 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Where person who was not mortgagor paid a mortgage and failed to take an assignment of either the mortgage or the note, she did not acquire a lien on the land and any claim that she may have had was necessarily barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Letton's Adm'r v. Rafferty, 154 Ky. 278 , 157 S.W. 35, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where the mortgage sued on contained no independent agreement to pay the money secured, it was barred after five (5) years. Allen v. Shepherd, 162 Ky. 756 , 173 S.W. 135, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1915 ).

61.—Agreement Not to Compete.

Plaintiff had a right to sue at any time within five (5) years from the time defendant first breached an alleged oral contract that defendant would cease selling buggies in a named county and not again engage in the business. Each sale of a buggy did not constitute a distinct cause of action for which suit might be brought. Davis v. Brown, 98 Ky. 475 , 32 S.W. 614, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 1428 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1895 ).

62.—For Attorneys’ Fees.

Claim for valuable services of attorney, rendered more than 12 years before the claim for them was asserted and the plea of limitations interposed, was barred. Vanover v. Cline, 239 Ky. 335 , 39 S.W.2d 477, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 769 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A general employment as counselor and attorney with each item taken up and concluded but no fee fixed and the whole service measured by the attorney at an annual sum is barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Statutes of limitation apply to actions to recover attorney’s fees. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where attorney is employed to conduct a suit until final determination, the statute does not begin to run against cause of action for his fees until the expiration of period required to reach that end. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where attorney is retained generally to represent party in all litigations, his cause of action for attorney’s fees accrues when a service is rendered. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where attorney is to be paid salary by the month or the year, the statute of limitations begins to run after each month’s or year’s salary falls due and is payable. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where attorney had served estate for some 20 years, up until he filed suit in 1941 to collect fees, payments had been made to him on the account as late as 1935, and he had handled bankruptcy proceedings involving estate in 1937, he was allowed to recover for all services rendered during the 20 year period as against the contention that the five (5) year statute of limitations barred recovery for many of them. Varney's Ex'r v. Staton, 310 Ky. 322 , 220 S.W.2d 855, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 924 ( Ky. 1949 ).

63.—Repayment of Loan.

The contract, as alleged by plaintiff, showed it was a loan of money by her to the decedent under a parol contract to repay it at the expiration of two (2) years which was within the statute of frauds, yet plaintiff’s claim against decedent’s estate was not invalid if there were no other impediments to recovery and the five (5) year statute of limitations did not begin to run until the expiration of the two (2) years. Weber v. Weber, 76 S.W. 507, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 908 (1903).

Action to recover money loaned to another seven (7) years earlier was barred by the five-year statute of limitations relating to contracts not in writing. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

64.—Repair of Premises.

An action to recover amount paid to employee injured on business premises from lessor on ground lessor made a promise and agreement to repair and make safe the business premises was not based on the injury but on the verbal contract and the five (5) year statute of limitations based on oral contracts was applicable to the action and not the one (1) year statute of limitations based on personal injuries. Altsheler v. Conrad, 118 Ky. 647 , 82 S.W. 257, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 538 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1904 ).

65.—Repurchase of Land.

A parol agreement and understanding that purchaser of land at sale in bankruptcy would permit the bankrupt to have the right to redeem it by refunding to the purchaser the amount paid for it could not be enforced more than five (5) years after the accrual of the cause of action. Buckler's Adm'x v. Rogers, 53 S.W. 529, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 552 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

66.—Tenants.

The implied warranty in a partition of land by joint devisees is not broken until there is an eviction by a superior title. Jones v. Bigstaff, 95 Ky. 395 , 25 S.W. 889, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 821 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1894 ).

Action by tenant in common against his cotenant to recover his part of the proceeds of lumber sold from land, brought more than five (5) years after the lumber was sold and paid for, was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Ramey v. Ramey, 170 Ky. 390 , 186 S.W. 160, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 83 ( Ky. 1916 ).

67.—Sureties.

Action by a surety to recover from his principal amounts paid on a note and due bills was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Usher v. Tyler, 85 S.W. 166, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 354 (1905).

Since surety’s cause of action against cosurety for contribution is on promise implied by law, or equitable principle demanding distribution of a common burden equally, among those who are able to bear it, the five (5) year statute of limitations applies. Vansant's Ex'x v. Gardner's Ex'x, 240 Ky. 318 , 42 S.W.2d 300, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Cause of action of surety who pays principal’s obligation without taking assignment is based on an implied obligation to pay and is barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Porter v. Bedell, 273 Ky. 296 , 116 S.W.2d 641, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 632 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where a surety on a contractor’s bond, executed pursuant to a written contract between the contractor and a city whereby the contractor agreed to indemnify the city against loss or liability arising out of work to be performed, paid the claim of a materialman who had obtained a judgment against the city, but the surety failed to secure an assignment of the obligation, and the surety waited seven (7) years before bringing action against the contractor, the surety could not assert its subrogation rights under the written contract between the contractor and the city to avoid the contractor’s plea that the claim was barred by this section, since the surety’s insistence on subrogation was not to furnish him a better or different remedy or to protect an equity but his action was on an implied contract of indemnity. Payne v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co., 259 S.W.2d 491, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1157 ( Ky. 1952 ).

68.—Payment to Minor on Majority.

Where a mother surrendered her child to a third person pursuant to his parol agreement to pay him a certain sum at his majority, an action by him on the contract within five (5) years after attaining majority is not barred by limitations. Jones v. Comer, 76 S.W. 392, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 773 (1903).

69.—Procurement of Purchasers.

Although no time was fixed for procuring orders, buyer had a cause of action as soon as seller’s agent breached his promise to procure purchasers for the goods bought by buyer, thus violating his contract, and buyer’s right to maintain the action continued for five (5) years from the first breach and not longer. Rucker v. New York Canners, Inc., 251 Ky. 240 , 64 S.W.2d 577, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 838 ( Ky. 1933 ).

70.—Promise to Pay for Real Estate.

Where an action was brought against the department of highways for damages to landowner’s property caused by the construction of a fill across the land without providing sufficient outlets for drainage, such cause of action was based on an implied promise to pay for property taken by the Commonwealth on the theory that the injured party could waive the tort and sue on such promise, and, therefore, any such cause of action accrued when the fill was built without sufficient outlets and was subject to the five (5) year statute of limitations. Curlin v. Ashby, 264 S.W.2d 671, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 688 ( Ky. 1954 ).

71.—Make Good Default in Payment.

Where vendor of real estate accepted building and loan certificates from purchaser with understanding that purchaser would make good any default in payment of certificates, vendor’s cause of action to recover difference between agreed purchase price and amount received on certificates, which were not paid in full because of insolvency of association by which they were issued, did not accrue until such time as the default in paying the certificates occurred. Sparkman v. Triplett, 292 Ky. 569 , 167 S.W.2d 323, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1942 ).

72.—Devising of Real Estate.

Cause of action based on the alleged right of recovery of money earned and payable under an oral contract whereby plaintiff was to receive one half (1/2) the net profits for managing a show business but was to send all the proceeds to the owner who was to invest them in real estate and, at the owner’s death, was to leave the real estate to plaintiff did not accrue until the death of the owner, and for that reason the five (5) year statute of limitations did not begin to run until that time. Haralambo's Adm'r v. Christopher, 237 Ky. 679 , 36 S.W.2d 385, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 691 ( Ky. 1931 ).

73.—Services Rendered.

Under this section a claim for services rendered a county in superintending the building of a bridge, not having been commenced until after the lapse of more than five (5) years from the time services were rendered, was barred. Flowers v. Logan County, 148 Ky. 822 , 147 S.W. 918, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 548 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section applies to a suit to enforce a claim for personal services rendered a decedent. Yowell v. Bottom, 175 Ky. 635 , 194 S.W. 768, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 352 ( Ky. 1917 ).

In action by physician for services rendered, court sustained plea of limitation of five (5) years in bar to all services rendered previous to that time. Wheeler v. Justice, 293 Ky. 58 , 168 S.W.2d 329, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 551 ( Ky. 1943 ).

In the absence of a statute, contract or custom fixing the time when the claim for services was due, the recovery was limited to a period of five (5) years next before the suit was brought. Stacy's Adm'r v. Stacy, 296 Ky. 619 , 178 S.W.2d 42, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The plea of the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section was not available in action based on an oral contract as business agent commenced in 1939, where evidence showed defendant, in the presence of witnesses, acknowledged the contract to plaintiff and promised to pay for the services in 1926, 1928, 1930, 1934, 1936 and 1938. Crawford's Adm'r v. Ross, 299 Ky. 664 , 186 S.W.2d 797, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 494 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Evidence failed to show an express contract upon which claim was based and clearly showed claim for labor and a portion of alleged claim for board was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section. Adams v. Adams, 310 Ky. 588 , 221 S.W.2d 457, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 980 ( Ky. 1949 ).

74.— —Testamentary Bequest or Devise.

Where one agreed that, in consideration of services performed by another, the latter should receive compensation from the former’s estate after her death, limitations did not begin to run against a demand for the compensation until the former’s death. Benge's Adm'r v. Fouts, 163 Ky. 796 , 174 S.W. 510, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 305 ( Ky. 1915 ), limited, Flynn's Ex'r v. Mullett, 254 Ky. 90 , 70 S.W.2d 978, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1934 ).

75.—Support and Care.

No claim for the breach of a contract for the support of a person during her life can be maintained, under the statute of limitations, except for the five (5) years next preceding the institution of the action. Whitley v. Whitley's Adm'r, 80 S.W. 825, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 134 (1904).

In an action by an administrator to recover value of decedent’s support, the obligation for each year’s support of decedent by her son-in-law in consideration for conveyance of real estate was a separate cause of action to which the five-year statute of limitations applied. Bryson's Adm'r v. Biggs, 104 S.W. 982, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 159 (1907).

Where decedent applied to her son-in-law to keep her, telling him that she was able to pay her way, that she did not expect to be kept as a pauper, that she had means of support, and, asking that an account of the time be kept by some member of the family, there was an oral contract to pay a reasonable compensation for which her son-in-law could recover and each year’s account, for the purposes of applying the statute of limitations which was pleaded, should have been deemed a separate right of action. Bryson's Adm'r v. Biggs, 104 S.W. 982, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 159 (1907).

The five-year statute of limitations applied to undertaking to support and care for a minor assumed as a personal obligation when devisee accepted property under a will and the mere fact that the acceptance of the devise charged the property with the liability undertaken did not have the effect of extending the time in which an action could be brought beyond five (5) years. Low v. Ramsey, 135 Ky. 333 , 122 S.W. 167, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1909 ).

No cause of action accrues on an oral contract to care for and render services for a person during their life before the death of the party to whom such services are to be rendered. Mussinon's Adm'r v. Herrin, 252 Ky. 495 , 67 S.W.2d 710, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 812 ( Ky. 1934 ).

All monthly payments alleged to be due for support of defendant’s invalid sister which became due five (5) years prior to commencement of action for their recovery were barred by limitation. Harned v. Layman, 283 Ky. 460 , 141 S.W.2d 857, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 349 ( Ky. 1940 ).

In an action by niece by marriage to recover claim for services in cooking, housekeeping, nursing and waiting upon decedent and his wife wherein defendant filed an answer pleading the five-year statute of limitations, all services rendered prior to five (5) years before death of decedent were barred but evidence was sufficient to show an express oral contract to pay for the services rendered within five (5) years of death which were not barred. Berry's Ex'r v. Jones, 309 Ky. 423 , 217 S.W.2d 970, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 722 ( Ky. 1949 ).

A petition seeking recovery from brother’s estate for food, lodging and other items furnished brother by sister was barred by statute of limitations as to items furnished more than five (5) years prior to bringing of action. Wilson v. Ashley's Adm'x, 312 Ky. 196 , 226 S.W.2d 937, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 616 ( Ky. 1950 ).

76.— —Testamentary Bequest or Devise.

Plaintiff’s right of action for breach of a contract, whereby decedent promised that upon the death of himself and his wife, plaintiff should have all the property they left, did not accrue until the death of decedent’s wife, who survived him. Thomas v. Feese, 51 S.W. 150, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 206 (1899).

A cause of action does not accrue upon a contract to make provision for another by will until the death of the obligor, and the statute of limitations does not begin to run until that time. Story v. Story, 61 S.W. 279, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1731 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 671 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

As under the terms of a contract decedent agreed to pay plaintiffs for their services in caring for him and his horse by providing by will for the payment of same out of his estate after his death, the claims were not payable until after decedent’s death and a cause of action therefor did not accrue until his death. Dawson v. Smith, 197 Ky. 342 , 247 S.W. 19, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 646 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Payments at intervals by decedent made to niece for caring for decedent should be credited on account for respective years in which niece furnished services, and do not take claim out of statute of limitations. Kellum v. Browning's Adm'r, 231 Ky. 308 , 21 S.W.2d 459, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1929 ).

The trial court properly confined the evidence and should limit the recovery for a promise to pay for services by testamentary bequest to a period of five (5) years with the payments made from time to time credited on the account for the respective years in which they were made and they cannot be considered as taking the claim out of the statute of limitations. Kellum v. Browning's Adm'r, 231 Ky. 308 , 21 S.W.2d 459, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1929 ).

When reliance is had on a promise to pay for services by testamentary bequest, each year’s support does not constitute a separate cause of action and recovery should be limited to a period of five (5) years. Kellum v. Browning's Adm'r, 231 Ky. 308 , 21 S.W.2d 459, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Statements made by decedent to the effect that he intended to leave plaintiff a part of his estate or that he intended to show his appreciation for her services by leaving her a part of his property fell far short of establishing an implied contract with her for payment by testamentary bequest which could avoid the bar of the five (5) year statute of limitations. Adams' Adm'rs v. Adams, 264 Ky. 543 , 95 S.W.2d 31, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 364 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Cause of action by daughter against her mother’s executor and others to recover on a claim for services during the last eight (8) years of her mother’s life predicated upon an oral contract by which the mother promised that she would pay for the services by bequeathing her entire estate to the daughter did not accrue until her mother’s death and was not barred by the five-year statute of limitations under this section. Troxel v. Childers, 299 Ky. 719 , 187 S.W.2d 264, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 793 ( Ky. 1945 ).

77.—Wages.

This section applies to actions for debt or for a money judgment for wages earned and unpaid. Kentucky-Tennessee Light & Power Co. v. Moats, 290 Ky. 690 , 162 S.W.2d 526, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 476 ( Ky. 1942 ).

78.—Parol Trust.

Creditor must stand in his debtor’s shoes when he is seeking to enforce a parol trust in favor of his debtor, and, if the debtor would be barred, the creditor cannot recover. Buckler's Adm'r v. Rogers, 54 S.W. 848, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1265 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 339 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

Where money was placed with trustee under parol agreement to pay it over to beneficiary as the latter needed it, refusal of trustee to turn over money unless beneficiary promised not to give any of it to a child staying in beneficiary’s home, coupled with statement of trustee that he would keep money to bury beneficiary, did not constitute such a repudiation of the trust as would start the running of the statute of limitations. Hardwick's Ex'r v. West, 293 Ky. 8 , 168 S.W.2d 353, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 561 ( Ky. 1943 ).

79.—Open Account.

Where judgment made no award for costs, claim for costs was mere open account and could be barred by statute of limitations, as other such accounts, by the expiration of five (5) years. Causey v. Cohron, 216 Ky. 164 , 287 S.W. 544, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 863 ( Ky. 1926 ).

80.—Modification by Parol.

The modification of a contract in writing, not required to be so by statute, by parol agreement of the parties, which goes to a material part thereof, therefore should operate to reduce it to the status of a contract by parol, in determining the applicability of statutes of limitation. Homire v. Stratton & Terstegge Co., 157 Ky. 822 , 164 S.W. 67, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 367 ( Ky. 1914 ).

81.—Insurance.

The insured’s cause of action against the insurance agent for its negligence in failing to procure insurance coverage based on the agency relationship is encompassed within subdivision (1) of this section, an action upon a contract not in writing, express or implied. Plaza Bottle Shop, Inc. v. Al Torstrick Ins. Agency, Inc., 712 S.W.2d 349, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1065 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

82.Implied Contracts.

Where property conveyed in fraud of the grantor’s creditors has been subjected to the payment of a debt for which he was bound as surety, and the grantee has failed to procure an actual assignment of the judgment, his right of action against the principal and the grantor’s cosureties on the implied promise to reimburse him for the appropriation of his property is barred after the lapse of five (5) years from the time of the sale. Duke v. Pigman, 110 Ky. 756 , 62 S.W. 867, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 209 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1901 ).

The five-year statute of limitations rather than the two-year statute of limitations under KRS 276.500 (now repealed) was applicable to a suit against a railroad company to recover overcharges for switching cars of grain and grain products where allegations in the petition were sufficient to support an action in assumpsit for money had and received based upon a promise implied in law, or an obligation which the law supplied from the circumstances because in fairness and in equity the defendant should pay back the amount by which he was enriched at the expense of the plaintiff. Barnes v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 283 Ky. 261 , 140 S.W.2d 1041, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 313 ( Ky. 1940 ) (decision prior to 1948 amendment of KRS 276.500 ).

Where, in order to withdraw from hands of trustee certain funds, a petitioner listed his debts for the benefit of the court, and the court, in allowing the funds to be withdrawn, directed that the petitioner pay the debts, but the creditors were not parties to the action and no judgment was entered in their favor, the debts listed by the petitioner were not put on the footing of judgments in order that the 15 year statute of limitations would apply. Furthermore, the listing of the debts did not constitute a “written contract”; thus, a debt based on an oral contract was barred in five (5) years. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

83.Penalty or Forfeiture.

As KRS 419.090 does not impose any other limitation, subsection (3) of this section fixing the time for actions for penalties applies to penalties under KRS 419.090 for refusal to obey a writ of habeas corpus. Fuson v. Stewart, 137 Ky. 748 , 126 S.W. 1097, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 620 ( Ky. 1910 ).

This section sets out time within which Commonwealth must bring proceeding to forfeit property used in an illegal business. Bailey v. Runyon, 293 S.W.2d 631, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1956 ), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 930, 77 S. Ct. 718, 1 L. Ed. 2d 723, 1957 U.S. LEXIS 1094 (U.S. 1957).

The statute of limitations did not begin to run with regard to a penalty imposed by the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet under KRS 350.028(4) until the 1995 final order assessing the penalty, notwithstanding that a request for a formal hearing on the citation which led to the imposition of the penalty was made in 1993. Couch v. Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet, 986 S.W.2d 158, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1999 ).

A cause of action for the enforcement of civil penalties begins to run when the liability for, and amount of, the penalties have been conclusively and finally established. Vanhoose v. Commonwealth, 995 S.W.2d 389, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 62 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).

Alleged injured party’s bad faith third-party claim against an insurer under the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act was not time-barred because (1) the claim accrued when the party executed a settlement agreement and was paid the settlement amount, forming a binding contract, as the claim did not accrue until there was either a judgment fixing liability against the insurer’s insured or the insured became legally obligated to pay under the terms of an insurance contract, and the claim did not accrue when the insurer’s insured made a settlement offer, and (2) suit was filed within five years of that date. Watson v. United States Liab. Ins. Co., 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 94 (Ky. Ct. App. May 24, 2019).

84.Trespass.

Although the words “unlawful conspiracy” were used in complaint against union, the basis of the claim under state law was the common-law tort of wrongful interference with business and the averments in the amended complaint that defendants, through their duly authorized agents or representatives acting within the scope of their authority, destroyed by dynamite and/or fire the tipple of the plaintiff and alleging loss of profits as a direct and proximate result of the acts of the defendant union was sufficient to make the five-year statute of limitations under this section applicable rather than the one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140 for conspiracy. Ritchie v. United Mine Workers, 410 F.2d 827, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12428 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

An action to recover for mental anguish suffered by plaintiff because slate and other mining refuse was deposited on the graves of her children was barred by this section when plaintiff discovered the condition in 1945 but did not bring suit until 1952. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

In toxic tort cases arising out of an oil company’s drilling operations in the 1950s and 1960s, the circuit court properly dismissed named plaintiffs. The applicable statute of limitations was five years pursuant to KRS 413.120(4), and plaintiffs filed suit in 1997. Ray v. Ashland Oil, 389 S.W.3d 140, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 291 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

85.—Operation of Railroad.

The statute of five (5) years’ limitation will bar any claim of any person, whether or not an abutting property owner, for damages resulting from the necessary and prudent operation of a railroad along or over a street. Rowlstone v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 54 S.W. 2, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1507 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 621 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

This section was applicable to so much of a suit as claimed damages for trespass outside the easement for a reasonably necessary railroad right of way although the action was mainly for the recovery of land or, alternatively, for its value which was controlled by KRS 413.010 establishing 15 years as the period of limitation. Buck C. R. Co. v. Haws, 253 Ky. 203 , 69 S.W.2d 333, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1934 ).

86.—Removal of Coal.

An action to recover the value of coal removed from a tract of land by concealed, subterranean mining methods by the lessee of an adjoining tract was barred both by this section and KRS 413.130 when suit was not commenced until more than ten (10) years after the last removal of coal and more than five (5) years after the time when diligence would have resulted in disclosure of the trespass. Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 305 S.W.2d 308, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1957 ).

87.—“Tap-on” to Gas Pipe.

Action for conversion of natural gas was barred under subsection (4) of this section where evidence did not warrant that “tap-on” to gas company’s pipe had occurred within five (5) years of institution of cause of action by the gas company. Ketnucky-West Virginia Gas Co. v. Burchett, 402 S.W.2d 421, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 360 ( Ky. 1966 ).

88.—Collision with Bridge.

Action by highway department for damage to a bridge caused by a collision of a truck with the bridge is subject to the five (5) year statute of limitations because it is an action for a trespass. Commonwealth, Dep't of Highways v. Ratliff, 392 S.W.2d 913, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1965 ).

89.—Committed by a Predecessor.

Railroad company could not be held liable for trespasses committed by their predecessor in title by depositing rock, dirt, and debris outside 50-foot right of way and at a place where it was not reasonably necessary in the construction of the railroad; furthermore, action for any trespasses committed by the predecessor was barred by the five-year statute of limitations. Buck Creek R. Co. v. Haws, 264 Ky. 436 , 94 S.W.2d 980, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1936 ).

90.—Accrual of Action.

Where defendant constructed an embankment which caused recurrent and damaging overflows of plaintiff’s land in every freshet and high tide, the statute of limitations was not available, since a new cause of action accrued for damage done by each overflow, except to bar a recovery for damages occurring more than five (5) years before the bringing of the action. Judd v. Blakeman, 175 Ky. 848 , 195 S.W. 119, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 399 ( Ky. 1917 ).

An action for trespass usually accrues when the trespass is committed and the statute of limitations begins to run at that time because these cases ordinarily involve a sudden invasion which is quickly terminated; but, in other cases where the invasion does not cease immediately and the trespass continues, one may recover damages for the injury inflicted during the five (5) year period immediately preceding the instigation of the action. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Where there was conflicting evidence as to whether cause of action for trespass accrued within the five-year period of limitations under subsection (4) of this section and trial judge apparently accepted the evidence that it did accrue within the five-year period, Court of Appeals would not hold his ruling on the limitation question in error. Jackson v. Metcalf, 415 S.W.2d 363, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 309 ( Ky. 1967 ).

In a case involving toxic torts, a trial court properly entered a dismissal because the action was not filed within five years after it accrued, pursuant to the limitation for trespass actions under KRS 413.120(4); it was undisputed that the property owners knew their property was contaminated prior to August 9, 1991, and the complaint was not filed until 1997. Mullins v. Ashland Oil, Inc., 389 S.W.3d 149, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 289 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

91.—Counterclaim.

Where appellant in 1944 instituted an action against persons to enjoin them from interfering with construction work necessary for its operations, and an injunction was granted, a counterclaim filed by appellee in 1950 alleging arbitrary, malicious and wanton destruction by the appellant of garden crops, orchard and fencing constitutes an affirmative action so as to be barred by the five-year statute of limitations. Harvey Coal Corp. v. Smith, 268 S.W.2d 634, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 914 ( Ky. 1954 ), overruled, Armstrong v. Logsdon, 469 S.W.2d 342, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1971 ).

92.—Permanent Structure.

The court properly instructed the jury, as a matter of law, that embankment built by power company, in which openings could not be constructed without excessive and disproportionate expense, was a permanent structure and an action brought in 1934 to recover damages for injuries to property due to flooding was barred by the five-year statute of limitations under this section where the first injury had occurred in 1927. Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where the injury or nuisance complained of is permanent, the measure of damages is the depreciation in the market value of the property, and limitation begins to run from completion of the improvement or the structure that caused the injury, and the action is barred in five (5) years from that time, and all the damages for past, present, and future injuries must be recovered in one action. Louisville Hydro-Electric Co. v. Coburn, 270 Ky. 624 , 110 S.W.2d 445, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1937 ).

For damages arising from a properly built and permanent structure, there must be one suit and one recovery for all damages, past, present and future, and statute of limitations begins to run when structure is completed, but if structure is temporary, successive actions may be maintained for five-year period next preceding the instigation of the action. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

If the structure is one which may not be readily remedied, removed or abated, at reasonable expense, or is of durable character intended to last indefinitely, it is permanent and only one recovery may be had for all damages sustained and the cause of action accrues when such structure is completed. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

The rule that should be applied in order to determine whether the slate piled on the graves of plaintiff’s children was a permanent trespass for which only one recovery could be had for all damages sustained and to which the five-year statute of limitations under this section applied was a determination of whether the slate pile is and was of such a nature that it could be removed only at prohibitive expense. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Until evidence was produced and the classification of the structure as temporary or permanent established, it was impossible to decide whether the five (5) year statute of limitations which applies to cases where a permanent structure is involved was a bar to an action for trespass for dumping slate and or refuse on graves of plaintiff’s children or whether recovery should be permitted on the theory that it was a continuing invasion which condition permitted recovery during the last five (5) years immediately preceding the instigation of the action. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

93.—Continuing.

Where issue made in the evidence and presented to the jury by the instructions was upon the question whether the construction of culvert was proper and skillful although plaintiff in an action against a railroad company alleged the company wrongfully, unlawfully and negligently opened a culvert, it followed that the injury resulting from collecting the surface water upon the land opposite and casting it in a body upon plaintiff’s land was not to be considered as of a permanent character, but each overflow was a distinct trespass, and the statute of limitations began to run only from the time when the overflow occurred. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Cornelius, 111 Ky. 752 , 64 S.W. 732, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1069 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1901 ).

Injury to residential lot resulting from collecting of surface water upon the land opposite and casting it in a body upon plaintiff’s land is not to be considered of a permanent character as it could be remedied by a regrade of the street or an extension of the sewerage system of the city along the street; therefore, each overflow was a distinct and separate trespass and the statute of limitations began to run only from the time the overflow occurred rather than when the city originally diverted it from its natural course without enlarging the culvert through which it was required to pass. Finley v. Williamsburgh, 71 S.W. 502, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1336 (1903).

If structure causing damage to another can be changed, repaired or remedied at reasonable expense, it is temporary and the harm is then a continuing one for which recovery may be had for the injuries as they occur. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

94.Nuisance.

Where action for damages to property, caused by maintaining nuisance, is barred by statute of limitations, an action to abate the nuisance is also barred. Kentucky & West Virginia Power Co. v. McIntosh, 278 Ky. 797 , 129 S.W.2d 522, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1939 ).

95.—Nature.

In determining whether a nuisance is permanent or temporary, the question is not whether the defendant failed to exercise due care in the construction, maintenance or operation of a structure but whether the cause of the nuisance results from some improper installation or method of operation which can be remedied at reasonable expense and, if so, the nuisance is a temporary one and a claim for damages caused by it is not barred by this section. Lynn Mining Co. v. Kelly, 394 S.W.2d 755, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where a nuisance results from the erection of a permanent structure, action therefor is barred five (5) years after the completion of the structure, but if a nuisance results from some improper installation or erection which can be remedied at reasonable expense, then it is a temporary nuisance and action therefor may be brought at any time, the recovery being limited to damages caused within five (5) years preceding the date of suit. In any such case, negligence in the creation of the nuisance has nothing to do with it. Lynn Mining Co. v. Kelly, 394 S.W.2d 755, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1965 ).

96.— —Permanent.

Where damages are caused by a permanent structure, properly constructed and not negligently operated, a recover must be had once and for all, and the action must be brought within five (5) years from the date such structure was completed and its operation commenced, or from the date of the first injury, or from the date that it became apparent there would be injuries resulting from the structure or its operation. Kentucky & West Virginia Power Co. v. McIntosh, 278 Ky. 797 , 129 S.W.2d 522, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A permanent structure of the character to make the five-year statute of limitations applicable is defined as one which may not be readily remedied, removed, or abated at a reasonable expense, or one of a durable character evidently intended to last indefinitely, costing as much to alter as to build it in the first instance, and, if the structure causing the injury or nuisance can be easily changed or repaired at reasonable expense, it may be regarded as temporary. Kidd v. Jody, 290 Ky. 379 , 161 S.W.2d 606, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 409 ( Ky. 1942 ).

An action for damages to real estate occasioned by a culvert under railroad fill, which was a permanent structure, was barred by five-year statute of limitations. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Laswell, 299 Ky. 799 , 187 S.W.2d 732, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 780 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where recovery is sought for damages occasioned by a permanent structure properly built, the recovery must be once and for all, and sought within five (5) years from the date of the completion, or of the first injury, or from the date when it became apparent that there would be resulting injuries from the building of the structure. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Laswell, 299 Ky. 799 , 187 S.W.2d 732, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 780 ( Ky. 1945 ).

This section barred claim against gas company in 1952 for injury to their real estate by construction of a pumping station in 1941 for the purpose of gathering gas and compressing it into transmission lines for delivery to consumers. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Co. v. Matny, 279 S.W.2d 805, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 548 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where damages are caused by permanent structure properly constructed, and not negligently operated, recovery must be had for permanent nuisance once and for all, and action must be brought within five (5) years from date such structure was completed and its operation commenced, or from date of first injury, or from date it became apparent there would be injuries resulting from structure or its operation. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Co. v. Matny, 279 S.W.2d 805, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 548 ( Ky. 1955 ). See Hawkins v. Wallace, 384 S.W.2d 507, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1964 ).

97.— —Continuing.

The stopping up of a sewer was not necessarily a permanent and continuing nuisance since the expenditure of a small amount of labor and money would have cleaned out the sewer and caused the water to flow through its natural channel; thus, five (5) year statute of limitations applied and commenced to run at the time of injuries to property occurred through city’s negligence in allowing a drainpipe to fill causing surface water to flow onto and injure property abutting on an alley. Central Covington v. Beiser, 122 Ky. 715 , 92 S.W. 973, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 261 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1906 ).

Damages sustained by plaintiff were avoidable and resulted from the manner in which the city sewerage system was maintained and operated; therefore, the nuisance from which the damages resulted was a continuing one against which the statute of limitations did not run except for such damages as had occurred more than five (5) years before the institution of the action. Princeton v. Pool, 171 Ky. 638 , 188 S.W. 758, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 408 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Evidence showed that structure was not permanent within the meaning of the cases holding that five (5) year statute applies but was one which at reasonable expense could be altered so as to abate the nuisance that had been created on plaintiff’s land by erection of an embankment obstructing the natural flow of water through defendant’s land and causing it to back on and overflow plaintiff’s land. Kidd v. Jody, 290 Ky. 379 , 161 S.W.2d 606, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 409 ( Ky. 1942 ).

98.—Burden of Proof.

Under CR 8.03, the limitation provided by this section is an affirmative defense to an action to recover property damages because of the maintenance of a nuisance and the burden is on the defendant to prove that the nuisance, if any, was permanent so that plaintiff’s claim would be barred hereby. Lynn Mining Co. v. Kelly, 394 S.W.2d 755, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1965 ).

99.—Waiver.

Even if dam had been a permanent structure and the plaintiff’s cause of action had been barred, defendant in contract settling that controversy waived his right to rely on the five-year statute of limitations which applies where the injury or nuisance complained of is permanent. Kidd v. Jody, 290 Ky. 379 , 161 S.W.2d 606, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 409 ( Ky. 1942 ).

100.Injury to Real Property.

A railroad must be regarded as a permanent structure, and when its construction in the streets of a city is authorized by legislative and municipal authority, all damages naturally resulting from the proper operation of the road can then be ascertained and determined, and the cause of action therefor is barred by limitation after five (5) years from the time the action might first have been instituted; but where the construction of the railroad in the street is not authorized by legislative and municipal authority, it is an unauthorized taking of property and the 15-year statute of limitations applies. Klosterman v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 114 Ky. 426 , 71 S.W. 6, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1183 , 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1233 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Action for damages for the wrongful diversion of a natural stream across lands was barred by a period of five (5) years. Chicago, S. L. & N. O. R. Co. v. Hoover, 147 Ky. 33 , 143 S.W. 770, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1912 ), modified, 147 Ky. 645 , 143 S.W. 1199, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The five-year statute of limitations is applicable to an action against a railroad for damages for depreciation in the value of the use of plaintiff’s residence as well as for the personal inconvenience by reason of the foul odors from a stagnant pond maintained by it along its right of way. Cumberland R. Co. v. Bays, 153 Ky. 159 , 154 S.W. 929, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 793 ( Ky. 1913 ).

For a permanent structure, properly built, a single recovery must be had for all damages from flooding caused by permanent structure properly built, but for a structure unlawfully or negligently built, though intended to be permanent, and for temporary structure, recurring recoveries may be had as injuries occur and whether the original construction was unlawful or negligent is a question for the jury under the evidence when presented by the pleadings and the proof is conflicting. Covington v. McKinney, 263 Ky. 131 , 92 S.W.2d 1, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1936 ).

If obstruction causing flooding may be remedied at reasonable expense, it may be regarded as temporary, but if the trouble cannot be so remedied, it should be regarded as permanent and this is a question for the jury. Covington v. McKinney, 263 Ky. 131 , 92 S.W.2d 1, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where structures, though permanent and negligently constructed, cannot be repaired or remedied so as to avoid the recurring injuries, at a reasonable expense, or where the expense of repairing or remedying would be so great as to authorize condemnation of the property, then there must be a recovery once and for all. Covington v. McKinney, 263 Ky. 131 , 92 S.W.2d 1, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1936 ).

KRS 413.120(7)’s five-year limitations period applied to slander of title, not KRS 413.140(1)(d)’s one-year period, because slander of title alleged injury to real property rights due to title disparagement. Ballard v. 1400 Willow Council of Co-Owners, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 229, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 579 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Property owner’s slander of title claim was outside the scope of negligent performance of professional services, would not constitute negligent malpractice, and would not fall under the one-year professional malpractice statute of limitations, because the owner alleged the filing of a mechanic’s lien was in bad faith; to escape liability under the guise of attorney professional services would be unconscionable if the obligations surrounding the claims are true. RLB Props., Ltd. v. Seiller Waterman, LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 179 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018), rev'd, in part, aff'd, 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

101.—Accrual.

If a coal company obstructs a stream by refuse which it puts in it, or poisons the water which it thus throws over its neighbor’s land, a fresh cause of action accrues for the damage done by each overflow, and any damage within five (5) years before the bringing of the action may be recovered. Crabtree Coal Min. Co. v. Hamby's Adm'r, 90 S.W. 226, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 687 (1906).

An action for damages by owner of gristmill, located on river, to his real estate by the construction of a dam in the river which diverted the water previously used to power his gristmill did not accrue upon the completion of the dam but upon the taking of the water out of the river and he was entitled to recover for such damages as resulted from diversion of the water during the five (5) years next preceding the filing of the petition. King v. Board of Council, 128 Ky. 321 , 107 S.W. 1189, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 1188 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 48 ( Ky. 1908 ).

When a sewer becomes increasingly inadequate by the increasing demands upon its capacity due to the growth of the city, each recurrence of injury attributable to this changed condition constitutes a separate cause of action which then accrues and starts the statute of limitations running. Louisville v. Leezer, 143 Ky. 244 , 136 S.W. 223, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 383 ( Ky. 1911 ).

A cause of action against a county to recover damages for injury to land alleged to have been due to the ditching of a public road and the building of a culvert in such manner as to discharge water upon plaintiff’s premises in greater quantities than the natural flow accrues when it becomes reasonable apparent that injury has resulted from the completion of the ditch and culvert and is barred after the lapse of five (5) years. Moore v. Lawrence County, 143 Ky. 448 , 136 S.W. 1031, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 465 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Right of action to recover damages for the flooding of two (2) houses and lots allegedly caused by acts of defendant in erecting concrete abutments and piers to support its bridges and embankments did not accrue until plaintiff could have known, with reasonable diligence, that the erection of these structures depreciated the vendible value of her property which was not until the property was inundated by a flood. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Robbins, 154 Ky. 387 , 157 S.W. 903, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 93 ( Ky. 1913 ).

The statute of limitations did not begin to run in an action by a landowner against a coal company to recover damages for injury to his land caused by the overflow of a stream filled with coal slack until the actual happening of the injury. North Jellico Coal Co. v. Trosper, 165 Ky. 417 , 177 S.W. 241, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 542 ( Ky. 1915 ).

A party is not required to sue for damages to his land until it is reasonably apparent that he has suffered damages. Big Sandy & C. R. Co. v. Thacker, 270 Ky. 404 , 109 S.W.2d 820, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where a structure is unlawfully or negligently built, though intended to be permanent, recurring recoveries for damages from flooding resulting from such improper or negligent construction may be had as the injuries occur if suit is brought within five (5) years after the injury occurs. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Salyer, 272 Ky. 171 , 113 S.W.2d 1152, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 101 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A cause of action for damages to realty caused by permanent structure does not necessarily accrue when structure is completed but only when injury occurs or when it becomes reasonable apparent to injured party that injury may occur. Action was barred when not brought until eight (8) years after formal complaint showing plaintiff’s knowledge of injury. Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Little, 274 Ky. 681 , 120 S.W.2d 150, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 320 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Discovery rule applied with regards to the time limitations of KRS 413.120(4) for a suit seeking damages for groundwater contamination at an owner’s land; because the owner knew that contamination was present when it sent a letter making a claim to its insurance company more than five (5) years before suit was filed, the case was time-barred. Bulk Terminals v. Alcoa, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 78 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2007).

102.—Burden of Proof.

The burden was upon the railroad, in an action for damages to land by flooding due to railroad fill constructed more than five (5) years prior to suit, to establish its plea of limitation and it failed to show that injuries complained of were such that they might reasonably have been anticipated at the time when the structure was completed. Big Sandy & C. R. Co. v. Thacker, 270 Ky. 404 , 109 S.W.2d 820, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1937 ).

103.Taking of Real Property.

This section may bar an action under Ky. Const., § 242, for recovery against a railroad invested with the privilege of taking private property for public use and requiring just compensation for property so taken, injured or destroyed because all such damages may be ascertained the moment the railroad is put in operation and the question of negligence is not involved. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Scott, 197 Ky. 636 , 247 S.W. 735, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 683 ( Ky. 1923 ). See Curlin v. Ashby, 264 S.W.2d 671, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 688 ( Ky. 1954 ).

KRS 413.120(2) five-year statute of limitations applied to enforcement of the condemnees’ KRS 416.670 right to redeem property condemned by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, but did not begin to run until the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet had effected required statutory notice of to the condemnees of their redemption rights. Vandertoll v. Commonwealth, 110 S.W.3d 789, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 118 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Fiscal court’s resolution acquiring a county road and the maintenance thereof resulted in an unauthorized taking because a proper acquisition complying with statutory requirements could not have occurred; however, owners who acquiesced to paving could obtain no recovery, even if they timely filed suit, and were properly directed to remove a gate. Cary v. Pulaski County Fiscal Court, 420 S.W.3d 500, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 85 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).

104.Withholding Real or Personal Property.

Action, brought by assignee of coal mining lease seven (7) years after physical possession of the land was taken from him by subsequent lessees of owner, to recover damages based upon a loss of profits was not a suit to have the question of title determined or to recover the coal or the land or its value to which the 15-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.010 applied but a claim for damages measured by the loss of profits he could have realized by mining the coal which arose from trespass upon the land and deprived him of its use to which the five-year statute of limitations applied. Creson v. Scott, 275 S.W.2d 406, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 350 ( Ky. 1955 ).

In an action in tort brought by an assignee of first coal mining lease against the lessors and lessees under a subsequent coal mining lease to recover damages for the loss of profits because of an eviction almost seven (7) years before the action was brought, this section was not suspended during the pendency of a suit by plaintiff’s assignor against lessors and lessees to have first lease declared superior to the subsequent lease and to obtain an injunction. Creson v. Scott, 275 S.W.2d 406, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 350 ( Ky. 1955 ).

105.Personal Property.

Despite brother’s 40-year possession of stagecoach, which was a family heirloom, the statute of limitations did not begin to run against his sister until there had been some action hostile to his sister’s rights as cotenant. Daugherty v. Breeding, 553 S.W.2d 299, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 744 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

106.—Injury.

An action against a railroad by a landowner for damages to growing crops for the year 1915 brought in January 1916 was not an action for injury to real property and was not barred although the railroad had constructed the tracks, which caused the water to stand on landowner’s land, more than five (5) years prior to the institution of the action. Chicago, M. & G. R. Co. v. Dodds & Johnson, 174 Ky. 389 , 192 S.W. 61, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Alleged injury by railroad to abutting property arose not upon the completion by the railroad of their embankment but only after their embankment had, by reason of its alleged negligent construction and maintenance, been permitted to slough off and wash into and fill abutting property owners’ ditch, then and thereby causing the overflow of their land, resulting in the injury to their property, for which injury their cause of action then arose and action brought within five (5) years after the overflow was not barred. Chicago, S. L. & N. O. R. Co. v. Hicks, 249 Ky. 578 , 61 S.W.2d 37, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 566 ( Ky. 1933 ).

For injuries caused by railroad to abutting property resulting from an improper or careless operation, a cause of action does not accrue until the wrong is done. Chicago, S. L. & N. O. R. Co. v. Hicks, 249 Ky. 578 , 61 S.W.2d 37, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 566 ( Ky. 1933 ).

107.—Taking.

Since action was commenced by conditional seller of plastic molding machine for balance due under contract within five (5) years after the plaintiff received notice of the fraudulent conversion, suit was not barred by the five-year statute of limitations on actions to recover for injury to personal property even though the action was commenced more than five (5) years after the subsequent mortgage constituting the conversion was recorded. Koehring Co. v. Tyler, 209 F. Supp. 750, 1962 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3553 (W.D. Ky. 1962 ).

In action by assignee of seller, the five-year statute of limitations applying in cases of conversion of personal property applied to sale of automobile by purchaser under a conditional sale contract without seller’s knowledge or permission and not the one-year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.140 which covers theft. Eline v. Commercial Credit Corp., 307 Ky. 77 , 209 S.W.2d 846, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 695 ( Ky. 1948 ).

An action to recover the value of stolen bonds from a brokerage firm that participated in their sale was limited by the provisions of subsection (6) of this section, which makes no provision for delayed discovery, and was not within the provisions of KRS 413.140 permitting suit within one (1) year of the discovery of the theft when the brokerage firm was not itself the thief, was innocent of criminal knowledge or intent, and was not in possession of the bonds at the time of suit. Amlung v. Bankers Bond Co., 411 S.W.2d 689, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where husband removed wife’s stock certificates from her lock box without her knowledge, forged her signature and sold them through brokerage firm, the brokerage firm had no criminal knowledge or intent so that, in action against firm, the five (5) year statute under this section rather than the one (1) year statute under KRS 413.140 applied. Amlung v. Bankers Bond Co., 411 S.W.2d 689, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1967 ).

The employee’s action against his employer under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act for suspension of his disability retirement benefits accrued when the trustee notified the employee that his pension benefits were suspended; therefore, since the employee waited more than six (6) years to file the action, the action was dismissed as barred by the five-year statute of limitations in subdivision (5) or (6) of this section. Salyers v. Allied Corp., 642 F. Supp. 442, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27726 (E.D. Ky. 1986 ).

From the very nature of a “reverse condemnation” action, there can be no breach of the implied promise to pay until first there has been a compensable “taking”; a cause of action would not accrue until the complaining party had suffered an injury. Jones v. Transportation Cabinet, Dep't of Highways, 875 S.W.2d 892, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 117 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

Where the Department of Highways, in the course of construction that occurred in 1978 and 1979, dumped boulders into and along the banks of the Caney Creek, and where this narrowed and diverted the natural flow of the water, which ultimately on October 18, 1989, resulted in the washing away of forty feet of land, a barn, and a chicken house on plaintiff’s property, the compensable “taking” allegedly occurred on October 18, 1989, and the complaint was filed on April 24, 1991, well within the five-year period provided by subsection (1) of this section. Jones v. Transportation Cabinet, Dep't of Highways, 875 S.W.2d 892, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 117 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

108.—Recovery.

An action to recover possession of personal property more than five (5) years after notice of adverse claim, when the statute of limitations began to run, was barred. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co. v. McCabe, 169 Ky. 613 , 184 S.W. 1124, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 745 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Evidence in suit to recover possession of stock from trustee not only failed to uphold plaintiff’s contention but, on the other hand, was convincing that trustee held the title adversely to plaintiff’s claim and that trustee’s acts had not stopped the running of the five-year statute of limitations. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co. v. McCabe, 169 Ky. 613 , 184 S.W. 1124, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 745 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Action by administratrix as administratrix and heir at law and on behalf of all other heirs of decedent seeking to recover furniture and other personal belongings of the deceased allegedly converted by defendant to her own use and seeking damages for detention of the personalty was not barred by limitations, because the alleged taking did not occur until after decedent’s death, a few months before the action was brought. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

109.—Gratuitous Bailment.

One of the prerequisites to maintaining an action to obtain an order of delivery is that the petition or affidavit must show that the plaintiff’s cause of action has accrued within one (1) year; however, a party’s right to recover the possession of specific personal property by a judgment does not depend upon this provision. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The five-year statute applied to action for claim and delivery of diamond. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where plaintiff, in action against his sister under KRS 425.120 (now repealed) for recovery of possession of a diamond, proved that the diamond had been given to him by his father, that he had later turned it back to his father to keep for him, that the father kept custody of the diamond until his death some ten (10) years later, and that plaintiff’s mother then kept custody of the diamond for some 14 years until her death, when plaintiff’s sister took the diamond, plaintiff’s action for recovery, brought less than one (1) year after he made demand for return of the diamond, was not barred by limitations. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where plaintiff pleaded and proved a gratuitous bailment without limit of time, and defendant merely alleged and proved facts as to the period of time, the property remained in the possession of the bailees, defendant’s plea that plaintiff’s claim was barred by limitations was merely a legal conclusion from an insufficient allegation of facts justifying it; it was essential that defendant plead and prove such ultimate facts from which it could be inferred. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where plaintiff pleads and proves a prima facie case, the burden of going forward with the proof to establish that the cause of action accrued more than the statutory period before the commencement of the action shifts to the defendant. If the defendant pleads and proves facts sustaining his plea of limitations, then to neutralize or avoid the effect, the plaintiff must pick up the burden and offer contradictory evidence or evidence of legal disability. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where plaintiff proved a prima facie case of a gratuitous bailment without limit of time, the burden of going forward with the proof to establish that the cause of action accrued more than five (5) years before the action was instituted shifted to the defendant, and where the defendant did not meet this burden, the question became one of law for the court. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

110.Injuries Not Arising on Contract.

Right of action by city, sued for injuries in collision with obstruction in street, against one responsible for the obstruction was subject to this section, requiring actions for injuries not arising on contract to be commenced within five (5) years. Louisville v. O'Donaghue, 157 Ky. 243 , 162 S.W. 1110, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 258 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Right of action by city, sued for personal injuries caused by obstruction in street, against third person responsible therefor, accrued when it paid the judgment against it. Louisville v. O'Donaghue, 157 Ky. 243 , 162 S.W. 1110, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 258 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Action for damages for mental suffering caused by disinterment of body of wife by cemetery company without notice is covered by this section and not KRS 413.140 . Resthaven Memorial Cemetery, Inc. v. Volk, 286 Ky. 291 , 150 S.W.2d 908, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Trial court erred in granting motion for summary judgment and dismissal of action to recover for damages to property allegedly resulting from blasting operations as barred by subdivision (7) (now (6)) of the five-year statute of limitations on the basis of testimony given by plaintiff as a witness in a neighbor’s suit, since such testimony did not constitute a judicial admission where it was not given in an action between the same parties nor in an action wherein plaintiff was even a party. Bartman v. Derby Constr. Co., 395 S.W.2d 360, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 140 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where damages were sought for disruption of business resulting in the loss of contracts for the mining and sale of coal, the five-year statute of subdivision (7) (now (6)) of this section was applicable, as the action sounded in tort and could not be characterized as a contract action merely because the damages were related to contract. Norton Coal Corp. v. Austin, 508 S.W.2d 584, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 621 ( Ky. 1974 ).

The plaintiff’s action against a former FBI agent alleging that his constitutional rights were violated by the agent’s surveillance of him was governed by the one-year limitation of subdivision (1)(a) of KRS 413.140 , not the five-year limitation period of subdivision (7) (now (6)) of this section. McSurely v. Hutchison, 823 F.2d 1002, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 9881 (6th Cir. Ky. 1987 ), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 934, 108 S. Ct. 1107, 99 L. Ed. 2d 269, 1988 U.S. LEXIS 1189 (U.S. 1988).

111.Wrongful Discharge.

Where an employee of an insurance company was wrongfully discharged for reporting misconduct of insurance salesmen, the court applied the five-year statute of limitations under subdivision (7) of this section rather than the one-year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.140(1), since the employee sought to recover damages for mental anguish, as well as damages for loss of past and future earnings. Brown v. Physicians Mut. Ins. Co., 679 S.W.2d 836, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 594 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984), disapproved, Grzyb v. Evans, 700 S.W.2d 399, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 279 ( Ky. 1985 ).

112.Bank Deposits.

Although a bank fails to credit depositor’s passbook, the statute of limitations does not begin to run against the depositor in favor of the bank until the depositor makes demand for the money and payment is refused. Corbin Banking Co. v. Bryant, 151 Ky. 194 , 151 S.W. 393, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 777 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Where husband and wife were married in 1961, acquired a joint checking account and three (3) certificates of deposit by June 1966, and then made a joint and mutual will in July 1966, after which the husband died in 1967, and the wife in 1976, and where the will had named each executor for the other, giving the other a life estate in the property, and the wife chose to consider these accounts as part of the husband’s property, although it was his money that went into them, the statute of limitations did not begin to run, absent actual knowledge of such actions, when the wife settled her accounts as administratrix, but at her death in 1976, and, therefore, an action filed in 1977 was timely. Vaughn v. Perkins, 576 S.W.2d 257, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 379 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

113.—Checks.

Generally it is the duty of the personal representative to assert the bar of limitations, particularly so when the claim was barred at the time of decedent’s death, or that it is so stale as to raise presumption of payment though he may waive the plea of bar where he believes the claim to be just, due and unpaid but, where personal representative knew the payment of a check was barred and the check showed on its face that it was barred and he made no inquiry of its justness, he paid claim at his individual risk and should account for that amount. Russell v. Hogan, 282 Ky. 764 , 140 S.W.2d 615, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 263 ( Ky. 1940 ).

114.Bills of Exchange.
115.—Notes Placed on Footing of Bill of Exchange.

A note made payable to order of a bank was not a discounted not placed on the same footing as a bill of exchange by the bank’s charter and the 15-year statute of limitations and not the five-year statute applied. Bramblette v. Deposit Bank of Carlisle, 79 S.W. 193, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1850 (1904).

The five-year limitation provided in this section was applicable only to notes negotiated before maturity and in the hands of a third party, the 15-year statute being applicable as to the principals and the seven-year statute as to the sureties so long as the instrument remains in the hands of the original payee. Southern Nat'l Bank v. Schimpeler, 160 Ky. 813 , 170 S.W. 178, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 539 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Notes which were not only negotiable but which were actually negotiated before their maturity were placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange and, as suit was not brought within five (5) years after the notes matured, they were barred by the five (5) year limitation and that being true, the lien which they secured was also barred. Hazel v. McCullough, 188 Ky. 419 , 222 S.W. 100, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 296 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Under this section an action upon a promissory note placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange must be commenced within five (5) years next after the cause of action accrues. Hazel v. McCullough, 188 Ky. 419 , 222 S.W. 100, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 296 ( Ky. 1920 ).

The five-year statute of limitations applies only to bills and notes placed on the footing of a bill of exchange and the only way a note may be placed on the footing of a bill of exchange is by its negotiation in good faith for value and before maturity. Coleman v. Coleman's Ex'r, 189 Ky. 96 , 224 S.W. 668, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 382 ( Ky. 1920 ).

Note negotiated at a time when by its negotiation purchaser became a “holder in due course” was thereby placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange to which the five-year statute of limitations under this section applied. Paintsville Nat'l Bank v. Robinson, 220 Ky. 418 , 295 S.W. 412, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 543 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Where a note was not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange by being actually negotiated in good faith for value before maturity, the 15-year statute of limitations applied rather than the five-year statute. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The five-year statute of limitations was applicable to any suit upon a note where payee, before maturity, assigned and transferred it in due course. First State Bank v. Parrott, 255 Ky. 615 , 75 S.W.2d 46, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1934 ).

In action on note commenced 34 years after date of note, where body of the note was complete and certain in every detail including the date and payable one (1) day after date, and the memorandum following the signature was at material variance with and repugnant to the body of the note in that it stated note was due on death of payee, the presumption that memorandum was made at the time the note was executed or before its delivery did not obtain to show action was not barred by the statute of limitations and burden was on plaintiffs to show that the memorandum on the note was there when the note was signed or was made pursuant to and in conformity with the agreement of the parties. Bush's Adm'r v. Bush, 276 Ky. 126 , 122 S.W.2d 972, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Action started four (4) years after note became due was timely, even if five-year limitation applied to action on note which had been executed year prior to its maturity, since no action accrued until note became due. Root v. Rowland, 287 Ky. 728 , 155 S.W.2d 203, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 634 ( Ky. 1941 ).

When a note is barred by limitation, the lien securing it is likewise barred. Yeiser v. Webb, 300 Ky. 26 , 187 S.W.2d 831, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 811 ( Ky. 1945 ).

As a general proposition, a paper, once placed on the footing of a bill of exchange, remains as such. Bellevue Commercial & Sav. Bank v. Highfill, 305 Ky. 315 , 202 S.W.2d 732, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 747 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The five-year statute of limitations under this section was not applicable because chattel mortgage was not placed on the footing of a bill of exchange. Fresh v. Dunakin, 306 Ky. 87 , 206 S.W.2d 203, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 960 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Note negotiated before maturity for valuable consideration was placed upon footing of bill of exchange within subsection (8) of this section. Garnett v. Walton, 242 S.W.2d 107, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1043 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Note executed on January 25, 1929, payable four (4) months after date, transferred by an undated indorsement in blank, was placed on the footing of a bill of exchange by its negotiation for value before maturity and an action on the note was barred by the five-year statute of limitations under this section, where no evidence was introduced by either party as to the date of transfer of the note. Johnson's Adm'r v. Johnson, 244 S.W.2d 969, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 1252 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where a purchase money note was negotiated by payee, it was placed on a footing of a bill of exchange and barred by subdivision (8) (now (7)) of the five-year statute of limitations. Walters v. Watson, 247 S.W.2d 368, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 689 ( Ky. 1952 ).

A promissory note issued in Georgia and having been negotiated before maturity was placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange and was controlled by the five-year period of limitation provided for in this section rather than Georgia’s six-year limitation period because KRS 413.320 “borrows” the Georgia statute only if it provides for a shorter limitation period. Haeberle v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 769 S.W.2d 64, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 10 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

116.Merchant’s Account.

In a suit to recover value of merchandise sold, where plaintiff’s exhibit gave an itemized statement of account showing that last merchandise was sold to defendants more than seven (7) years prior to institution of suit, the defense of statutory limitation was not properly raised by a motion to dismiss the petition, since this defense must ordinarily be pled. Woolery v. Smith, 302 Ky. 725 , 196 S.W.2d 115, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 741 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where a seller filed suit to recover payment for coal that was previously delivered to a buyer, a District Court erred in dismissing the seller’s breach of contract claim because the five-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.120(10) prevailed over the four-year statute of limitations in KRS 355.2-725(1). Rebecca Son v. Coal Equity, Inc., 122 Fed. Appx. 797, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 24106 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 ).

117.Account Between Merchant and Merchant.

Where averments were not traversed and the plaintiff in a suit upon an account had alleged that defendant was a mercantile firm, and the plaintiff was a merchant, and that the dealing about the goods sued for was a sale between merchant and merchant, the five (5) year statute of limitations applied and a plea of the two (2) year statute applicable to merchants’ accounts was insufficient. Fennell v. Myers, 76 S.W. 136, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 589 (1903).

118.Fraud or Mistake.

Where cause of action set up in the petition and amended petition was for fraud, the five-year statute of limitations applied. Hill v. Halmhuber, 225 Ky. 394 , 9 S.W.2d 55, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 793 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The right of a purchaser of a note to require indorsement by the seller is subject to the five-year statute of limitations. Farmers' Trust Co. v. Threlkeld's Adm'x, 257 Ky. 211 , 77 S.W.2d 616, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1934 ).

If plaintiff’s cause of action was bottomed on a fraud perpetrated on him by his brother, and this section as modified by KRS 413.130 clearly barred such an action, and, on the other hand, if plaintiff’s cause of action could be considered as one for the recovery of real estate, then it should have been brought within 15 years as provided by KRS 413.010 ; but in any event an action to quiet title to minerals brought more than 22 years after he first knew of mistake in deed was barred by the statute of limitations. Francis v. Francis, 288 Ky. 685 , 157 S.W.2d 289, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1941 ).

If there is a conflict between subsection (12) of this section requiring original actions for fraud to be commenced within five (5) years of accrual and CR 60.02(3) requiring proceedings to set aside a judgment for fraud to be commenced within one (1) year after entry of judgment, the civil rule would govern. Dean v. Gregory, 318 S.W.2d 549, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Subsection (12) (now (11)) of this section relates to original actions for fraud, and not to proceedings to set aside a judgment for fraud which are governed by the civil rules. Dean v. Gregory, 318 S.W.2d 549, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1958 ).

When a confidential relationship exists between the parties, such as the relationship of husband and wife, the five-year statute of limitations set forth in subsection (12) (now (11)) of this section does not commence to run until the alleged fraud or mistake is discovered, and no constructive notice such as the recordation of the instrument containing the mistake is sufficient to commence the running of the statute. Hernandez v. Daniel, 471 S.W.2d 25, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 1971 ).

The distinction between the three-year statute of limitations for stock frauds under KRS 292.480 and the five-year statute of limitations for general frauds under this section is a reasonable classification and not violative of the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution. Hutto v. Bockweg, 579 S.W.2d 382, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 389 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

Where plaintiff insurer, as subrogee of defendant debtor's former employer, sought damages from debtor arising out of allegations of fraud, based on undisputed date of discovery of fraud, plaintiff's action was brought within five-year statute of limitations period but, according to Kentucky's statute of repose, only alleged acts of fraud committed 10 years prior to filing of action could be litigated. Fed. Ins. Co. v. Woods (In re Woods), 558 B.R. 164, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 3388 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2016 ).

Mother was entitled to sanctions against a father and the father's attorney, in the father's suit for fraudulently claiming paternity, because (1) the father pursued a claim barred by the statute of limitations after the statute was raised, and, instead, tried to add the child as a defendant, showing the case was filed and maintained to harass, and (2) later case law provided no new claim for paternity fraud, so the father's position was not a plausible view of the law. Large v. Oberson, 537 S.W.3d 336, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 785 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

119.—Statute Inapplicable.

This section had no application to a suit in equity brought in federal court seeking relief on account of fraud. Massachusetts Protective Asso. v. Stephenson, 5 F. Supp. 586, 1933 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1079 (D. Ky. 1933 ).

The statute of limitations applicable to actions for relief from fraud or mistake does not operate to perfect the title of the grantee in a fraudulent conveyance who has never been in possession. Potter v. Benge, 67 S.W. 1005, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 24 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 370 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902).

Where suit was brought on an obligation based on and growing out of settlement by a trustee and defendant pleaded that by mistake he was charged in that settlement with certain items which should not have been charged against him, that these items were included in the note sued on, and that the note to that extent was without consideration, his plea was a mere defense to which the statute of limitations interposed by plaintiff was not applicable. Weakley v. Meriwether, 156 Ky. 304 , 160 S.W. 1054, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 425 ( Ky. 1913 ).

If fraud relied upon is alleged fraud in declaration of dividends by directors when the corporation is insolvent, KRS 413.130 has no application, since the action is upon a liability created by statute covered by subsection (2) of this section and not an action for relief or damages on the basis of fraud covered by subsection (12) (now (11)) of this section. McGill's Adm'x v. Phillips, 243 Ky. 768 , 49 S.W.2d 1025, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 192 ( Ky. 1932 ).

An action to have the terms of a deed construed because of the existence of a latent ambiguity arising because of the physical position and the typed spacing of a particular paragraph and not because of an alleged mistake in its wording is not barred by either subsection (12) (now (11)) of this section or subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 , since the deed could be construed according to the intent of the parties with no change being made in its wording. Berryman v. Elmore, 402 S.W.2d 102, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1966 ).

120.—Conveyances in Fraud of Creditors.

Action to reach the property of the debtor’s wife as purchased with his money was barred by limitations where not brought until five (5) years after execution of the deed. Cogar v. National Bank of Lancaster, 151 Ky. 470 , 152 S.W. 278, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 506 ( Ky. 1913 ).

A suit to subject to the payment of intestate’s note certain property which was transferred in fraud of his creditors is an action for relief for fraud and is controlled by that portion of this section and KRS 413.130 . Hancock v. Chapman, 170 Ky. 99 , 185 S.W. 813, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Clearly, suit to set aside deed of a husband to his wife for the purpose of defeating creditors was not one founded upon KRS 378.060 applicable to suits based upon preferential conveyances with a six (6) months’ limitation period under KRS 378.070 but was one founded upon the denounced acts set forth in KRS 378.010 and 378.020 forbidding the fraudulent conveyance by a debtor of his property so as to put it beyond the reach of creditors, and the limitation applicable in such cases was five (5) years after the cause of action accrued as prescribed in this section, and KRS 413.130 says that the action accrues when the fraudulent acts are discovered but in no case may it be brought beyond ten (10) years after the perpetration of the fraud. Moore v. Shepherd, 189 Ky. 593 , 225 S.W. 484, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1920 ).

An action to cancel a conveyance because of fraud or undue influence is governed and controlled by the provisions of this section and KRS 413.130 . Tucker v. Tucker's Ex'r, 201 Ky. 383 , 257 S.W. 46, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Attack upon conveyance from husband to wife on the ground it was designed to defraud creditors of husband could not be maintained after five (5) years from the discovery of the fraud. Leitchfield Milling Co. v. Rogers, 239 Ky. 481 , 39 S.W.2d 961, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 803 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The six (6) months’ limitation prescribed in KRS 378.070 is exclusively applicable to an attack upon a preferential conveyance as set forth in KRS 378.060 and does not apply to an action brought under KRS 378.010 , 378.020 and 378.030 to set aside a deed on basis of fraud which may be maintained under this section at any time within five (5) years after the perpetration of the fraud against which relief is prayed or under KRS 413.130 within five (5) years from the time of the discovery of the fraud through the exercise of due diligence but not later than ten (10) years from its perpetration. Gillardi v. Henry, 272 Ky. 188 , 113 S.W.2d 1158, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 102 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Although action on notes is governed by 15-year statute, an action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance by the maker of the notes and to subject the property to the payment of the notes is an action for relief from fraud, governed by the five-year statute. Sword v. Scott, 293 Ky. 630 , 169 S.W.2d 825, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 676 ( Ky. 1943 ).

An action to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent as to creditors is not governed by six (6) months’ limitation of KRS 378.070 but by this section providing that such action is not barred until five (5) years from the time the cause of action accrued and by KRS 413.130 providing that such cause of action does not accrue until the fraud is discovered but that in any event is barred ten (10) years from the time the fraud was perpetrated. Morgan v. Hibbard, Spencer, Bartlett & Co., 299 Ky. 57 , 184 S.W.2d 218, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1015 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where the creditor obtained a foreign judgment against the debtor, and then brought action to set aside the debtor’s fraudulent conveyance to his spouse, the fraudulent transfer action accrued when the foreign judgment was obtained, as the creditor failed, as a matter of law, to exercise all reasonable and ordinary diligence in discovering the alleged fraud perpetrated by the debtor. Shelton v. Clifton, 746 S.W.2d 414, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 42 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Trustee attempted to cure the time bar under an “adverse domination” theory, but the court was unpersuaded that the doctrine tolled either the two-year (Bankruptcy law) or five-year (state law) statute of limitations for the Trustee’s fraudulent transfer claims here, as that doctrine is not generally applicable to limited liability companies nor applied outside of the “discovery rule” context, and cannot be asserted by an entity other than the debtor. Wheatley v. McCarty (In re CC Operations, LLC), 618 B.R. 471, 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 1104 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2020 ).

121.—Deed.
122.— —Setting Aside.

An action to divide land of ancestor and to set aside a deed executed by him because of fraud in its procurement insofar as it pertains to setting aside the deed is not an action for the recovery of real property, to which the limitation of KRS 413.010 applies, but is an action to set aside a deed because of fraud to which the limitations of this section and KRS 413.130 apply. Combs v. Grigsby, 200 Ky. 31 , 252 S.W. 111, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 7 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Where grantors claimed that their quitclaim deed was obtained by fraud of grantee in withholding information that land contained fluorspar deposits, but grantee had commenced mining fluorspar from the land before the execution of the deed, under a lease from other title claimants, and the mining operations were open and notorious, grantor’s action to set aside deed was barred by five-year statute. Morgan v. Hughett, 301 Ky. 409 , 192 S.W.2d 197, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 496 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where the circumstances surrounding the execution of deed from a mother to her son were strongly suggestive of fraud, the five-year statute of limitations precluded cancellation of the deed on that ground. Bostic v. Bostic, 264 S.W.2d 59, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 643 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Action seeking to have deed, executed by decedent but reserving a life estate, set aside on grounds of fraud and failure of consideration was barred under all circumstances after a lapse of ten (10) years, as the limitations against the claim of fraud commenced to run when the deed was executed. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Where action to set aside a deed on the ground of fraud would have been barred as to the decedent by the statute of limitations of ten (10) years, the administratrix and the other heirs of the decedent stood in his shoes and action, being barred as to him, was also barred as to them. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

An action to set aside a deed on the ground of undue influence is governed by the five-year statute of limitations set forth in subsection (12) (now (11)) of this section as may be extended by KRS 413.130(3). Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

As a general rule, the recording of a deed obtained by fraud is notice to the grantor, and the grantor must bring an action to set aside the deed within five (5) years after the recording of the deed, or within 10 years of execution of the deed, whichever is earlier. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

An action to set aside conveyance to grantor’s father upon whose petition the grantor had been adjudged incompetent before deed was executed was based on fraud and must be brought within five (5) years or it is barred. Powell v. Winchester Bank, 551 S.W.2d 820, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 706 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

123.— —Reformation.

Due diligence requires that fraud or mistake be discovered at least within five (5) years from the recording of a deed; thus cause of action by grantor to correct description in a deed was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations where she proved no estoppel. Martin v. Wagers, 310 Ky. 363 , 220 S.W.2d 580, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 903 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Grantor, in action to correct description in deed on ground of fraud or mistake, must allege and prove that she did not and could not have discovered it by the exercise of reasonable diligence within the five (5) year period of limitations or it is barred. Martin v. Wagers, 310 Ky. 363 , 220 S.W.2d 580, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 903 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where a suit to reform a deed to except certain mining leases was instituted more than six (6) years after the execution of the deed, and the grantors knew at that time, or soon thereafter, about the leases, the action was barred by subsection (12) of this section. Combs v. Grigsby, 279 S.W.2d 249, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 522 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where fiduciary relationship existed between grantee and grantor, grantee would have been estopped from relying upon the statute of limitations in an action to reform deed on the ground of mutual mistake, and it would follow that those claiming under him would also be estopped from asserting limitations, especially those who through their own actions prevented the plaintiff from discovering and asserting a right before the statute had run. Strode v. Spoden, 284 S.W.2d 663, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where mother had conveyed one (1) tract of land to a son reserving minerals for life by a deed recorded 24 years before her death and subsequently conveyed to all her eight (8) children the minerals in all her land with reservation of a life estate, the action of the other seven (7) children against their brother to reform their mother’s prior deed to him on the ground of mutual mistake in reserving a life estate instead of the minerals outright accrued upon their mother’s death and was barred five (5) years later, since they could have discovered the mistake at any time by diligent effort. Stepp v. Stepp, 288 S.W.2d 337, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1956 ).

An action to reform deeds on the ground of mutual mistake filed in 1958 was barred by either the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section or the ten (10) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.130 where the deeds were executed in 1944 and 1945. Gallin v. Combs, 341 S.W.2d 778, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 87 ( Ky. 1960 ).

124.— —Shortage in Acreage.

There being no covenant in the deed as to quantity of land conveyed and the warranty only applying to the title, an action to recover for deficiency was based on the implied promise or assumpsit grantor would refund the money received by them under a mistake, which was barred in five (5) years from the discovery, and in no case extending beyond ten (10) years. Burton v. Cowles' Adm'x, 156 Ky. 100 , 160 S.W. 782, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Where a warranty in a deed did not cover the quantity of land, plaintiff’s right to recover a portion of the consideration for a deficiency in quantity was in assumpsit for money paid under mistake and was barred in five (5) years after the discovery of the mistake. Burton v. Cowles' Adm'x, 156 Ky. 100 , 160 S.W. 782, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1913 ).

The right of action to recover money paid for land under mistake as to acreage is based on the contract which the law implies to repay money paid by mistake and the five (5) year statute of limitations commences to run when the payment is made and not when the contract under which it is paid is executed. Morris v. McDonald, 196 Ky. 716 , 245 S.W. 903, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 606 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Failure of plaintiff who had exchanged lands to have tract conveyed to him surveyed until more than five (5) years after the exchange when he began to make preparations to subdivide it did not constitute laches and an action brought promptly, upon the discovery through the survey of a deficiency of over 39 acres, to recover its value was not barred by the five-year statute of limitations. Barton v. Jones, 206 Ky. 238 , 267 S.W. 214, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1924 ).

An action by purchaser for shortage in acreage accrues upon final payment of purchase money and limitations begin to run then. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

An action by purchaser for shortage in acreage, in absence of a specific warranty as to quantity, is founded on fraud or mistake by reason of which one has been required to pay for something he did not get and this section is applicable. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Limitations did not commence to run against action by purchaser for shortage in acreage in land purchased in 1913 until final payment was made in 1918 and action commenced in 1926 was not barred by KRS 413.130 placing a ten (10) year qualification on this section. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Plaintiff, in action for shortage in acreage, failed to prove that he could not have discovered by exercise of reasonable diligence that the alleged shortage existed before the five-year statute of limitations had run and his right of action was barred. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Since more than seven (7) years had elapsed between the final payment and the filing of suit, action of purchaser for shortage in acreage was barred by the five (5) year statute unless he could show that by the exercise of ordinary diligence and prudence, he did not and could not have discovered the shortage alleged sooner than five (5) years before filing suit. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Payment was made to seller by purchaser when he assumed seller’s mortgage debt by executing a note to mortgagee bank and seller delivered him a deed acknowledging receipt of other consideration and the statute of limitations commenced running on an action by purchaser for shortage in acreage at that time, it being immaterial as to when purchaser paid the note. Harlan v. Buckley, 268 Ky. 148 , 103 S.W.2d 946, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 774 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Since purchaser’s action to recover for shortage in acreage was based on an implied promise to repay the part of the purchase money paid by mistake, the five (5) year statute of limitations commenced running when the purchase money was fully paid upon delivery of the deed. Harlan v. Buckley, 268 Ky. 148 , 103 S.W.2d 946, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 774 ( Ky. 1936 ).

A cause of action by the purchaser of land to recover for a deficiency in the acreage conveyed does not accrue until the purchaser has paid a sufficient sum on the purchase price of the land to constitute an overpayment by reason of the deficiency. Kilburn v. Pierson, 293 Ky. 480 , 169 S.W.2d 326, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 653 ( Ky. 1943 ).

125.—Money Paid by Mistake, Recovery.

In action to compel surrender of note and recovery of $200 paid by mistake on note executed without consideration, the recovery of the $200 paid by mistake was barred by the five-year statute of limitations. Avritt v. Russell, 58 S.W. 811, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 752 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 247 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

The general rule is that a cause of action to recover money paid by mistake arises at the time of payment but this rule did not apply to suit to settle accounts of county and to recover the amount erroneously included in warrant issued by the county on the ground of mistake which arose at the time of the execution and delivery of the warrant as the county could have had a suit for cancellation or reformation of the warrant without making the payment. Robertson v. Jefferson County, 205 Ky. 479 , 266 S.W. 27, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Five-year statute of limitations applied to the unjust enrichment claim by the holder of oil and gas interests against a property owner when the holder alleged that it made overpayments of royalty payments to the owner. Furthermore, the discovery rule did not toll the statute of limitations as the holder failed to discover its alleged overpayments to the owner due to a lack of reasonable diligence on the holder’s part. EQT Prod. Co. v. Big Sandy Co., L.P., 590 S.W.3d 275, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 200 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

126.—Vacation of Judgment.

This section and KRS 413.130 are applicable to remedies provided in KRS 394.295 which authorize the vacation of a judgment after expiration of term at which rendered for fraud practiced by successful party. Mussman v. Pepples, 243 Ky. 674 , 49 S.W.2d 592, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where husband had no actual knowledge of the rendition of a judgment against him in a suit for alimony and divorce but had filed a motion to quash the return on the summons, his suit to set the judgment aside on the basis of fraud was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Mussman v. Pepples, 243 Ky. 674 , 49 S.W.2d 592, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1932 ).

127.—Recovery of Insurance Premiums.

If a wife procures insurance on the life of her husband without his knowledge and consent and pays his money for the premiums, he is entitled to recover the same back from the insurance company and the five (5) year statute of limitations under this section does not begin to run until, with the exercise of ordinary diligence, he could have discovered the existence of the policy or the payment of the premiums. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Trende, 53 S.W. 412, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 909 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 565 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

Where plaintiff paid premiums on insurance policies on life of deceased under mistake of law, action to recover premiums paid more than five (5) years before action was brought was not barred by this section, since payment of premiums and continuing in force of policies was one continuous transaction, and plaintiff’s claim to premiums did not mature until the death of insured when defendant asserted claim to policies. Newton v. Hicks' Adm'r, 282 Ky. 226 , 138 S.W.2d 329, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1940 ).

An action to recover premiums paid on a policy in fraud of creditors under KRS 297.140 (now repealed) and 297.150 (now repealed) is within this section. Parks v. Parks' Ex'rs, 288 Ky. 350 , 156 S.W.2d 90, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 88 ( Ky. 1941 ).

128.—Setting Aside Note and Mortgage.

Where an action to cancel note and mortgage on ground of fraud was not an action to set aside judgment obtained by defendant on original note since that judgment was set aside and that action dismissed by defendant in consideration of execution of new note and mortgage by plaintiff sought to be enforced by defendant by cross petition but an action having for its exclusive purpose the setting aside of the original note and mortgage executed some 24 years before the filing of the instant action for the purpose, of course, of obtaining relief which would destroy the consideration for the new note and mortgage evidencing and securing the same indebtedness, it was barred by this section and KRS 413.130 . Bohn v. German Protestant Orphans Home Co., 283 Ky. 509 , 142 S.W.2d 167, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1940 ).

129.—Rescission.

An action to rescind the purchase of a note was not barred by limitations, where it was brought within five (5) years of the plaintiff’s discovery of the fraud and within ten (10) years of the perpetration of the fraud. Farmers' Trust Co. v. Threlkeld's Adm'x, 257 Ky. 211 , 77 S.W.2d 616, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1934 ).

Action to rescind transaction for fraud, consisting of representation by president of holding company that impending merger with certain company would not be effected until an audit of that company’s affairs had been made, was not barred by limitations or by laches when brought on day that holding company went into receivership, and brought again in proper circuit court less than seven (7) months after it was finally determined that suit was originally brought in wrong venue, in spite of fact that merger had been published in newspapers in June before holding company went into receivership in November. Kentucky Title Trust Co. v. Weil, 281 Ky. 763 , 136 S.W.2d 1097, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1939 ).

130.—Rights to Life Insurance Policy.

This section barred relief on the ground of mistake for children of a first marriage in an action between them and their half brothers and sisters by a subsequent marriage of their father to determine rights to a life insurance policy on the life of their father naming their mother, who had died more than 13 years previously, as the beneficiary, if living, otherwise the insured’s children. Webb v. Webb, 64 S.W. 839, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1057 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 578 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

131.—Affidavits of Constructive Service.

A judgment in proceedings in rem, in which constructive service is permitted, can be attacked on the ground of fraud in the affidavits upon which constructive service was made only within five (5) years from the time the fraud was discovered, or in any event within ten (10) years from the time the fraud was committed, except in the case of will contests, where relief is limited to three (3) years by KRS 394.280 . Miller v. Hill, 293 Ky. 242 , 168 S.W.2d 769, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1943 ).

132.—Surcharging Settlement.

Where 20 years had passed from the time of defendant’s discovery of the alleged fraud to the time of commencement of action, her counterclaim in action by administrator against her for expenses and fees in excess of moneys in his hands was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations unless she could amend her counterclaim and surcharge the account of administrator. Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ).

Fiscal court’s suits against sheriff and surety on grounds of fraud or mistake were suits to surcharge settlements for limitation purposes. American Surety Co. v. Bales, 228 Ky. 543 , 15 S.W.2d 481, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 620 ( Ky. 1929 ).

A cause of action to surcharge the settlement of an estate arose when the settlement was made, although subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 provides the cause of action does not accrue until the fraud or mistake is discovered since ordinary diligence must be exercised to make discovery and, where the facts are disclosed by a public record which is required to be kept and no examination is made of it, that is not the exercise of ordinary diligence. Hall's Adm'r v. Hall's Ex'r, 265 Ky. 528 , 97 S.W.2d 23, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1936 ).

A ward’s cause of action to surcharge his guardian’s settlement for fraud accrues when the final settlement is filed, and limitations begin to run from the date the minor came of age and, where minor knew of fraud when he came of age, the five (5) year limitation applied. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A complaint, filed on December 31, 1959, which alleged in substance that a former county clerk’s annual settlements for the years 1949 to 1952 were fraudulently made, that the former clerk knowingly omitted true figures and inserted false ones in each report, that these acts were done with the intent to defraud and resulted in defrauding the county, that the fraud was not ascertained until December 1, 1959, when an audit by a CPA was filed, and that the fraud was not and could not have been discovered before that time alleged a case within the ten (10) year limitation of subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 and was not limited by the five (5) year provision of this section, since the negligence or laches of public officials, in failing to make a thorough annual audit for each report, cannot be imputed to the public. Madison County v. Arnett, 360 S.W.2d 208, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1962 ).

133.—Cancellation of Partnership Settlement.

Plea of limitation was available in action by a partner to cancel prior settlements on ground of fraud. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

134.—Accrual of Action.

The right of minority stockholders of a corporation to maintain an action in equity to compel its controlling corporation to satisfy a judgment obtained against it based on the fraudulent diversion by the controlling corporation of surplus earnings of the controlled corporation accrued at the juncture of wrong and damage that gave rise to a cause of action which occurred when the controlled corporation was required to pay the judgment and not at the time of the wrongful diversion of the surplus earnings. Dodd v. Pittsburg, C., C. & S. L. R. Co., 127 Ky. 762 , 106 S.W. 787, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 605 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1908 ).

Where more than ten (10) years had elapsed between the time a trustee paid over to the cestui que trust the sum alleged to have been paid her by mistake and the institution of action to recover it, the five (5) year statute of limitations barred a recovery of the money paid, for the trustee was bound to know that he could not dissipate the body of the trust fund and the cause of action accrued at the time he paid the money. Blakley v. Hanberry, 137 Ky. 283 , 125 S.W. 703, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 567 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Action by creditors of insolvent husband to recover to the extent that expenditures made by him increased the vendible value of his wife’s real estate accrued when the visible improvements were made and, since the basis of their action was fraud of the husband in diverting his resources from the discharge of his debts, the action had to be brought within five (5) years after the cause of action accrued unless the fraud was not found out within that time. Pierce v. J. B. Pierce's Trustee in Bankruptcy, 238 Ky. 495 , 38 S.W.2d 254, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1931 ).

135.—Running of Statute.

Where revenue collector mistakenly paid over all of the school tax derived from corporations to trustees of white school, trustees of the white school did not receive the money in trust but simply received it in the honest belief that they were entitled to it and the trustees of the colored school had the right at any time to have demanded their part of the fund from the collector or the white school; therefore, the cause of action arose immediately upon diversion of the funds either by the collector or trustees of the white school and accordingly the five (5) year statute of limitations commenced to run in favor of the white school when the money belonging to the colored school came into possession and not when demand was made. Board of Trustees v. Board of Trustees, 181 Ky. 810 , 205 S.W. 904, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 604 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Where amendment sets out no new cause of action and makes no new demands, it will relate back to the commencement of the action, and the running of the statute against the claim of fraud will be arrested on the date of the filing of the original petition. Martin v. Hall, 297 Ky. 537 , 180 S.W.2d 390, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 178 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Limitation does not run where a grantee under a deed, which by mutual mistake does not describe the property granted, has been in possession of the land. Hamblin v. Johnson, 254 S.W.2d 76, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1128 ( Ky. 1952 ).

136.— —Actual or Constructive Notice.

Execution in 1914 on judgment obtained in 1908, which was not paid, more than five (5) years after actual and constructive notice of judgment debtor’s conveyance to wife without consideration, and of her possession, was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Harris v. Harris, 179 Ky. 834 , 201 S.W. 312, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 287 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Where demurrer admitted that more than five (5) years had elapsed since the execution of two (2) deeds and more than 25 years since the execution of one deed, plaintiff necessarily had knowledge of the alleged duress or of any fraud perpetrated on her at the respective times of the execution of those deeds and the limitation of five (5) years to obtain relief on the ground of fraud or mistake under this section applied. Clay v. Clay, 199 Ky. 4 , 250 S.W. 829, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 788 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Parties to and attorneys in a division suit were chargeable with notice not only of the title of defendant to minerals under the involved tract of land but also with notice of the fact that the division deed executed to it conveyed the oil and gas under the surface acreage that it received in the division; therefore, the right to maintain an action to expunge references in court orders and conveyances of oil and gas to defendant was barred within five (5) years thereafter. Elkhorn Coal Corp. v. Hite, 225 Ky. 735 , 9 S.W.2d 1083, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Recording of husband’s deed to wife was constructive notice of her claim to the property and barred actions by husband’s creditors which were not brought within five (5) (5) years. Pierce v. J. B. Pierce's Trustee in Bankruptcy, 238 Ky. 495 , 38 S.W.2d 254, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Evidence sustained trial court’s conclusion that wife acquired butcher business from husband in good faith and for valuable consideration, more than five (5) years before the institution of suit, and that creditors had actual notice of the transfer to her more than five (5) years before the commencement of the action. Leitchfield Milling Co. v. Rogers, 239 Ky. 481 , 39 S.W.2d 961, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 803 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Knowledge of fraud or mistake in deed by predecessor in title which was not acted on by him within five (5) years barred persons claiming under him from raising the question. Colony Coal & Coke Corp. v. Olinger, 264 Ky. 775 , 95 S.W.2d 597, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 399 ( Ky. 1936 ).

In action for reformation of a mortgage, where an examination of the record would not have revealed mistake, rule that recorded instruments furnish constructive notice of mistake revealed thereby, so as to start statute of limitations running, did not apply. Schroath v. Pioneer Bldg. Ass'n, 274 Ky. 685 , 119 S.W.2d 1113, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 314 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where the inspection of court records would have disclosed fraud in obtaining a judgment, action for relief against the fraud must be brought within five (5) years of its perpetration. County Debt Com. v. Morgan County, 279 Ky. 476 , 130 S.W.2d 779, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 279 ( Ky. 1939 ), overruled, Fiscal Court of Estill County v. Debt Com. of Kentucky, 286 Ky. 114 , 149 S.W.2d 735, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1941 ).

In action to recover proceeds allegedly due from sale of land, counterclaim and setoff for value of barn burned a few days prior to delivery of deed was barred by five (5) year statute of limitations under this section where there was nothing to indicate seller concealed from purchaser fact barn burned but he in fact reported it to purchaser’s apparent agent. Kentucky Nat'l Park Com. v. Dennison, 281 Ky. 61 , 134 S.W.2d 973, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 9 ( Ky. 1939 ).

When pleader knew or by ordinary diligence could have known all pertinent facts concerning execution of deed more than five (5) years prior to filing of suit, his action was barred. Hunt v. Picklesimer, 290 Ky. 573 , 162 S.W.2d 27, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 453 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Whether recording of alleged fraudulent deed by vendee of real estate to his daughter constituted such notice of fraud as to bar action to set aside deed after five (5) years from date of recording was not necessary to decide, in action by original vendor to recover balance of purchase price, since vendor could enforce implied vendor’s lien against daughter of vendee without having deed set aside, she not being a bona fide purchaser, and five (5) years not having elapsed from date purchase price was due. Sparkman v. Triplett, 292 Ky. 569 , 167 S.W.2d 323, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Action by owner of farm for damages to his crops caused by oil company’s breach of easement to construct and maintain pipelines underground was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations where the supplemental petition alleged the easement was procured through fraud, deceit and misrepresentations nine (9) years prior to institution of the action. Smith v. Texas Gas Transmission Corp., 325 S.W.2d 314, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Constructive notice by recordation of deed wherein brothers and sisters conveyed mineral interests to a brother could not be construed to mean actual discovery of the fraud in view of the fiduciary relationship and the recordation did not commence the running of the five (5) year statute of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Even allowing plaintiff months to read the 2003 prospectus supplement, which reading was certainly required in the exercise of “ordinary vigilance and attention,” plaintiff should have become aware of defendants’ alleged omissions long before March 20, 2004, five years before it filed the instant suit; as such, plaintiff’s claims based on the 2003 certificates were all time-barred. Republic Bank & Trust Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co., 683 F.3d 239, 2012 FED App. 0186P, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12513 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

137.— —Discovery.

In action seeking to recover investment in oil and gas leases on ground that they were induced by fraudulent representations of defendant, if any fraud was involved, plaintiffs failed to disclose by proof any facts and circumstances which precluded them from discovering it by the exercise of reasonable diligence before the lapse of the five (5) year period of limitations after completion of the drillings when the results were known. Terrill v. Carpenter, 143 F. Supp. 747, 1956 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3028 (D. Ky. 1956 ), aff'd, 249 F.2d 142, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3942 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ).

Plaintiffs failed to prove that the fraud of which they complained could not have been discovered by the use of reasonable diligence within five (5) years prior to the filing of the petition to set aside a conveyance of real estate on the basis of fraud to which the defendant pleaded the five (5) year statute of limitations. Hendrick v. Miller, 107 S.W. 731, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 1030 (1908).

If, when a life insurance society paid the money due on policies in 1900, they knew, or by the exercise of ordinary care could have known, that the beneficiaries to whom it was paid were not creditors of the insured, as they had represented in securing the policies, their right to recover the money paid was barred by the five (5) year statute. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

An action to recover for land conveyed by plaintiff’s vendor to defendants by mistake which was instituted nearly 18 years after the mistake was made and more than five (5) years after the discovery of the mistake was barred by the statute of limitations, for even if it was granted that they, as his vendees, were subrogated to the rights of the vendor, by and against whom the mistake complained of was made, they were chargeable with his discovery of the mistake, and were consequently in no better position to maintain an action than he would have been. Eversole & Co. v. Burt & Brabb Lumber Co., 160 Ky. 477 , 169 S.W. 846, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 464 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Action based on fraud of executor in selling land at public auction with mineral rights allegedly reserved but issuing deed including mineral rights to purchaser was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations where the original petition and four (4) amendments failed to disclose diligence upon the part of plaintiffs to learn of the alleged fraud or that they even made any inquiry about, or attempted to assert any right to the minerals or any acts or conduct on the part of the defendant or the purchaser that lulled them into a sense of security or caused them to refrain from asserting their alleged claims and the deed was put to record more than five (5) years before the institution of their action. Cox v. Simmerman, 243 Ky. 474 , 48 S.W.2d 1078, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where a widow did not discover that the benefits of her husband’s life insurance was paid to his brother personally rather than as executor, the five (5) year statute of limitations on her action to set aside her husband’s change of beneficiary on the grounds of undue influence and lack of capacity did not start until her discovery. Ewing v. Ewing, 258 Ky. 825 , 81 S.W.2d 860, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1935 ).

In the face of finding that bank did not discover, and could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have discovered, the misappropriations of its president until a short time before suit when by chance the matter was brought to the attention of two (2) of the directors and that the president concealed his actions, the five (5) year statute of limitations did not commence running on an action by the bank to recover the misappropriations from the president until the discovery that he had made them. Blackburn's Adm'x v. Union Bank & Trust Co., 269 Ky. 699 , 108 S.W.2d 806, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Where wife did not discover fraud committed upon her by husband in recorded antenuptial contract until after his death, more than five (5) years after the contract was made, and then brought suit, less than ten (10) years after the contract was made, to cancel the contract, the suit was not barred by limitations, since the recording of the contract did not constitute notice to the wife of the fraud. Clore v. Clore, 280 Ky. 131 , 132 S.W.2d 548, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 71 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The five-year limitation on actions for relief for fraud begins to run when the fraud is discovered, or when it could have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence on the part of the one defrauded. Kentucky Title Trust Co. v. Weil, 281 Ky. 763 , 136 S.W.2d 1097, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where fraud in securing judgment was not discovered within five (5) years after its perpetration, KRS 413.130 applied rather than this section. Sutton v. Davis, 283 Ky. 146 , 140 S.W.2d 1020, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 306 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where plaintiff discovered three (3) years after he purchased stones alleged to be genuine diamonds worth $600 that they were not diamonds and were worth only $6.00, he had five (5) years thereafter in which to bring an action for fraud and deceit. Shilling v. McCraw, 298 Ky. 783 , 184 S.W.2d 97, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 999 ( Ky. 1944 ).

One seeking relief because of fraud must exercise reasonable diligence to discover the fraud, in order to extend the five (5) year period of limitations. Morgan v. Hughett, 301 Ky. 409 , 192 S.W.2d 197, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 496 ( Ky. 1946 ).

If the five-year period of subsection (12) (now (11)) has elapsed, the plaintiff must allege and prove that the fraud or mistake was not only not discovered within the five-year period, but that it could not have been discovered sooner by the exercise of reasonable diligence. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

Where the creditor obtained a foreign judgment against the debtor, and then brought action to set aside the debtor’s fraudulent conveyance to his spouse, the fraudulent transfer action accrued when the foreign judgment was obtained, as the creditor failed, as a matter of law, to exercise all reasonable and ordinary diligence in discovering the alleged fraud perpetrated by the debtor. Shelton v. Clifton, 746 S.W.2d 414, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 42 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Where plaintiff salesman could not have discovered defendant employer’s alleged fraud in calculating his compensation prior to 1999, due to the employer’s nondisclosure of deductions from his sales commissions, the five-year limitations period of KRS 413.120(12) was not violated. Dodd v. Dyke Indus., 518 F. Supp. 2d 970, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78248 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

Plaintiffs’ 2009 intentional misrepresentation/fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims were barred by the five-year statute of limitations, under KRS 413.120(12), because plaintiffs knew they had been injured and the cause of the injury in December of 2001, and they simply failed to further investigate the metes and bounds of their claims. Kerman v. Chenery Assocs., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30164 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 22, 2011).

Doctor’s fraud and fraudulent concealment claims were time-barred, under KRS 413.120 , because the doctor filed the claims more than five years after she should have had reason to investigate the attorney’s payments, and while the doctor argued that the attorney’s fraudulent concealment of the settlement payments tolled her statute of limitations, the doctor had not shown due diligence. Martello v. Santana, 713 F.3d 309, 2013 FED App. 0100P, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 7096 (6th Cir. Ky. 2013 ).

In a suit arising out of the malfunction of, and failure to fix, water filtrations systems, plaintiffs’ fraud claim based on assertions that the company’s employees had stated that the water in plaintiffs’ home was tested and that it was safe to drink brought on March 16, 2017 are untimely because plaintiffs certainly had reason to suspect the alleged fraud by March 22, 2013, but they did not file suit until more than five years later. Newberry v. Serv. Experts Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC, 806 Fed. Appx. 348, 2022 FED App. 132N, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 7092 (6th Cir. Ky. 2020 ).

138.— —Confidential Relationship.

Concealment by uncle, who had become niece’s guardian after the death of her father, of information that he had exchanged her bonds and taken title to the ones exchanged therefor in his own name constituted an obstruction, so that an action for the alleged fraud was not barred by statute of limitations, even though the action was not brought for more than 20 years after the niece had become of age and more than three (3) years after the uncle had died, since he had been in a fiduciary relationship with the niece. Security Trust Co. v. Wilson, 307 Ky. 152 , 210 S.W.2d 336, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 701 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where a confidential relationship exists between the parties and there has been fraud in the inception of the execution of a deed or contract, constructive notice by recordation cannot be construed to mean actual discovery of the fraud and the recordation does not start the running of the five (5) year period of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ); Jennings v. Fain, 226 Ky. 290 , 10 S.W.2d 1101, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1928 ); Hollifield v. Blackburn, 294 Ky. 74 , 170 S.W.2d 910, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1943 ); McCoy v. Arena, 295 Ky. 403 , 174 S.W.2d 726, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 266 ( Ky. 1943 ); Morgan v. Hughett, 301 Ky. 409 , 192 S.W.2d 197, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 496 ( Ky. 1946 ); Stepp v. Stepp, 288 S.W.2d 337, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Where a confidential relationship exists and there is fraud in the inception, mere recordation of the instrument is not sufficient notice to begin the running of the statute. McMurray v. McMurray, 410 S.W.2d 139, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 30 ( Ky. 1966 ).

When a confidential relationship exists between the parties, the statute of limitations for fraud does not begin to run until actual discovery of the fraud, there being no duty on the part of the injured party to exercise due diligence to discover the fraud; however, the party seeking to prosecute an action after the expiration of the general statutory time limit is not wholly relieved of the burden of pleading and proving the tardiness is excusable. Boone v. Gonzalez, 550 S.W.2d 571, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 685 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

139.—Pleadings and Proof.

To bar plaintiff’s action against bank to recover losses he had to pay purchasers of his bank stock which were allegedly caused by the bank’s misrepresentations, the burden was upon the bank to show actual knowledge on the part of plaintiff of the failing condition of the bank more than five (5) years before the institution of his suit. Day's Committee v. Exchange Bank of Kentucky, 116 S.W. 259 ( Ky. 1909 ).

Where there is no replication indicating the time the discovery of the mistake was made, the five (5) year statute will be computed from the time the mistake occurred. Robertson v. Jefferson County, 205 Ky. 479 , 266 S.W. 27, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The five-year limitation of this section did not bar action for relief from fraud where amendment to “objections and exceptions” entitled “amended answer, counterclaim and setoff” related back to the filing of the original pleading and the original pleading was filed in time. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Action brought by grantor attacking validity of deed on ground of fraud, mistake and undue influence was barred by five-year statute of limitations, in absence of allegation that confidential relationship existed between grantor and grantees, and in absence of allegation that alleged fraud was not discovered and could not have been discovered by the exercise of reasonable diligence within the five-year period. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

Former salesman’s election to plead part of his case as a common law breach of contract and fraud relieved him of the KRS 413.120(12) statute of limitations which applied to statutory claims, but also foreclosed him from the liquidated damages and attorneys fees provided for by KRS 337.385(1). Any other result seemed unfair because it would have allowed a plaintiff to characterize his claim as a common law claim for purposes of an advantageous statute of limitations, but as a statutory claim for purposes of statutory liquidated damages and attorneys fees. Dodd v. Dyke Indus., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34786 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 25, 2008).

140.— —After Five-Year Period.

In action by railroad employee against voluntary relief department for compensation for injuries, where an award made more than eight (8) years previously by advisory committee was set up as a bar, a reply, alleging fraud or mistake in the award but not containing any allegation that the alleged fraud or mistake was not known from the time the decision was rendered or that it had been discovered within five (5) years last past or by the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have been sooner discovered, was barred by limitation. Reager's Adm'x v. Pennsylvania Co., 169 Ky. 479 , 184 S.W. 395, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 721 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Ordinarily, limitations to be available must be pleaded, but, where action is brought for relief from fraud or mistake, after five (5) years, plaintiff must allege facts excusing delay, in order to state cause of action. McCarty v. McCarty's Adm'r, 258 Ky. 666 , 81 S.W.2d 8, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 225 ( Ky. 1935 ).

An action for relief from fraud, filed more than five (5) years after its original accrual, must allege facts showing the fraud could not have been discovered within the five (5) year limitation under the exercise of reasonable diligence. Woolery v. Smith, 302 Ky. 725 , 196 S.W.2d 115, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 741 ( Ky. 1946 ).

If the five-year period of limitations is allowed to elapse, the plaintiff must allege and prove that the fraud or mistake was not only not discovered within the period but that the same could not have been discovered sooner by the exercise of reasonable diligence. Justice v. Graham, 246 S.W.2d 135, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 618 ( Ky. 1952 ).

In order to recover damages in an action brought later than five (5) years after the alleged perpetration of fraud there must be an allegation and proof that the fraud was not discovered within the five-year period allowed under this section and that by the exercise of ordinary care could not have been discovered within that time. Boone v. Gonzalez, 550 S.W.2d 571, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 685 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

141.— —Demurrer.

The question of imitation cannot be raised by demurrer but it must be pleaded in order for a party to avail himself of it; thus, the fact that it appeared in the petition that the attack upon a conveyance was made after the expiration of five (5) years from its execution and that the attacking creditor did not allege that he could not by ordinary diligence have ascertained the fraud within five (5) years from the execution of the conveyance was not ground for demurrer. Childers v. Bales, 124 S.W. 295, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 734 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Though it may be true that the plea of fraud is barred by the statute of limitations, that is a matter which must be pleaded, and cannot be raised by demurrer. Middleton v. Commonwealth, 200 Ky. 237 , 254 S.W. 754, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 55 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Where there was no specific affirmative plea of limitations, though facts were pleaded in joint answer which were equivalent to a plea, whether or not the plea in bar was sufficiently stated to raise the question of limitations, the demurrer in action on note and for cancellation of deed of husband to wife allegedly to defraud creditors appropriately raised that question. House v. Farmers State Bank, 269 Ky. 80 , 106 S.W.2d 113, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 557 ( Ky. 1937 ).

It is the duty of plaintiff in an action for relief against fraud or mistake to allege and prove, if denied, that his action is not barred by the limitations prescribed by this section and KRS 413.130 , and the question is sufficiently raised by the defendant by filing of a demurrer to the petition. Mullins v. Jennings' Guardian, 273 Ky. 68 , 115 S.W.2d 340, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 580 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The question of limitation in an action for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake may be raised by demurrer where the petition contains no allegation excusing the delay in filing action. Flynn v. Fike, 291 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W.2d 470, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 227 ( Ky. 1942 ), overruled in part, Townsend v. Cable, 378 S.W.2d 806, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 211 ( Ky. 1964 ).

Although generally the statute of limitations must be pleaded and cannot be raised by demurrer, in an action by bank stockholder against transferee bank for an accounting of assets transferred based on fraudulent acts of bank and officer, where petition showed on its face that she had waited nearly 15 years before initiating action to protect any rights she may have had as a result of the liquidation of bank assets, the petition was demurrable to show that the action was barred by this section as extended by KRS 413.130 , the ten (10) year statute of limitations relating to fraud, since plaintiff did not allege sufficient facts excusing or warranting her delay. Roush v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 310 Ky. 408 , 220 S.W.2d 984, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1949 ).

142.Action for Personal Injuries Against Builder.

Circuit court did not err in dismissing a moving company worker's negligent design and construction claim against a homebuilder because the limitations period had expired where the worker admitted that she aware of the step on the landing, and thus, the condition of the porch was non-latent. Breedlove v. Smith Custom Homes, Inc., 530 S.W.3d 481, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 538 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Subsection (14) of this section and KRS 413.135 deal with the same general area of legislation and, since KRS 413.135 is a newly enacted statute rather than an amendment to an existing statute of limitations, it can properly be examined to clarify the legislative intent. Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ). (Decision prior to 1988 amendment of this section).

143.Acknowledgment or New Promise to Pay.

Promises made before a debt was barred, or acknowledgments made, served to suspend the running of the statute, to prolong the statutory limitation, by cutting off the antecedent time. Therefore, if as much as five (5) years had not elapsed between any renewal of promise or acknowledgment of the obligation, the action would rest upon the original undertaking and it was not necessary to prove such a positive and unqualified acknowledgment as was required where the action was upon the new promise. Rankin v. Anderson, 69 S.W. 705, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 647 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 493 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902).

In order to remove the bar interposed by the statute of limitations, an express promise to pay, or an acknowledgment made to the creditor or someone acting for him, of the debt as a debt due at the time, coupled with the original consideration, must have been made within the time limited by the statute for bringing the action. Dowell v. Dowell's Adm'r, 137 Ky. 167 , 125 S.W. 283, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 555 ( Ky. 1910 ). See Marcum's Adm'x v. Terry, 146 Ky. 145 , 142 S.W. 209, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 15 ( Ky. 1912 ).

As a new promise creates a new obligation, it could be restricted to the payment of any part of the original obligation, but when it is not so restricted an unconditional promise to pay the indebtedness includes the unpaid interest, which is an integral part of the note and is carried with it unless segregated by agreement, just as such interest would be recovered in a suit on a note barred by the statute in the absence of a plea of that character. West v. W. T. B. Williams & Sons, 202 Ky. 382 , 259 S.W. 1015, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Suit must be on the new promise if made after the bar of limitations is complete. West v. W. T. B. Williams & Sons, 202 Ky. 382 , 259 S.W. 1015, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Bar of statute of limitations may be removed by oral or written promise to pay debt. Reamer's Ex'r v. Coleman, 226 Ky. 301 , 10 S.W.2d 1095, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Evidence of an acknowledgment of, or promise to pay, an ordinary debt, if sufficient to suspend the statute of limitations, is sufficient to constitute an estoppel “in actions in tort or upon specialties” which are required to be brought within a certain time. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Promise to pay suspending running of statute of limitations must be proven to have been made within statutory time. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Unqualified acknowledgment of debt as subsisting demand prolongs statutory limitation, express promise to pay being unnecessary. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

The law implies a promise to pay from an express acknowledgment of the debt. Muenninghoff v. Friedlander, 294 Ky. 664 , 172 S.W.2d 457, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 511 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where plaintiff seeks to recover on ground that new promise tolled statute, the alleged new promise must form the basis of the action to the exclusion of the original promise. Muenninghoff v. Friedlander, 294 Ky. 664 , 172 S.W.2d 457, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 511 ( Ky. 1943 ).

An acknowledgment of a debt to lift the bar limitation must be distinct, unqualified, unconditional recognition of an obligation for which the person making the admission is liable. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

In order to establish a waiver of notice of dishonor after discharge, the circumstances or conversations relied on must be unequivocal and import a clear admission of liability or amount to a distinct promise to pay; waiver will not be inferred from doubtful language. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

One under a moral, as well as a legal, obligation to pay a note becomes liable upon a new promise to pay made after the bar of limitation has become complete, the new promise creating a new obligation. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The acknowledgment from which the law is to raise a promise, contrary to the provisions of the statute, must be clear and express, where the mind is brought directly to the point — debt or no debt at the present time — not whether the debt was once an existing demand. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

In action against administrator and heirs seeking recovery on notes based on new promise to pay after expiration of 15 years from due date and attempting to have real estate that passed to administrator and heirs sold to satisfy claim, the issue of new promise to pay was a legal one, so that doctrine of laches could not be applied and the matter must be determined by the statute of limitations, notwithstanding that the action was one of which a court of equity had jurisdiction by reason of the legal issue being joined with another issue of exclusive equitable jurisdiction. Gover's Adm'r v. Dunagan, 299 Ky. 38 , 184 S.W.2d 225, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1020 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A new promise to pay a debt barred by limitation creates a new obligation and the action must be brought on the new promise. Hutsell v. Current's Adm'r, 308 Ky. 787 , 215 S.W.2d 978, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1053 ( Ky. 1948 ).

An express acknowledgement of a debt once barred by limitation, when proved by clear and convincing evidence, raises an implied promise to pay the debt. Hutsell v. Current's Adm'r, 308 Ky. 787 , 215 S.W.2d 978, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1053 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Although acknowledgment was written in ex parte petition, it was not a “written contract” within the meaning of KRS 413.090 , but the 15 year statute of limitations, but it was simply a new promise based upon the original oral contract which was controlled by this section, the five (5) year statute of limitations. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Since reply to cross complaint showed that more than five (5) years and even more than ten (10) years had elapsed between the date of acknowledgment in previous ex parte petition on April 24, 1934, and the date creditors filed their answer and cross petition on October 18, 1948, the debt was barred even under the new promise raised by the acknowledgment in the previous ex parte action. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

144.—Persons to Whom Made.

Acknowledgment of an indebtedness which has been barred by limitations to be sufficient must be made to creditor or to some person acting for him. Thornton's Adm'r v. Minton's Ex'r, 250 Ky. 805 , 64 S.W.2d 158, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 789 ( Ky. 1933 ). See Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

An acknowledgment of a debt or a new promise to pay it to be sufficient, whether or not the debt is barred by the statute of limitations, must be made to the creditor or some person acting for him. Cox v. Monday, 264 Ky. 805 , 95 S.W.2d 785, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 410 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The original transaction must be proven to establish consideration for a new promise to pay a debt barred by the statute of limitations; however, the original transaction may be shown by the admission of the debtor to the creditor or someone acting for him but not to a stranger. Hutsell v. Current's Adm'r, 308 Ky. 787 , 215 S.W.2d 978, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1053 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Acknowledgment of a pre-existing debt barred by limitations may support a new promise to pay it, but it must be made to the debtor or someone acting in his behalf. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

A reply was not demurrable where it was alleged that the acknowledgment or new promise alleged to have been made by decedent was not made to plaintiff, or to her agent or anyone acting in her behalf. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

While statement in previous ex parte suit was an acknowledgment by deceased that she owed the debt, it was not made to her creditor or her creditor’s agent or representative so as to remove the bar of limitations but was simply a statement made to the court by decedent that she owed that debt along with others, in order that she might obtain a certain fund in the hand of her trustee to pay same and the fact that creditor’s mother joined in suit to waive any remainder or contingent interest she might have to the money sought to be withdrawn did not establish a privity between the parties with respect to the new promise. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

145.—Partner.

Where partnership had terminated long before a payment was made on notes by one partner, the payment by the partner did not operate to lift the bar of limitation against his coobligors, there being nothing to show that they consented to the payment, directed it to be made or subsequently ratified it. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

146.—Joint Maker.

Joint maker of notes was liable for the full amount of the notes, and the payment by him operated to lift the bar of limitation not merely as to one third (1/3) of the notes but as to the full amount. Vinson's Ex'xs v. Maynard, 296 Ky. 759 , 178 S.W.2d 603, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1944 ).

147.—Personal Representative or Trustee.

The burden of proving by convincing evidence that a personal representative or trustee stopped the running of the statute of limitations either by part payment or by promise to pay or by such acknowledgment of the debt as would imply a promise to pay is on the party asserting such acts. Fidelity & Columbia Trust Co. v. McCabe, 169 Ky. 613 , 184 S.W. 1124, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 745 ( Ky. 1916 ).

148.—Pleading.

If the statute of limitations bars an action on the original liability, and the creditor seeks to recover on a promise to pay the pre-existing debt, the petition should allege every fact essential to a recovery on the original liability and in addition thereto, the promise to pay. Meyer v. Zotel's Adm'r, 96 Ky. 362 , 29 S.W. 28, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 506 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Where the plaintiff anticipates a plea of limitation, by aptly alleging promises to pay from time to time and an issue is made by answer thereon, no reply to the plea of limitation is necessary. Green's Adm'r v. Smith, 234 Ky. 448 , 28 S.W.2d 494, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1930 ).

149.—Sufficient Proof.

Where father transferred claim to son for valuable consideration and creditor executed mortgage to son, the mortgage was a new promise to pay which tolled the statute of limitations. Hampton v. France, 32 S.W. 950, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 980 ( Ky. 1895 ), modified, 33 S.W. 826, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 982 ( Ky. 1896 ).

Action for money received which defendant had within five (5) years of institution of action promised to pay to plaintiff was not barred by limitations. Maize v. Bradley, 64 S.W. 655, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 993 (1901).

Acknowledgments of indebtedness made at the time of payments and as a part of the same transaction were competent to show for what purpose the payments were made. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

If the debtor at the time he makes the payment on account has before him the account, or knows what it is made up of, and the amount of it, no matter how many items it may contain or what they are for, then his payment will be an acknowledgment of the justice of the entire account and will have the effect of cutting off the time before the payment was made and start the statute running as of the date of the payment. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where a payment is made by the debtor upon an open account or a note before it is barred by limitations, and this fact is shown by competent evidence, it will be a sufficient acknowledgment of the debt to stop the running of the statute up to that time, and the period of limitation will then be computed from the date of the payment. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where debtor knew he owed for board, no part of which was barred by limitations, when he made payments accompanied by the statement that he wanted them to go on his board, the payments were an acknowledgment of so much of the account as was then due and unpaid, and saved from the operation of the statute of limitations the antecedent time, and served to create a new period from which the statute should run. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Payments by abutting property owner credited on the costs of two (2) of the street improvements together with her statement to city attorney were sufficient to constitute an estoppel as to plea of statute of limitations. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Plea of statute of limitations was not available to property owner against claim of bank where property owner made regular and repeated payments to the bank on its note and this was true whether bank credited the payments on its note or on the apportionment warrants held as collateral security for the note; thus, the plea was not available to subsequent mortgagee with actual notice where no element of an estoppel was present. Ideal Sav. Loan & Bldg. Ass'n v. Campbell County Bank, 264 Ky. 778 , 95 S.W.2d 577, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where administrator of estate, when approached by creditors of estate within period of limitations, said that estate had no funds but that he would pay the claims as soon as certain real estate was sold, the statute was tolled. Shaw v. Strauch's Adm'r, 294 Ky. 558 , 172 S.W.2d 50, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 473 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Testimony of attorney, in an action brought against administrator to recover balance of account allegedly owed by decedent, that he, at the request of plaintiff, presented her account to decedent prior to his death and that decedent acknowledged its correctness and paid $100 thereon with the promise that he would pay the balance was sufficient to take the case to the jury and to sustain a verdict if one be returned in favor of plaintiff. Hutsell v. Current's Adm'r, 308 Ky. 787 , 215 S.W.2d 978, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1053 ( Ky. 1948 ).

A statement of account merely itemizing or listing items, with dates, amounts, and some descriptions, on a paper not bearing the name of either party or anything else indicating that it was an account between them which was acknowledged by the debtor as correct and owing and which he promised to pay and on which he had in fact paid $100 was admissible in evidence in an action against administrator to recover upon acknowledgment and a new promise by decedent to pay debt barred by statute of limitations. Hutsell v. Current, 312 Ky. 90 , 226 S.W.2d 539, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Debtor’s unqualified acceptance of the statement of various items of account covering a period of eight (8) years was proof of the admission of a presently subsisting debt of the liabilities barred and recognition of an original liability was an admission that there was an original promise to pay and that recognition formed the consideration for new promise upon which suit was based. Hutsell v. Current, 312 Ky. 90 , 226 S.W.2d 539, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In action against administrator to recover upon decedent’s new promise to pay an account barred by limitations, the direct and positive testimony that decedent had accepted statement of amount as correct and promised to pay it was not contradicted by fact some items were apparently written with the same pencil and at same time although several years had elapsed between the first and last items and that claim submitted to the administrator did not state that the deceased had promised to pay account in installments or that the original agreement was that the obligation would be paid out of his estate if the claimant should outlive him but was not to be paid at all if she predeceased him. Hutsell v. Current, 312 Ky. 90 , 226 S.W.2d 539, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1950 ).

In a stockholder’s suit against the trustee of an alleged pension fund trust to establish the rights of the corporation with respect to the trust fund wherein the defendants maintained that the complaint showed on its face that the claim for relief was barred by limitations because it showed the trustee had repudiated the claim more than five (5) years before the action was brought, while the complaint alleged specifically that the trustee made statements recognizing and acknowledging the trust until a few months before the action was brought, the action was not barred although the complaint further alleged that beginning prior to the period of limitations, the trustee had voted such stock and received the dividends thereon. Whitley v. Mammoth Life & Acci. Ins. Co., 273 S.W.2d 42, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1146 ( Ky. 1954 ).

In an action by elderly parents against their children, there was sufficient proof of acknowledgment of indebtedness to avoid the bar of the statute of limitations under this section as to two (2) of three (3) items. Huffaker v. Twyford, 339 S.W.2d 944, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 500 ( Ky. 1960 ).

150.—Insufficient Proof.

The mere making of a payment on an account consisting of more than one (1) item or an account containing a charge for more than one particular thing, some of which the debtor may recognize as just and others that he may not, will not stop the statute of limitations from running as to any part of the account that the debtor did not then know was in existence or that he did not have in mind when the payment was made. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The mere putting of a credit on an open account or note, unless there is evidence showing that the amount represented by the credit was paid by the debtor on the note or account, will not be sufficient to stop the statute of limitations from running. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

There was no evidence that debtor intended to pay money borrowed or that he acknowledged the justice of it or that at the time he made the payment on indebtedness for board, he knew of the existence of the item for money borrowed so the statute of limitations did not stop running on the money borrowed. Brown's Adm'r v. Osborne, 136 Ky. 456 , 124 S.W. 405, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 505 ( Ky. 1910 ).

A debtor’s statement that in order to settle a creditor’s claim, he was willing to turn over to the creditor a tax bill properly receipted provided creditor would give him a receipt in full for the legal services rendered was simply an offer to compromise and did not constitute a clear and express acknowledgment of a then existing debt which would take the case out of the statute of limitations. Marcum's Adm'x v. Terry, 146 Ky. 145 , 142 S.W. 209, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 15 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Wife’s checks paying the interest on her husband’s note was not a keeping alive of her note which payee had assigned and transferred in due course before maturity putting it on the footing of a bill of exchange and hence her plea of the five (5) year statute of limitations to an action against her on her note was a valid defense. First State Bank v. Parrott, 255 Ky. 615 , 75 S.W.2d 46, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1934 ).

Where the liability of two (2) or more persons is several, no admission or promise by one can remove the bar of the statute of limitations as against the others; hence, the acknowledgment of debt, for labor performed and material furnished to improve home owned by wife under husband’s individual contract, by the husband solely on his own behalf within five (5) years before action was instituted against his wife on implied contract to pay for labor and material which she knew was used in the improvement of her property was not, without more, an acknowledgment of the debt by the wife so as to stop the running of the five (5) year statute of limitations in her favor. Burnett Bros. v. Helburn, 261 Ky. 245 , 87 S.W.2d 371, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 622 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Debtor’s mere admission of justice of debt is insufficient to suspend running of statute of limitations. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

The direction in a will to pay the testator’s “just debts” does not waive the bar of the limitations, since the term “just debts” meant “legal debts.” Jones' Ex'r v. Jones, 275 Ky. 753 , 122 S.W.2d 779, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 504 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where, in order to withdraw from hands of trustee certain funds, a petitioner made a statement to the court that, among certain other obligations, he owed a certain debt, the statement was not such an acknowledgment of the debt to remove the bar of limitations. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Payments by one joint lessor to other joint lessors were a gift where his son had purchased assets of lessor at receiver’s sale and transferred them to his father who used the equipment as his own for 12 years without complaint from the other joint lessors and gave them what he pleased calling them “rents on mining equipment” and the statute of limitations barred the other joint lessors’ claim to the mining equipment under the lien reserved in the lease agreement with the insolvent lessor. Johnson v. Chavies Coal Co., 299 S.W.2d 629, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1957 ).

151.—Questions of Law.

Where the facts were undisputed and not susceptible to more than one interpretation and credibility of witness testifying that decedent had accepted as correct statement of account barred by statute of limitations and had promised to pay it was not questioned, it became a question of law for the court to determine that there had been a sufficient acknowledgment and new promise to pay and the trial court should have directed a verdict for plaintiff. Hutsell v. Current, 312 Ky. 90 , 226 S.W.2d 539, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 595 ( Ky. 1950 ).

152.—Questions for Jury.

A new promise sufficient to toll the statutes must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, but positive testimony of the plaintiff that such promise was made, although denied by defendant, constitutes such evidence. It is a question for the jury whether or not the rule of clear and convincing proof has been met. Muenninghoff v. Friedlander, 294 Ky. 664 , 172 S.W.2d 457, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 511 ( Ky. 1943 ).

153.—Instructions to Jury.

Instruction that action by medical clinic for services rendered was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations and that the jury should find for the defendant unless they believed from the evidence that decedent acknowledged the debt or promised to pay the plaintiff or his agent the claim within five (5) years before commencement of the action and in that event they should find for the plaintiff but to revive the debt the promise or acknowledgment of the debt had to be explicit, direct, positive and unequivocal was not prejudicial to the substantial rights of plaintiff. Bullock v. Gay, 296 Ky. 489 , 177 S.W.2d 883, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 579 ( Ky. 1944 ).

154.Contract for Shorter Period.

A contract providing a shorter limitation period than that prescribed by statute is valid, if the contract period is reasonable. Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 276 Ky. 132 , 122 S.W.2d 990, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Parties dealing at arm’s length may contract for a limitation shorter than that provided by statute, so long as the period provided is a reasonable one. Prewitt v. Supreme Council, R. A., 302 Ky. 301 , 194 S.W.2d 633, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 663 ( Ky. 1946 ).

Where, at time life insurance policy containing a three (3) year limitation clause was issued, Court of Appeals was upholding the rule that parties dealing at arm’s length may control for a reasonable limitation shorter than the statutory provision, the rule would by applicable in an action on this policy, though at a later date, on which the policy was reissued, the court was temporarily adopting the opposite view, holding it contrary to public policy to contravene the statutory limitation. Prewitt v. Supreme Council, R. A., 302 Ky. 301 , 194 S.W.2d 633, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 663 ( Ky. 1946 ).

155.Contract for Longer Period.

Contracts undertaking to fix a longer period of limitation than that established by statute are void. Citizens Bank of Shelbyville v. Hutchison, 272 Ky. 195 , 113 S.W.2d 1148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1938 ).

156.Running of Statute.

Where a married woman purported to make an assignment of her interest in certain gas and oil leases, and the assignment was subsequently judicially determined to be void because her husband had not joined her in the making of the assignment, her right to demand an accounting accrued at the time of the said judicial determination, and the removal of the statutory disability by the death of her husband did not affect her rights so that the five (5) year statute of limitations ran from the time the assignment was declared void. Dempsey v. D. B. & M. Oil & Gas Co., 112 F. Supp. 408, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2786 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

Whatever rights bondholders had against city accrued at the time the bonds matured and, since such actions would have been for the purpose of determining the liability of the city, such actions were not dependent upon outcome of the city’s actions against the abutting property owners so the city’s actions against the abutting property owners could not toll the five (5) year statute of limitations applicable to bondholders’ actions against the city because of its failure to enact proper assessment ordinances, a negligent breach of duty. Heydinger v. Catlettsburg, 114 F. Supp. 294, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3963 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

The statute of limitations on an action against a bank for improperly paying out funds of depositor does not begin to run until he is refused a withdrawal. Long v. Watkins, 271 F. Supp. 630, 1967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7185 (E.D. Ky. 1967 ).

Recovery on mortgage was not barred because of the obstruction by the removal from the state, and the attempt to defeat the foreclosure by the plea to the action at law would not avail because no personal service could have been had. Hampton v. France, 33 S.W. 826, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 982 ( Ky. 1896 ).

The statute of limitations did not begin to run against agent’s claim until decedent’s death at which time the agency expired where they had been decedent’s agent and had managed her property for 121/2 years without a settlement or adjustment having been made or demanded, although decedent had assured them they were to be reasonably and even liberally compensated for their services. McGrew's Ex'r v. Congleton, 139 Ky. 515 , 102 S.W. 1185, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 609 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 4 ( Ky. 1907 ).

A judgment, void because it was rendered when assignor of a note was not before the court, did not suspend the running of the statute of limitations in his favor. Arnett v. Howard, 156 Ky. 458 , 161 S.W. 531, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Although subsequent signing of judgment was good now for then, the plaintiff in fact had no cause of action and no right to enforce his lien until the judgment was signed and the five (5) year statute of limitations did not run against him until then. Shuey v. Hoffman, 235 Ky. 490 , 31 S.W.2d 727, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 397 ( Ky. 1930 ).

A cause of action accrues when a party has the right and capacity to sue and it is not suspended until he ascertains that he has a cause of action and the only exception applied to this rule has been in the case of an underground trespass and this is on the theory of estoppel rather than fraud. Carter v. Harlan Hospital Ass’n, 265 Ky. 452 , 97 S.W.2d 9, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 509 ( Ky. 1936 ), overruled in part, Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ). See Falls Branch Coal Co. v. Proctor Coal Co., 203 Ky. 307 , 262 S.W. 300, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 915 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Failure to exercise accelerating option on default in one (1) installment does not start statute of limitations running against action to collect future installments. Dawson Springs v. Hamby, 273 Ky. 523 , 117 S.W.2d 204, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where guaranty agreement expressly covered renewals of note in full or in part, limitations did not begin to run until last renewal note became due. Taylor v. Payne, 276 Ky. 79 , 122 S.W.2d 964, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 515 ( Ky. 1938 ).

One who purchases property with the knowledge that damages may result from a nearby permanent structure cannot claim that the running of the statute was interrupted by his purchase or that a new period commenced to run from the date of the purchase. Kentucky & West Virginia Power Co. v. McIntosh, 278 Ky. 797 , 129 S.W.2d 522, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where note fell due in 1927 and new note was executed in same amount, old note being retained as collateral, payments of interest, all indorsed on new note, did not stay running of limitations on the old note. Lyons v. Hager's Adm'r, 278 Ky. 99 , 128 S.W.2d 196, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 378 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Since the 1934 amendment to KRS 413.170 , coverture is not a disability prolonging the operation of the statutes of limitation, regardless of when the cause of action accrued. Flynn v. Fike, 291 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W.2d 470, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 227 ( Ky. 1942 ), overruled in part, Townsend v. Cable, 378 S.W.2d 806, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 211 ( Ky. 1964 ).

The five (5) year statute of limitations under this section does not run under KRS 413.170 during mental disability, and the existence of mental disability is a question of fact and does not depend upon a legal adjudication following a sanity inquest. Carter v. Huffman, 262 S.W.2d 690, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 1122 ( Ky. 1953 ).

The bringing of initial action for entire claim by truck owner for damages to truck-tractor after it had assigned part of its claim to its insurance carrier tolled the statute of limitations as to the insurance carrier’s claim and it was error to permit assignor to maintain the action for the entire claim over defendant’s objection that assignee should be made a party to assert its claim. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Mack Mfg. Corp., 269 S.W.2d 707, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1010 ( Ky. 1954 ).

Where husband became obligated to wife on an implied contract in 1929, an action by her administrator after her death subsequent to 1950 to recover on the contract was barred by the statute of limitations, because the disability of a married woman ceased in 1937 even as to previously accrued causes to action. Hays v. Hays' Adm'r, 290 S.W.2d 795, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 343 ( Ky. 1956 ), overruled, Saylor v. Saylor, 389 S.W.2d 904, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where son of one (1) of four (4) joint owners of land leased to a coal mining corporation purchased assets of the coal mining corporation at receiver’s sale and transferred them to his father as trustee, the trust was a naked or dry trust as there were no active duties to be performed by the trustee and the statute of limitations did not stop running against an action by the other joint owners to enforce their lien on the mining equipment to secure payment of royalties under the lease agreement with the coal mining company. Johnson v. Chavies Coal Co., 299 S.W.2d 629, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1957 ).

The five-year time limit of subdivision (2) of this section does not run during the minority of any person entitled to bring an action pursuant to subsection (1) of KRS 406.021 . Alexander v. Commonwealth, 708 S.W.2d 102, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

A claim for recovery of unpaid occupational license fees accrues on the day following the due date of the return, when the fee becomes delinquent; although an occupational license fee is computed for the calendar year ending on December 31, the county government could not bring an action on that day, because fees are not delinquent provided that they are paid by April 15 of the year after the taxable year. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government v. Abney, 748 S.W.2d 376, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 53 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

While state law governs the substantive limitation period, federal law governs when the cause of action accrues, and thus when the statute begins to run. Leonard v. Corrections Cabinet, 828 S.W.2d 668, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 75 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

When the McCracken County Deputy Sheriff Merit Board ordered that a deputy sheriff be reinstated with back pay, and the sheriff refused to comply with the order, the limitations period applicable to the deputy’s action to enforce the Board’s order, under KRS 413.120(2), was tolled when a court set the order aside, because, during that period, there was no order for the deputy to try to enforce. Cherry v. Augustus, 245 S.W.3d 766, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 205 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Water users’ action against a mining company was barred by the statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 because the suit was filed more than five years after the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet reported to the users its conclusion that the loss of water quality and quantity in the watershed was related to the underground mining activities of the company. Golden Oak Mining Co. v. Lucas, 2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 96 (Ky. Ct. App. June 17, 2011).

Employee’s action against an employer was time-barred because although the statutory time limit for the employee’s claims was five years under KRS 413.120(2), the employee had signed an agreement limiting the employee to one-year in which to bring an action, such a waiver was permissible for at-will employees, and the employee’s particular waiver was reasonable on its face. Dunn v. Gordon Food Servs., 780 F. Supp. 2d 570, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13387 (W.D. Ky. 2011 ).

Limitations period of Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 386B.10-050 (4) did not apply to the stockholders' breach of fiduciary duty claim as no statutory authority extended the discovery rule to claims brought pursuant to Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.120(6). Middleton v. Sampey, 522 S.W.3d 875, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 248 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

157.—Constructive Trusts.

Five-year statute of limitations will run against a constructive trust from time it is created. Patton v. Coldiron, 213 Ky. 709 , 281 S.W. 812, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Allegations in plaintiff’s reply as amended that indorser had wrongfully received payments from maker of note, had released lien of record and had fraudulently concealed these facts from plaintiff who was indorsee constituted, at most, a constructive trust, and the statute of limitations commenced to run against it from the time it was created. Redding v. Main, 303 Ky. 41 , 196 S.W.2d 887, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1946 ).

The trusts intended to be embraced by KRS 413.340 excluding from application of limitations continuing and subsisting trusts are those of an exclusively equitable character, where trustee has a right to hold estate and cestui que trust has no right to sue for it and not a constructive trust to which the five (5) year statute of limitations applies. Redding v. Main, 303 Ky. 41 , 196 S.W.2d 887, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In action to establish a constructive trust, there was no merit to defense based on various statutes of limitation where cestui que trust retained possession of the land until the action was brought, there was no repudiation of the trust, the trustee acknowledged the trust in writing prior to the action and the action was brought within the statutory period after the cestui que trust learned of the claim of title of another to the land under a sheriff’s sale. Snyder v. Snyder, 297 S.W.2d 758, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1956 ).

158.—Remaindermen.

Considering the relationship of the parties, the fact that children who were remaindermen lived at a distance, and all the circumstances shown by the proof, it could not be said they failed to use ordinary diligence in not learning sooner that an implicit confidence and express trust had been violated by their mother who was life tenant in selling their land and taking title to the land in which the proceeds were invested in her own name and the five (5) year statute of limitations did not bar their defense in an action by their stepfather for the allotment of a homestead for life. Mayes v. Payne, 60 S.W. 710, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1465 (1901).

Limitations begin to run on a cause of action against a life tenant for voluntary waste at the time such waste is committed. Fisher's Ex'r v. Haney, 180 Ky. 257 , 202 S.W. 495, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Cause of action did not accrue to or statute of limitations run against remainderman until waste was either committed by life tenants who were cotenants or its commission was so threatened as to give remainderman reasonable ground to believe it would presently be committed. Salyer's Guardian v. Keeton, 214 Ky. 643 , 283 S.W. 1015, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 397 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Remaindermen’s cause of action under a testamentary trust to recover possession of the estate vested in them by testator accrued on the death of the life tenant and the applicable period of limitation was five (5) years under subsections (5) and (6) of this section, extended to a possible maximum of ten (10) years under subsection (12) of this section and subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 in the event of fraud or mistake. Potter v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co., 361 S.W.2d 515, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1962 ).

159.—Contracts Not in Writing.

An action to recover amount overpaid on purchase of a tract of land under a deed of general warranty due to a deficiency of 31 acres in the boundary conveyed was not based upon a deed or contract of sale of land nor for fraudulent representations made in the deed nor to reform it nor to rescind the contract but was based upon the implied contract to refund the money which was paid as the result of a mutual mistake and the statute of limitations under this section did not run from the date of the deed but from the date the law implied a contract which was the moment the last payment of purchase money was made as the cause of action then accrued. Nave v. Price, 108 Ky. 105 , 55 S.W. 882, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1538 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1900 ).

In suit to recover for personal services extending over a period of more than five (5) years in which it was alleged that defendant “repeatedly promised that he would pay plaintiff what he owed her, as claimed in the petition as amended, with interest on same from the end of each month when same was due, at such time as she might demand it, and that at no time during said services did as much as five (5) years elapse between the making of such promises, and that within the last five (5) years next before the filing of this amendment he so promised to pay her” and that she had not demanded the payment of any of the sums so owing her until within five (5) years before the filing of the suit, taking these allegations as true for the purposes of testing the sufficiency of the petition, it followed that plaintiff’s cause of action did not accrue until she had demanded the payment of her wages and that not having demanded them until within five (5) years before the bringing of the suit, the statutory bar had not been completed. Rankin v. Anderson, 69 S.W. 705, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 647 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 493 (Ky. Ct. App. 1902).

The subscription to capital stock of a corporation is a promise to pay money, and the right of action thereon and consequently the beginning of the running of the statute of limitations thereon is not until there has been a call or assessment made by the corporation or by a court in proper proceedings for that purpose upon complaint of creditors and a plea that more than two (2) years had elapsed since the date of the subscription to said stock and more than five (5) years had elapsed since the date of death of subscriber was insufficient. Otter View Land Co.'s Receiver v. Bolling's Ex'x, 70 S.W. 834, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1157 (1902).

Right of action against lessees for breach of covenant to deliver up premises in good condition, since the injuries to the premises complained of were such as could be repaired, did not begin to run until expiration of lease for there was no breach of the agreement to yield up the premises in good condition until such premises were surrendered. Cohen v. Reif, 223 Ky. 603 , 4 S.W.2d 388, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 393 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Limitations do not start from making of a contract but from date of its promised performance. Finley v. Thomas, 269 Ky. 422 , 107 S.W.2d 287, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 613 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Statute of limitations began to run against action on contract to pay money to parties shown to be entitled thereto by lawsuit when mandate was issued by Court of Appeals and suit begun within five (5) years thereafter was not barred. Finley v. Thomas, 269 Ky. 422 , 107 S.W.2d 287, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 613 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Setoff claim based on parol contract, by which defendant was to furnish gas to plaintiff’s decedent for an indefinite time, was barred by limitations as to all payments that had been due for more than five (5) years before death of decedent, or for five (5) years and six (6) months before appointment of administrator. Stone v. Smith, 279 Ky. 213 , 130 S.W.2d 18, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Statute does not begin to operate against the right to recover purchase money paid for realty under a parol contract until the vendor refuses to execute the conveyance. Back v. Back's Adm'r, 281 Ky. 282 , 135 S.W.2d 911, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where deceased father paid son $3,000 for tract of land which he had formerly conveyed to son, son returned deed of former conveyance to father, and deed was mutilated, but no deed reconveying the property was executed and after father’s death son sued and received deed in place of one which had been mutilated, the right of personal representative of father to sue to recover purchase money did not arise until son developed situation shown by his action to have existed. Back v. Back's Adm'r, 281 Ky. 282 , 135 S.W.2d 911, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 21 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Jockey’s agent that had been fired by the jockey in 1999 could not maintain his action filed in 2005 against the jockey to obtain a percentage of a stud fee gift made to the jockey in 1997 because the agency contract had been oral and the five-year statute of limitations for oral contracts, KRS 413.120 , barred the action. Adika v. Smith, 466 F.3d 503, 2006 FED App. 0391P, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 26279 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

Trial court did not err in holding that the discovery rule was inapplicable to a thoroughbred horse owner’s counterclaim for fees paid to an advisor because there is no statute authorizing the use of the discovery rule in a cause of action involving a violation of KRS 321.190 or the five year statute of limitations in KRS 413.120(2); each time the general assembly has intended for the discovery rule to apply in a specific context, it has enacted an applicable statute. Ramsey v. Lambert, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 125 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 7, 2009).

160.—Trespass.

An action to recover of the city for the negligent construction of certain sewers by reason of which plaintiff’s property was flooded and damaged was for damages sustained at the date of the flooding of his property and the five (5) year statute of limitations should date from that event. Louisville v. Norris, 111 Ky. 903 , 64 S.W. 958, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1195 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1901 ).

Statute of limitations commenced running against railroad for injury to plaintiff’s land, caused by diversion of a polluted creek from its natural source into a ditch and through a culvert which was allowed to fill up and overflow on plaintiff’s land, at the time the water overflowed and not at the time the creek was diverted from its natural source. Illinois Cent. R.R. v. Taylor, 89 S.W. 121, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 139 (1905).

If, in action for damages to real property caused by the defendant’s continuing trespass, the five (5) year statute of limitations applied, the date the cause of action occurred was the date the structure was completed and its operations commenced, or the date of the first injury, or the date it became apparent that injury would occur; if the five (5) year statute of limitations did not apply, damages were recoverable for the five-year period immediately preceding the instigation of the action. Wimmer v. Ft. Thomas, 733 S.W.2d 759, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 514 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

In an action for damages to real property caused by continuing trespass, (1) if the offending structure is permanent and non-negligent, suit must be brought within five (5) years from the date the cause of action occurred; (2) if the offending structure is permanent but negligently or unlawfully built or maintained, recurring recoveries may be had as the injuries occur; (3) if the offending structure is temporary, recurring recoveries may be had irrespective of negligence; (4) if the offending structure is permanent, but unlawfully built or negligent, only a one-time recovery brought within five (5) years from the date the cause of action occurred is allowed if it be shown that the structure cannot be remedied at an expense reasonable in relation to the damage; (5) if the evidence on the question of negligence presents a genuine issue, it is for the jury to decide. Wimmer v. Ft. Thomas, 733 S.W.2d 759, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 514 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

In a suit arising out of the malfunction of, and failure to fix, water filtrations systems, plaintiffs’ contamination of water claims brought on March 16, 2017 are untimely under Kentucky’s five-year statute of limitations for trespass to real property because the contamination of plaintiffs’ water was not a latent injury, the water was noticeably contained “blackish brown materials” on December 19, 2011, and plaintiffs’ trespass claim accrued on that date. Newberry v. Serv. Experts Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC, 806 Fed. Appx. 348, 2022 FED App. 132N, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 7092 (6th Cir. Ky. 2020 ).

161.—Nuisance.

Right of action against railroad accrued when it was put in operation and the five (5) year statute of limitations was a bar to injunction by abutting property owner where the railroad was constructed under authorization of legislative and municipal authorities even thought the railroad occupied the entire street obstructing passage. Ferguson v. Covington & C. E. R. & T. & B. Co., 108 Ky. 662 , 57 S.W. 460, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 371 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Statute of limitations commences running at the time cause of action by abutting property owner accrues against a city for damages caused by a permanent improvement such as raising of a street grade causing surface water to overflow on plaintiff’s land and the cause of action accrues when the permanent improvement is completed. Hay v. Lexington, 114 Ky. 665 , 71 S.W. 867, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1495 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 29 ( Ky. 1903 ).

Although petroleum refinery had been operated at the existing site since 1928 and there was some noise from the older units, testimony showed it did not become annoying until “platform-unifying” unit was put into operation in 1957; thus, the five (5) year statute of limitations did not bar action of plaintiff for diminution of value of her home since the five (5) year statute of limitations did not run with the noise but wit the cause of action and there was no cause of action until the sum total volume became an annoyance in 1957. Louisville Refining Co. v. Mudd, 339 S.W.2d 181, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 441 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Dust raised by coal-loading ramp and coal crusher which was a permanent structure became a nuisance upon its completion and beginning of operation or at the time it caused injury, and consequently the five (5) year statute of limitations began to run as of that time. Hawkins v. Wallace, 384 S.W.2d 507, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1964 ).

162.—Gratuitous Bailment.

In cases involving gratuitous bailments, there is a rule that unless delay in making a demand for return of the property is expressly contemplated by the parties, under some circumstances the court will presume from the lapse of an unreasonable time that such a demand was made and refused, and this is especially true where the relation of the parties is such as to render it improbable that demand should be neglected. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

The contract of bailment is construed as importing a reasonable time for the return of the chattel, and the court will determine what is a reasonable time from the circumstances of each case; ordinarily the time in which demand will be deemed to have been made is that stipulated in the statute of limitations as barring the cause of action if not brought after it accrued. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where bailee has permissive possession of a chattel without limit of time, the statute of limitations does not run against bailor’s right to bring an action to recover the chattel so long as the bailment lasts and where there is no limit of time or definite time fixed for the return, or termination is to be at the will of the bailor, there must be a demand made for the return and a refusal or some other act on the part of the bailee of which the bailor has notice which is hostile or inconsistent with the bailment and such as would constitute a denial of bailment or conversion of the chattel; it is then that there is a breach of the express or implied terms of the contract and then that the bailor’s cause of action accrues and the statute of limitations accrues. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where bailees in gratuitous bailment were father and mother of bailor, there would be no presumption of a demand for return of the property and a refusal, even though the bailment continued for 25 years. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where plaintiff loaned ring to defendant’s deceased husband, statute of limitations barring recovery of ring did not begin to run until plaintiff demanded the ring and was refused, or until plaintiff had other notice that defendant’s possession was hostile or inconsistent with the bailment arrangement. Bristow v. Taul, 310 Ky. 82 , 219 S.W.2d 641, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 835 ( Ky. 1949 ).

163.Pleading.

Where defendant filed a motion to dismiss action by successor trustee of estate of bankrupt to recover a money judgment on the ground that the claim was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations embodied in this section, the court reserved the question of limitation in overruling motion to dismiss since it could better be considered when concisely pled by a responsive pleading. Curtis v. Drybrough, 70 F. Supp. 151, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2788 (D. Ky. 1947 ).

The statute of limitations cannot be pleaded as a bar to a payment made and agreed to be entered upon a note. Grover's Ex'rs v. Tingle, 53 S.W. 281, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 885 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 560 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

The statute of limitations must be pleaded, unless the petition shows not only a sufficient lapse of time but nonexistence of any ground of avoidance. Low v. Ramsey, 135 Ky. 333 , 122 S.W. 167, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1909 ).

A defendant has a right to waive the statute of limitations if he desires to do so, and if he would avail himself of a lapse of time as a peremptory bar to the maintenance of a cause of action against him, he must interpose the statute by a plea to that effect. Taulbee v. Hargis, 173 Ky. 433 , 191 S.W. 320, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 492 ( Ky. 1917 ).

A plea of limitations was not available against defendants seeking no affirmative relief, but attempting only to defeat the effect which plaintiffs sought to give the writing which was the foundation of their claim. Eastern Gulf Oil Co. v. Lovelace, 188 Ky. 238 , 221 S.W. 544, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 263 ( Ky. 1920 ).

It is unnecessary for the plaintiff in an action for wrongful cutting and appropriation of timber by grantee of an estate for the life of grantor, to allege in the petition when the cause of action accrued, or to state such facts as will show it is not barred by the statute of limitations; but the statute of limitations, if relied on as ground of defense, must be pleaded by the party seeking its protection. Adams v. Bates, 191 Ky. 710 , 231 S.W. 238, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 376 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Although the statutory bar is complete unless the plea of the statute is interposed by the obligor, judgment will go for the original obligation, which in such case is not considered as dead. West v. W. T. B. Williams & Sons, 202 Ky. 382 , 259 S.W. 1015, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 726 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The plea of limitation is a personal one, and a party entitled to plead it may, by his acts, conduct, and statements, estop himself to rely upon it as a defense “in actions in tort, or upon specialties,” which are required to be brought within a certain time. Louisa v. Horton, 263 Ky. 739 , 93 S.W.2d 620, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 802 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Plea of limitations under this section was not available where trial court followed explicit directions of Court of Appeals in relation to any valid claims which might be presented by the widow in an action by heirs to make settlement of estate, thus closing the door to the plea of limitations particularly when the widow’s amended pleading was timely filed. Preston's Heirs v. Preston, 279 Ky. 401 , 130 S.W.2d 797, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 286 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A plea of limitations is an affirmative defense, especially where the case involves a continuing trust. However, the defendant need only invoke the statute, without pleading or proving any facts, if the case is one where all of the facts, or sufficient facts, are set forth in the plaintiff’s petition. Slack v. Bryan, 299 Ky. 132 , 184 S.W.2d 873, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1945 ).

A party to an action may not rely on the statute of limitations in bar of his adversary’s right to recover unless he specifically pleads the statute. Fresh v. Dunakin, 306 Ky. 87 , 206 S.W.2d 203, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 960 ( Ky. 1947 ).

In an action to recover on a promissory note where plaintiff’s claim on note and defendant’s defense of payment both originated in items of open account between the parties, and grew out of mutuality of interrelated business dealings between the parties, it was error for court to direct verdict for plaintiff on ground that defense of payment was barred by limitations. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Where there was no cross-appeal, although Court of Appeals was unable to understand why trial court did not apply limitation to action, it affirmed the judgment. Johnson v. Chavies Coal Co., 299 S.W.2d 629, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1957 ).

164.—Amendment.

In action by receiver of bank, plaintiff’s motion to amend petition to conform to proof as it related to claim against defendants was denied as this section barred any right of action against defendants personally and KRS 413.200 (now repealed) barred any right of action against them in their representative capacity. Anderson v. Brady, 7 F.R.D. 84, 1946 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1664 (D. Ky. 1946 ).

Original petition, stating cause of action on note and filed less than five (5) years after accrual of right, was amended, more than five (5) years after accrual of right, to state cause of action on implied promise to pay. Defendant moved to compel plaintiff to elect, and plaintiff elected to sue on implied promise, without objecting or excepting to defendant’s motion. Plaintiff had abandoned cause of action stated in original petition, and amended petition was barred by five (5) year statute of limitations. Warning's Ex'x v. Tabeling, 280 Ky. 232 , 133 S.W.2d 65, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 118 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where an amendment sets up a new cause of action from the first sued on and cannot be sustained by the same evidence as that supporting the original cause, and the judgment on the first count cannot successfully be pleaded as a bar to the right of recovery under the second count, the cause asserted in the amendment will not relate back to the commencement of the action. Martin v. Hall, 297 Ky. 537 , 180 S.W.2d 390, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 178 ( Ky. 1943 ).

165.—Demurrer or Motion.

The benefit of the statute of limitations cannot be obtained by a demurrer to a cause of action set out in an amended petition showing that the cause of action accrued more than one (1) year prior to the filing of the amendment but not showing that the petitioner did not come within one of the exceptions contained in the statute which would avoid the bar of the statute. Low v. Ramsey, 135 Ky. 333 , 122 S.W. 167, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Graziani v. Ernst, 169 Ky. 751 , 185 S.W. 99, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 761 ( Ky. 1916 ).

The statute must be pleaded and cannot be raised by demurrer. Smith v. Young, 178 Ky. 376 , 198 S.W. 1166, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 742 ( Ky. 1917 ). See Davidson v. Kentucky Coal Lands Co., 180 Ky. 121 , 201 S.W. 982, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1918 ); Klineline v. Head, 205 Ky. 644 , 266 S.W. 370, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1924 ); Lyttle v. Johnson, 213 Ky. 274 , 280 S.W. 1102, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 497 ( Ky. 1926 ); Rowe v. Blair, 221 Ky. 685 , 299 S.W. 571, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 803 ( Ky. 1927 ).

In order for the statute of limitations to be raised by demurrer, the petition must show not only the lapse of time but also the nonexistence of any ground of avoidance or of circumstances which may have prevented the statute from running. Webster County v. Hall, 275 Ky. 54 , 120 S.W.2d 756, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 367 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The general rule is that the plea of limitations to be available must be by a pleading and ordinarily cannot be raised by demurrer. Finch's Ex'r v. Hopewell, 285 Ky. 495 , 148 S.W.2d 345, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 414 ( Ky. 1941 ).

The defense of limitations cannot as a general rule be raised by demurrer but must be pleaded. Crady v. Hubrich, 299 Ky. 461 , 185 S.W.2d 949, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1945 ).

A defense based upon the statute of limitations is one that ordinarily must be pleaded rather than set up in a motion or demurrer. Woolery v. Smith, 302 Ky. 725 , 196 S.W.2d 115, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 741 ( Ky. 1946 ).

166.—Counterclaim.

In action on note, counterclaim for use and occupation of room which plaintiff had rented from defendant which alleged that plaintiff made frequent promises to pay rent, that at no time during occupancy had as much as five (5) years elapsed between making of promises, and that plaintiff had promised to pay rent within five (5) years next before filing of answer was not demurrable on ground that claim was barred by limitation. Markwell v. Kahlkoff, 258 Ky. 231 , 79 S.W.2d 984, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1935 ).

The plea of the statute of limitations does not constitute a valid counterclaim, for it is a shield and not a sword, and is ground for the cancellation of an instrument that is barred by the statute of limitations purely and simply as a matter of defense not affecting the validity of a note in any way. Rader v. Dean, 275 Ky. 255 , 121 S.W.2d 43, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A demand for damages based upon a tort, when pleaded by way of counterclaim, is regarded as an affirmative action and is amenable to the operation of the statute of limitations and is unavailable if barred by it. Harvey Coal Corp. v. Smith, 268 S.W.2d 634, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 914 ( Ky. 1954 ), overruled, Armstrong v. Logsdon, 469 S.W.2d 342, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1971 ).

167.—Setoff.

Where business dealings of the parties after the execution of note continued with unchanged character and defendant relied upon plaintiff, being a banker, to allow proper credits on what was treated as a running account and plaintiff’s own books showed that after the note was executed he continued to keep credit and debit items just as he had prior to that time, defendant could set off claims outlawed by the statute of limitations against action on note. Hoagland v. Liter, 308 Ky. 680 , 215 S.W.2d 583, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 1023 ( Ky. 1948 ).

168.Submission to Jury.

Where there is a factual issue upon which the application of the limitation provided by this section depends, it is proper to submit the question to the jury and that can best be done by requiring the jury to render a special verdict under CR 49.01. Lynn Mining Co. v. Kelly, 394 S.W.2d 755, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1965 ).

In a dispute between plaintiffs (four sisters) and defendants (their brothers, who were fiduciaries of their parents' estates), because the record was replete with material factual disputes about whether defendants made adequate and truthful disclosures to plaintiffs regarding the parents' estate plans, settlement of a lawsuit, and disputed transfers of stock and real property, and accepting plaintiffs' testimony as to their actual discovery of the fiduciary breaches and fraud alleged, the court could not say as a matter of law that the claims were time barred under Kentucky law. Osborn v. Griffin, 50 F. Supp. 3d 772, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139915 (E.D. Ky. 2014 ).

169.Judgment.

A judgment dismissing an action on ground that plaintiff’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations is a decision on the merits and is res judicata. Burlew v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 276 Ky. 132 , 122 S.W.2d 990, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1938 ).

170.Intervention by Reparation Obligor.

A reparation obligor can properly join as a party in the tort suit prior to judgment, provided the intervention occurs within five (5) years, but it is the person suffering the injury who must commence the action. Gray v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 605 S.W.2d 775, 1980 Ky. App. LEXIS 357 (Ky. Ct. App. 1980).

171.Disability Retirement Benefits.

For an employee’s action against his employer under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act for suspension of his disability retirement benefits, the most analogous statute of limitations in this Commonwealth was the five-year period found in either subdivision (5) of this section for an action for damages for withholding personal property or subdivision (6) of this section for an action for detaining personal property. Salyers v. Allied Corp., 642 F. Supp. 442, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27726 (E.D. Ky. 1986 ).

172.Invasion of privacy.

Where a former employee alleged that defendants caused the employee to be prosecuted for crimes of which the employee was innocent and sought to cause the employee's termination, dismissal of the employee's invasion of privacy claim would be premature because the court was not convinced that the events giving rise to the action necessarily occurred over a year before the employee filed the complaint. Tucker v. Heaton, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83180 (W.D. Ky. June 26, 2015).

Cited in:

Walter Bledsoe & Co. v. Elkhorn Land Co., 219 F.2d 556, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4857 (6th Cir. 1955); Terrill v. Carpenter, 249 F.2d 142, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3942 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ); Kentucky Trust Co. v. Sweeney, 163 F. Supp. 450, 1958 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2908 (D. Ky. 1958 ); Glock v. Carpenter, 184 F. Supp. 829, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4273 (E.D. Ky. 1960 ); Maupin v. Maupin, 261 Ky. 312 , 87 S.W.2d 629, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 649 ( Ky. 1935 ); C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Caudill, 270 Ky. 107 , 109 S.W.2d 20, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 26 (1937); Drane v. Louisville R. Co., 279 Ky. 490 , 131 S.W.2d 439, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1939 ); First Nat’l Bank v. Varney, 280 Ky. 78 , 132 S.W.2d 529, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 62 ( Ky. 1939 ); Napier v. Duff, 281 Ky. 779 , 136 S.W.2d 1083, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 38 (Ky. 1939); Forwood v. Louisville, 283 Ky. 208 , 140 S.W.2d 1048, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 315 ( Ky. 1940 ); Department of Welfare v. Farmer’s Committee, 290 Ky. 813 , 162 S.W.2d 796, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 500 ( Ky. 1942 ); Shepherd v. Haymond, 291 Ky. 78 0 , 165 S.W.2d 812, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1942 ); Evans v. Caudill, 296 Ky. 460 , 177 S.W.2d 586, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 567 ( Ky. 1944 ); Lyons v. Moise’s Ex’r, 298 Ky. 858 , 183 S.W.2d 493, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 936 ( Ky. 1944 ); Fitzhugh v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 300 Ky. 509 , 189 S.W.2d 592, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 566 ( Ky. 1945 ); Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ); Moise v. Moise’s Ex’r, 302 Ky. 84 3 , 196 S.W.2d 607, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 764 ( Ky. 1946 ); Harlan-Wallins Coal Corp. v. David, 303 Ky. 84 , 196 S.W.2d 881, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 785 (1946); Hartlage v. Buchheit, 254 S.W.2d 343, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 583 ( Ky. 1953 ); Petroleum Exploration Corp. v. Hensley, 284 S.W.2d 828, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 54 ( Ky. 1955 ); Smith v. Campbell, 286 S.W.2d 532, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1955 ), overruled, Ward v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 436 S.W.2d 794, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1968 ), overruled in part, Ward v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 436 S.W.2d 794, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1968 ); Commonwealth ex rel. Luckett v. Kettenacker, 335 S.W.2d 339, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 256 ( Ky. 1960 ); Amos v. Montgomery, 339 S.W.2d 471, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 466 (Ky. 1960); Louisville & Jefferson County Air Board v. Porter, 397 S.W.2d 146, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1965 ); Payne v. Fidelity Homes of America, Inc., 437 F. Supp. 656, 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13858 (W.D. Ky. 1977 ); Herm v. Stafford, 511 F. Supp. 456, 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11752 (W.D. Ky. 1981 ); Coy v. Hardin, 556 S.W.2d 447, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1977 ); Harvey v. McGuire, 635 S.W.2d 8, 1982 Ky. App. LEXIS 220 (Ky. Ct. App. 1982); In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, Bryant Electric Co. v. Kiser, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (1983); Holloway v. Kruger, 682 S.W.2d 787, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 277 ( Ky. 1984 ); Commonwealth v. Anderson, 694 S.W.2d 465, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 491 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985); Tabler v. Wallace, 704 S.W.2d 179, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1985 ); Lang v. Ft. Thomas Bellevue Bank, 717 S.W.2d 505, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1219 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986); Watkins v. Oldham, 731 S.W.2d 829, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987); National Gypsum Co. v. Corns, 736 S.W.2d 325, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1987 ); Waters v. Transit Authority of River City, 799 S.W.2d 56, 1990 Ky. App. LEXIS 107 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990); Whittington v. Milby, 928 F.2d 188, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 4126 (6th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 883, 112 S. Ct. 236, 116 L. Ed. 2d 192, 1991 U.S. LEXIS 5155, 60 U.S.L.W. 3264 (1991); Hall v. Knott County Bd. of Educ., 941 F.2d 402, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 15773 (6th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1077, 112 S. Ct. 982, 117 L. Ed. 2d 144, 1992 U.S. LEXIS 693, 60 U.S.L.W. 3521 (1992); Wood v. Wingfield, 816 S.W.2d 899, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 70 ( Ky. 1991 ); Rigazio v. Archdiocese of Louisville, 853 S.W.2d 295, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 63 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993); Southerland v. Hardaway Mgmt. Co., 41 F.3d 250, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 33425 (6th Cir. 1994); City of Covington v. Board of Trustees of the Policemen’s & Firefighters’ Retirement Fund, 903 S.W.2d 517, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 66 ( Ky. 1995 ), rehearing denied, City of Covington v. Board of Trustees of the Policemen’s & Firefighters’ Retirement Fund of Covington, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1995 ); Manning v. Stigger, 919 F. Supp. 249, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2945 (E.D. Ky. 1996 ); Effinger v. Philip Morris, Inc., 984 F. Supp. 1043, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22151 (W.D. Ky. 1997 ); Ammerman v. Board of Educ. of Nicholas County, 30 S.W.3d 793, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 2000 ); Clark v. Alcan Aluminum Corp., 41 Fed. Appx. 767, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14938 (6th Cir. 2002); Hinkle v. Commonwealth, 104 S.W.3d 778, 2002 Ky. App. LEXIS 1848 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002); Million v. Raymer, 136 S.W.3d 460, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 2004 ); Carroll v. Carroll, 355 S.W.3d 463, 2011 Ky. App. LEXIS 218 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Trespass.

Unpublished decision: Five-year statute of limitations period of KRS 413.120 applied landowners’ claims of trespass, resulting from a corporation depositing polychlorinated biphenyls on their land, and, that the statute did not bar the landowners’ claims. Further, the federal discovery rule applied to the property damage actions with the necessary implication that the landowners, if they had a viable cause of action, were entitled to recover damages for injuries incurred outside of the five-year limitation period preceding the filing of their complaint. Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Wilhite, 143 S.W.3d 604, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

2.Nuisance.
3.—Nature.
4.— —Permanent.

Unpublished decision: Five-year statute of limitations period of KRS 413.120 applied landowners’ claims of nuisance, resulting from a corporation depositing polychlorinated biphenyls on their land, and, that the statute did not bar the landowners’ claims. Further, the federal discovery rule applied to the property damage actions with the necessary implication that the landowners, if they had a viable cause of action, were entitled to recover damages for injuries incurred outside of the five-year limitation period preceding the filing of their complaint. Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Wilhite, 143 S.W.3d 604, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

5.Fraud or Mistake.

Unpublished decision: Limitations period under KRS 413.120(12) only began to run when the plaintiff option holder learned of the sale of substantially all of the corporate assets, which rendered his option to purchase shares of stock in the corporation worthless. Gresh v. Waste Servs. of Am., 311 Fed. Appx. 766, 2009 FED App. 0136N, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 3151 (6th Cir. Ky. 2009 ).

6.—Running of Statute.
7.— —Actual or Constructive Notice.

Unpublished decision: KRS 413.120(12) barred plaintiff buyer’s proposed fraud claim because, in 1996, when it filed its complaint, the buyer already knew the seller’s identity, knew that it had been injured, and claimed the seller was responsible in part because it concealed information about the pollution from the buyer. 500 Assocs. v. Vt. Am. Corp., 496 Fed. Appx. 589, 2012 FED App. 0947N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 18272 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

8.— —Discovery.

Unpublished decision: Contractor’s fraud counterclaim against an insurer and agent foundered on Kentucky’s statute of limitations; the contractor knew of the basis for his fraud claim (the insurer’s attempt to enforce the 1995 indemnification agreement against him) no later than September 2001, yet the contractor waited more than five years to file his claim. Frontier Ins. Co. in Rehab. v. RLM Constr. Co., 468 Fed. Appx. 506, 2012 FED App. 0287N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5395 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Unpublished decision: Misrepresentation claim by an insured against two companies that marketed disability insurance was properly dismissed because the claim was barred by the applicable five-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120(2), (12) since the limitations period began to run from the time the misrepresentation could have been discovered through ordinary diligence under KRS 413.130(3). Daugherty v. Am. Express Co., 485 Fed. Appx. 746, 2012 FED App. 0548N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10795 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

An occupational license ordinance is a liability created by statute and hence the five-year statute of limitations applies with the statute beginning to run at the time the fee is due. OAG 71-135 .

The five-year statute of limitations would apply where the county asserted a claim for repayment of unauthorized deductions from excess fees taken by county officials. OAG 78-233 .

This section would apply to limit the number of years for which tax refunds could be sought where part of a fire district was annexed by a city and property owners in the annexed area had been paying both the city and the district for fire protection services. OAG 82-121 .

Where two (2) successive circuit clerks performed the duties of county law librarian without compensation, the fiscal court might be required by a court to make up those payments, under the salary established pursuant to KRS 172.110(1), but within the five-year statute of limitation, pursuant to subsection (2) of this section. OAG 82-177 .

The state auditor, in what might be termed a “current audit,” may disallow credit against the fees of a county clerk’s office in prior years for improper expenditures not cited in prior year audits by a private accountant. However, a legal action filed by a fiscal court to attempt to recover monies said to have been unlawfully expended, will be governed by this section. OAG 94-15

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Checks on state treasury must be presented within one year, KRS 41.370 .

Claims against state agency for property damage must be filed within one year, KRS 44.110 .

Inheritance taxes, limitation on actions to collect, KRS 140.160 .

Journal of Mineral Law & Policy.

Comments, Akers v. Baldwin: THe Broad Form Deed Dilemma Revisited, 4 J.M.L. & P. 213 (1988).

Comments, Hatton v. Falcon Coal: Breach of Contract or Trespass to Realty, 5 J.M.L. & P. 195 (1989-90).

Journal of Natural Resources & Environmental Law.

Articles, Common Law Remedies Available for Petroleum Contamination of Soil and Groundwater in Kentucky, 13 J. Nat. Resources & Envtl. L. 1 (1998-99).

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Palmore, A Summary of Significant Decisions by the Supreme Court of Kentucky April 1982-April 1983, Vol. 47, No. 3, July 1983, Ky. Bench & Bar 14.

Baker and Baker, Title Examination in Kentucky, 48 Ky. Bench & B. 12 (1984).

Davies, Children Born Out of Wedlock: Their Time Has Come, Volume 49, No. 2, April 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 10.

Scott, Title VII Discrimination Cases — Are They Taxable?, Vol. 56, No. 4, Fall 1992 Ky. Bench & B. 19.

Wolff, Defending Credit Card Collection Lawsuits, Vol. 76, No. 6, November 2012, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Vanlandingham, The Fee System in Kentucky Counties, 40 Ky. L.J. 275 (1952).

Ham, A Survey of Kentucky Corporation Cases Since 1946, 44 Ky. L.J. 5 (1955).

Roberts, Personal Liabilities An Executor May Incur in Settling Estates in Kentucky, 46 Ky. L.J. 543 (1958).

Hawkins, Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations — Adoption of the Discovery Rule, 59 Ky. L.J. 990 (1971).

Smith, Recent Statutory Developments Concerning the Limitations of Actions Against Architects, Engineers, and Builders, 60 Ky. L.J. 462 (1972).

Kentucky Law Survey, Ham, Corporations, 65 Ky. L.J. 255 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey, Leathers, Professional Responsibility, 65 Ky. L.J. 397 (1976-77).

Brickey, Products Liability in Kentucky: The Doctrinal Dilemma, 65 Ky. L.J. 593 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Kentucky Law Survey, Underwood, Insurance, 70 Ky. L.J. 255 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Harned and Hopgood, Worker’s Compensation, 70 Ky. L.J. 499 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Grise, Torts, 71 Ky. L.J. 307 (1982-83).

Kentucky Law Survey, Rouse, Mineral Law, 72 Ky. L.J. 437 (1983-84).

Comments, Design for Challenge: The Kentucky Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property, 73 Ky. L.J. 1143 (1984-85).

Rogers, Apportionment in Kentucky After Comparative Negligence, 75 Ky. L.J. 103 (1986-87).

Stipanowich, Kentucky’s “No-Action” Statute: Recalled to Life?, Volume 51, No. 3, Summer 1987 Ky. Bench & B. 11.

Comments, The Kentucky No Action Statute: Down for the Count?, 79 Ky. L.J. 159 (1992).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Notes, Attorneys — Malpractice — Driving Lawyers from the Citadel: Attorney's Liability to Third Parties for Malpractice After Hill v. Willmott, 6 N. Ky. L. Rev. 229 (1979).

Notes, Torts — Products Liability — Should Contract or Tort Provide the Cause of Action When a Plaintiff Seeks Recovery Only for Damage to the Defective Product Itself — C & S Fuel, Inc. v. Clark Equip. Co.,10 N. Ky. L. Rev. 489 (1983).

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

Kentucky Law Survey: Education,29 N. Ky. L. Rev. 115 (2002).

Jackson and Crase, A Survey of Kentucky Workers’ Compensation Law, 30 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2003).

Ruh & Lockaby, Balancing Private Property Rights with “Public Use”: A Survey of Kentucky Courts’ Interpretation of the Power of Eminent Domain., 32 N. Ky. L. Rev. 743 (2005).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 212.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant to Complaint Under KRS 378.020 , Form 306.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Pleading Statute of Limitations and Consent, Form 125.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Complaint for Nuisance Asserting Various Defenses, Form 139.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Trespass Complaint (General Form), Form 304.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint for Intentional Trespass (General Form), Form 304.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Accounts and Accounting, § 212.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Fraud, § 122.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Infliction of Emotional Distress, § 125.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Invasion of Privacy Torts, § 128.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Annulment of Marriage, § 10.17.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Dissolution Decree, § 24.24.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Separation Agreements, § 19.23.

413.125. Actions relating to personal property to be brought within two years.

An action for the taking, detaining or injuring of personal property, including an action for specific recovery shall be commenced within two (2) years from the time the cause of action accrued.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 224, § 5, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Subrogation Actions.

Insurer’s auto property damage subrogation action against the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident with an insured was untimely as it was filed more than two (2) years after the date of the underlying accident; the two-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.125 applied to the action because that was the statute of limitations that would have applied to the insured if she had filed an action directly against the driver. Am. Premier Ins. Co. v. McBride, 159 S.W.3d 342, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 291 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

2.Applicability.

Two-year limitations period under KRS 413.125 regarding damage to personal property applied to a case where the driver motored through a red light and struck the trucking company’s truck and, thus, the trucking company’s action brought beyond that time was time barred. Although the trucking company tried to claim that KRS 413.120 ’s five-year limitations period applied, that statute involved actions for trespass to chattels, which was an intentional tort not involved in the case. Ingram Trucking, Inc. v. Allen, 372 S.W.3d 870, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.140(1)(i) and (j) did not bar an estate's suit to recover allegedly misappropriated funds from a realtor because (1) the estate sued under a conversion theory, so Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.125 applied, and (2) the statute was tolled by the decedent's disability between an adjudication of disability and the decedent's death. Watts v. Henry, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 154 (Ky. Ct. App. Nov. 13, 2015), review denied, ordered not published, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Apr. 27, 2016).

Where plaintiff insurer, as subrogee of defendant debtor's former employer, sought damages from debtor arising out of allegations of embezzlement, and debtor admitted he committed embezzlement, claim of embezzlement was barred by Kentucky's two-year statute of limitations. Fed. Ins. Co. v. Woods (In re Woods), 558 B.R. 164, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 3388 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2016 ).

Claims for negligent failure to warn and negligence arising out of the malfunction of, and failure to fix, water filtrations systems were properly dismissed as time-barred because the plaintiffs had enough information by October 9, 2013 to warrant their own prompt, independent investigation of their household water quality, but they did not file this suit until March 16, 2017. Newberry v. Serv. Experts Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC, 806 Fed. Appx. 348, 2022 FED App. 132N, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 7092 (6th Cir. Ky. 2020 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Comments, The Kentucky No Action Statute: Down for the Count?, 79 Ky. L.J. 159 (1992).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Trespass to Chattel, Form 123.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Trespass to Chattel, Form 127.05.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Conversion, § 127.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Trespass to Chattel, § 126.00.

413.130. When certain actions in KRS 413.120 accrue.

  1. In every action upon a merchants’ account as described in subsection (9) of KRS 413.120 , the limitation shall be computed from January 1 next succeeding the respective dates of the delivery of the several articles charged in the account. Judgment shall be rendered for no more than the amount of articles actually charged or delivered within five (5) years preceding that in which the action was brought. If any merchant willfully postdates any article charged in such account, or the receipt for the delivery of it, he shall forfeit ten (10) times the amount of the article postdated, to be credited against the account. This credit shall be allowed in an action on the account, without any written pleadings setting it up.
  2. In an action to recover a balance due upon a mutual open and current account concerning the trade of merchandise between merchant and merchant or their agents, as described in subsection (10) of KRS 413.120 , where there have been reciprocal demands between the parties, the cause of action is deemed to have accrued from the time of the last item proved in the account claimed, or proved to be chargeable on the adverse side.
  3. In an action for relief or damages for fraud or mistake, referred to in subsection (11) of KRS 413.120 , the cause of action shall not be deemed to have accrued until the discovery of the fraud or mistake. However, the action shall be commenced within ten (10) years after the time of making the contract or the perpetration of the fraud.

HISTORY: 2518 to 2520; 1998, ch. 196, § 30, effective July 15, 1998; 2015 ch. 121, § 4, effective June 24, 2015.

Legislative Research Commission Note.

(8/20/92) 1988 Ky. Acts ch. 224, sec. 6 amended KRS 413.120 by deleting the former subsection (6) of that statute and renumbering its remaining subsections accordingly. However, no amendment was made to conform internal references within this statute to the renumbering of the subsections of KRS 413.120 . Pursuant to KRS 7.136(1), prior references to subsections (10), (11), and (12) of KRS 413.120 appearing in subsections (1), (2), and (3) of this statute have been renumbered by the Reviser of Statutes and now appear as references to subsections (9), (10), and (11) of KRS 413.120.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Construction.

The provision of this section that an action for relief or damages for fraud or mistake must in any event be brought within ten (10) years imposes a condition precedent, constituting a part of the right to maintain such an action, and is not merely a limitation in the ordinary sense which may be availed of by the defendant at his option. Sword v. Scott, 293 Ky. 630 , 169 S.W.2d 825, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 676 ( Ky. 1943 ).

2.Application.

The statutes of limitation do not apply to anyone not in possession of property but is a defense toward maintaining the status quo so that a mere claim for whatever time, unaccompanied by actual possession, can give no right under the statute to one out of possession under a fraudulent conveyance or void conveyance which would ripen into a perfect one by time and sustain an action in ejectment against one originally having the better title and in possession. Sewell v. Nelson, 113 Ky. 171 , 67 S.W. 985, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2438 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1902 ).

This section and KRS 413.120 did not bar recovery of land by heirs of father-in-law who purchased land at commissioner’s sale in the name of his son-in-law without his knowledge, since the son-in-law had not accepted the deed, was never in possession, and held such title as he had under a parol trust for his father-in-law. Row v. Johnson, 78 S.W. 906, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1799 (1904).

When plaintiff attempted to avoid defendant’s plea of discharge in bankruptcy on the ground that the note was procured by fraud, defendant could not set up KRS 413.120 and this section since the statutes apply to actions and not defenses and defendant’s plea went to the defense of the effect of the discharge in bankruptcy and not to the cause of action. Louisville Banking Co. v. Buchanan, 117 Ky. 975 , 80 S.W. 193, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 2167 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Limitation is not a bar to the correction of a deed by vendee in possession where by mistake the deed does not properly describe the thing being granted. Hill v. Clark, 106 S.W. 805, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 595 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 338 (Ky. Ct. App. 1908).

KRS 413.120 and this section apply to an action founded upon the denounced acts set forth in KRS 378.010 and 378.020 , forbidding the fraudulent conveyance by a debtor of his property. Moore v. Shepherd, 189 Ky. 593 , 225 S.W. 484, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 479 ( Ky. 1920 ).

The five (5) year statute of limitations (KRS 413.120 ) commences to run in favor of trespasser taking coal under surface of land only when the landowner discovers the trespass and on principles analogous to estoppel instead of fraud under this section. Falls Branch Coal Co. v. Proctor Coal Co., 203 Ky. 307 , 262 S.W. 300, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 915 , 37 A.L.R. 1172 ( Ky. 1924 ), overruled in part, Hughett v. Caldwell County, 313 Ky. 85 , 230 S.W.2d 92, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 803 , 21 A.L.R.2d 373 (1950). But see Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 305 S.W.2d 308, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1957 ).

The plea of limitations will not prevail against the right of the defendant to assert by way of counterclaim transactions connected with and growing out of the matter that was the basis of the suit. Lewis v. Kash, 239 Ky. 117 , 38 S.W.2d 978, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 736 ( Ky. 1931 ). See Hatfield v. Hatfield, 417 S.W.2d 218, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1967 ).

An alleged “mistake” in collection of insufficient taxes on assessed national bank shares was an erroneous interpretation of law which was not the character of mistake which serves to save a cause of action from the running of the statute of limitations. Powell County v. Clay City Nat'l Bank, 246 Ky. 326 , 55 S.W.2d 10, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 760 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Although administrator allegedly procured judgment of final settlement through fraud and collusion by representing that heir had left the state and not been heard from, KRS 413.090 , 413.100 , 413.120 and this section did not operate to suspend the running of the statute of limitations in favor of the surety on the administrator’s bond since such suspension could only be effected by some of the acts or conduct enumerated in KRS 413.240 , none of which were charged in the petition. Tucker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 270 Ky. 723 , 110 S.W.2d 649, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1937 ).

KRS 413.120 and this section apply to an action to surcharge a guardian’s settlement and the cause of action accrues when the settlement is made. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

This section does not govern actions to recover premiums paid on a policy in fraud of creditors under KRS 297.140 and 297.150 (now repealed). Parks v. Parks' Ex'rs, 288 Ky. 350 , 156 S.W.2d 90, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 88 ( Ky. 1941 ).

This section had no application to a judgment that was void because the defendant was not before the court. Hill v. Walker, 297 Ky. 257 , 180 S.W.2d 93, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 729 ( Ky. 1944 ).

An action to establish a constructive trust was not barred by subsection (2) of KRS 413.120 , subsection (3) of this section or KRS 413.160 where one day prior to the filing of the action, the constructive trustee executed a written acknowledgment of the constructive trust, the cestui que trust retained possession until the action was brought and the alleged acts of repudiation were with the consent and approval of the cestui que trust. Snyder v. Snyder, 297 S.W.2d 758, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1956 ).

An action to have the terms of a deed construed because of the existence of a latent ambiguity arising because of the physical position and the typed spacing of a particular paragraph and not because of an alleged mistake in its wording is not barred by either subsection (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 or subsection (3) of this section since the deed could be construed according to the intent of the parties with no change being made in its wording. Berryman v. Elmore, 402 S.W.2d 102, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1966 ).

In action to set aside deed expressly made in consideration of past and future services to aged parents on ground of failure of consideration, limitations did not run against counterclaim for value of services rendered under the deed. Hatfield v. Hatfield, 417 S.W.2d 218, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Statute of limitations applicable to the lender’s reformation action against the sellers was 10 years, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.130(3), given case law clarifying that the 10-year period applied in actions asserting that a deed contained a mistake. Harms v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 552 S.W.3d 516, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 130 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

3.Federal Courts.

A time limitation deemed attached to the right of action created by the state is binding in the federal forum but this section, being a general statute of limitations, is procedural only and is not binding in the federal forum. Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

This section, being a general statute of limitations, is procedural only and is not attached to the right of action created by the state; thus, the question of whether a libel in admiralty for the death of a boat passenger in a collision on a navigable river, based on KRS 411.130 and timely filed by an ancillary administrator appointed by a state court without jurisdiction over the subject matter of the death action, could be amended, at a time when a new suit would be barred by a state statute of limitations, so as to allege a subsequent effective appointment of the same person as ancillary administrator by a state court having jurisdiction, must be determined by federal admiralty practice rather than state law and, under such practice, the amendment should be permitted. Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

KRS 413.120 and this section have no application to a suit in equity brought in federal court seeking relief on account of fraud. The only bar is laches. Massachusetts Protective Asso. v. Stephenson, 5 F. Supp. 586, 1933 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1079 (D. Ky. 1933 ).

4.Disabilities.

An infant is bound by his deed unless he brings an action to set it aside within ten (10) years after he arrives of age. Hoffert v. Miller, 86 Ky. 572 , 6 S.W. 447, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 732 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1888 ). See Combs v. Noble, 58 S.W. 707, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 736 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 267 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

The statutes of limitation under KRS 413.120 and this section do not bar the rights of one of unsound mind while the disability continues. Collins v. Lawson's Committee, 140 Ky. 510 , 131 S.W. 262, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Under this section the ten-year statute of limitations did not begin to run against infants until they attained their majority. Furey v. Gallagher, 180 Ky. 231 , 202 S.W. 641, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 51 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Plea of ten-year statute of limitations was merely traversed of record by agreement of the parties which was equivalent to a mere denial that the cause of action had accrued more than ten (10) years before filing of suit, and was not sufficient to raise the issue of disability or to authorize the court to hear the evidence bearing on the question. Goff v. Goff, 182 Ky. 323 , 206 S.W. 466, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 355 ( Ky. 1918 ).

In an action to reform deed more than ten (10) years after its recordation, an infant grantee was not within the terms of this section. Lowe v. Taylor, 222 Ky. 846 , 2 S.W.2d 1042, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 263 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where minor admitted he knew all the facts when he arrived at the age of 21, his cause of action to surcharge a guardian’s settlement on grounds of fraud accrued when the final settlement was filed and limitations began to run when minor arrived at age. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Since the removal of coverture as a disability, it is not a disability prolonging the operation of the statutes of limitation regardless of when the cause of action accrued. Flynn v. Fike, 291 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W.2d 470, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 227 ( Ky. 1942 ), overruled in part, Townsend v. Cable, 378 S.W.2d 806, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 211 , 21 Oil & Gas Rep. 31 ( Ky. 1964 ) .

Where more than ten (10) years had elapsed since accrual of cause for mistake, action was barred, although plaintiff was a married woman and ten (10) years had not elapsed from time of the law removing coverture as a disability. Flynn v. Fike, 291 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W.2d 470, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 227 ( Ky. 1942 ), overruled in part, Townsend v. Cable, 378 S.W.2d 806, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 211 , 21 Oil & Gas Rep. 31 ( Ky. 1964 ) .

Where testatrix devised her property to her two (2) children, title passed to them upon her death, and subsequent provisions in will, directing and restricting executor in his disposition and control of the property, had no effect to impose a trust upon the property. Hence, as the incompetent son had title to the property in controversy, his cause was not barred by limitations. Strode v. Spoden, 284 S.W.2d 663, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1955 ).

5.Accounts Between Merchants and Merchants.

Subsection (2) of this section is conclusive as to a commission merchant’s account for advances made on tobacco shipments and the statute of limitations commences to run as of the date when it is the commission merchant’s duty to have disposed of the consignment or at most after allowing the commission merchant a reasonable time in which to have made and rendered a statement of the balance due to shipper. Seibert's Assignee v. Albritton, 101 Ky. 241 , 40 S.W. 698, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 402 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 185 ( Ky. 1897 ).

6.Disciplinary Proceedings.

The statute of limitations does not bar the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against an attorney and the failure to apply such statute does not deny him equal protection or due process. Kentucky Bar Asso. v. Signer, 558 S.W.2d 582, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 535 ( Ky. 1977 ).

7.Fraud or Mistake.

Where one of the creditors for whose benefit an assignment is made makes a settlement with the assignee on the theory and the representation of the assignee that he has received his share of the assigned estate, an action by him for more is not simply a suit for settlement of the trust estate, on the general doctrine that a receipt in full for a part of a debt is void, which does not apply in such a case, but involves relief from fraud or mistake, so as to be governed by the statute of limitations applicable to such relief. Richardson v. Whitaker, 103 Ky. 425 , 45 S.W. 774 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Under this section a cause of action for mistake shall not be deemed to have accrued until the discovery of the mistake or until the time the mistake, by ordinary diligence, should have been discovered, but no such action shall be brought ten (10) years after the time of making the contract. German Sec. Bank v. Columbia Finance & Trust Co., 85 S.W. 761, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 581 (1905).

Fraud can be pleaded as a defense to an action upon an executory contract notwithstanding the expiration of the periods prescribed by KRS 413.120 and this section. Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Meade, 121 Ky. 241 , 89 S.W. 137, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 208 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1905 ). See Massachusetts Protective Asso. v. Stephenson, 5 F. Supp. 586, 1933 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1079 (D. Ky. 1933 ); Weakley v. Meriwether, 156 Ky. 304 , 160 S.W. 1054, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 425 ( Ky. 1913 ); Luscher v. Security Trust Co., 178 Ky. 593 , 199 S.W. 613, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 425 ( Ky. 1918 ) ( Ky. 1918 ); Lewis v. Kash, 239 Ky. 117 , 38 S.W.2d 978, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 736 ( Ky. 1931 ).

An action to surcharge the settlement of a tax collector is an action for relief from fraud or mistake, under this section, and must be brought within five (5) years after the mistake has been discovered, or after it might have been discovered by ordinary diligence. Green County v. Howard, 127 Ky. 379 , 105 S.W. 897, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 243 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1907 ).

If the party who is injured by the fraud or mistake is apprised of it at the time it is perpetrated, he must bring his action within five (5) years thereafter; but if he is not apprised of it at the time it is perpetrated, he must bring his action within five (5) years after the discovery, but in no case can he bring his action after the lapse of ten (10) years from the making of the contract or the perpetration of the fraud. Reid v. Singer Mfg. Co., 128 Ky. 50 , 107 S.W. 310, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 927 , 1908 Ky. LEXIS 33 ( Ky. 1908 ). See Schoolfield v. Provident Sav. Life Assurance Soc., 158 Ky. 687 , 166 S.W. 207, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 692 ( Ky. 1914 ); Combs v. Ison, 168 Ky. 728 , 182 S.W. 953, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 630 ( Ky. 1916 ); Forman v. Gault, 236 Ky. 213 , 32 S.W.2d 977, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 712 ( Ky. 1930 ).

An action by heirs of decedent to set aside the decedent’s deed to other heirs was not an action for the recovery of real property to which the limitation of KRS 413.010 applied but was an action to set aside a deed because of fraud in its procurement to which KRS 413.120 and this section applied. Combs v. Grigsby, 200 Ky. 31 , 252 S.W. 111, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 7 ( Ky. 1923 ).

An action to cancel a conveyance because of fraud or undue influence is governed and controlled by the provisions of KRS 413.120 and this section. Combs v. Grigsby, 200 Ky. 31 , 252 S.W. 111, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 7 ( Ky. 1923 ). See Tucker v. Tucker's Ex'r, 201 Ky. 383 , 257 S.W. 46, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1923 ).

An action to recover purchase price of realty to enforce a mortgage on other realty and to set aside a deed brought under KRS 378.010 , 378.020 and 378.030 could be maintained at any time, within the five (5) year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.120 , after the perpetration of the fraud against which relief was prayed or under this section within five (5) years from the time of the discovery of the fraud through the exercise of due diligence but not later than ten (10) years from its perpetration and the six (6) months’ limit prescribed by KRS 378.070 for preferential conveyances was not applicable. Gillardi v. Henry, 272 Ky. 188 , 113 S.W.2d 1158, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 102 ( Ky. 1938 ).

An action by an injured employee, who had executed a written release reciting only a money consideration, for breach of alleged oral contract by employer to furnish him lifetime employment was in effect an action to obtain relief from fraud, and the ten (10) year statute of limitations applied. Drane v. Louisville R. Co., 279 Ky. 490 , 131 S.W.2d 439, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1939 ).

KRS 413.120 and this section and not subsection (2) of KRS 413.090 govern action by stockholder against bank officers and directors based on fraudulent acts. Roush v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 310 Ky. 408 , 220 S.W.2d 984, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1949 ).

An action cast under KRS 378.010 seeking to set aside an alleged fraudulent transfer made to delay, hinder and defraud in the collection of a claim for damages for personal injuries was bottomed upon fraud and was not barred by limitation until after the expiration of five (5) years from the time it accrued as provided by subsection (3) of this section. Pergrem v. Smith, 255 S.W.2d 42, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 638 ( Ky. 1953 ).

8.—Accrual of Action.

Cause of action by creditors to set aside a sheriff’s deed accrued when the creditors transferred their bids to the debtor’s sister for payments made to them by her with money furnished by her debtor brother and not two (2) years later when the sheriff executed the deed. Pearson v. Westerfield, 30 S.W. 875, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 224 (1895).

The fraud consisted in the mortgagee’s holding that to be a deed which was intended by the parties merely as a mortgage and the statute of limitations commenced to run when mortgagee deprived him of or attempted to deprive him of possession on the ground that the deed was absolute and not at the time of the execution of the deed. Brown v. Spradlin, 136 Ky. 703 , 125 S.W. 150, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 533 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The fact that creditor did not know of fraudulent transfer of funds by debtor mother into trust for her son or discover it until funds in the trust were used to purchase property in the name of the son and the conveyance was put of record did not prevent the ten (10) year statute of limitations under this section from running from the time the money was transferred into the trust. Graham's Adm'r v. English, 160 Ky. 375 , 169 S.W. 836, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1914 ).

The accrual of a cause of action to set aside a deed for fraud means the right to institute and maintain the suit, and, whenever one person may sue another, a cause of action has accrued and the statute of limitations begins to run. Henderson v. Fielder, 185 Ky. 482 , 215 S.W. 187, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 323 ( Ky. 1919 ).

Even if partnership settlements were fraudulently procured, they clearly had the legal effect of dissolving the partnership and the partners thereafter occupied no trust relation as generally exists between partners of a going partnership which would toll or suspend the applicable limitation defense to a cause of action for fraud. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The cause of action creditors of husband have for his fraud in diverting resources from discharging his debts to improving his wife’s property accrues when the visible improvements are made and must be brought within five (5) years after the action accrues unless the fraud is not discovered within that time. Pierce v. J. B. Pierce's Trustee in Bankruptcy, 238 Ky. 495 , 38 S.W.2d 254, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Subsection (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 and subsection (3) of this section did not apply to action brought in 1943 by heirs against administrator’s surety where administrator fraudulently collected insurance of decedent in 1930, heirs did not discover the fraud until 1941 and heirs summoned administrator into court in 1942 at which time he failed to account. Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Cause of action by personal representative to recover personalty allegedly converted by defendant to her own use clearly was not barred by limitations, because the alleged taking did not occur until after decedent’s death, a few months before the action was brought. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

The ten-year provision of subsection (3) of this section barred an action instituted by decedent grantor’s administratrix in 1957 to set aside, on the ground of fraud, a deed executed by decedent in 1934 which reserved to the grantor a life estate and conveyed the remainder to defendants, since the statute began to run with the execution of the deed and not when defendant took possession of the property at the death of the grantor. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

The ten-year statute of limitations set forth in subsection (3) of this section means that an action brought under subsection (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 must be brought within ten (10) years of the alleged mistake regardless of when the mistake is discovered. Hernandez v. Daniel, 471 S.W.2d 25, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Where attorney alleged that a professional liability insurer induced him by fraudulent misrepresentations to buy a certificate that it had no intention of redeeming, since the claim accrued when he received the certificate, which contained the terms for its redemption, and since he filed suit 9 years later, the claim was time-barred under KRS 413.130(3). Allen v. Lawyers Mut. Ins. Co., 216 S.W.3d 657, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 50 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Even allowing plaintiff months to read the 2003 prospectus supplement, which reading was certainly required in the exercise of “ordinary vigilance and attention,” plaintiff should have become aware of defendants’ alleged omissions long before March 20, 2004, five years before it filed the instant suit; as such, plaintiff’s claims based on the 2003 certificates were all time-barred. Republic Bank & Trust Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co., 683 F.3d 239, 2012 FED App. 0186P, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12513 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

9.— —Infants.

A suit filed March 19, 1934, by a ward who became of age March 21, 1927, with knowledge of all the facts, to surcharge his guardian’s settlement, recorded September 8, 1926, on ground settlement was false, fraudulent and untrue was barred by KRS 413.120 requiring actions for fraud to be commenced within five (5) years after accrual and this section had no application. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

10.— —Remaindermen.

The limitation period applicable to an action by remaindermen to recover possession of estates accruing on death of life tenant is five (5) years under subsections (5) and (6) of KRS 413.120 , extended to a possible maximum of ten (10) years under subsection (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 and subsection (3) of this section in the event of fraud or mistake. Potter v. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co., 361 S.W.2d 515, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 245 ( Ky. 1962 ).

11.—Discovery.

Five-year statute of limitations applied to the unjust enrichment claim by the holder of oil and gas interests against a property owner when the holder alleged that it made overpayments of royalty payments to the owner. Furthermore, the discovery rule did not toll the statute of limitations as the holder failed to discover its alleged overpayments to the owner due to a lack of reasonable diligence on the holder’s part. EQT Prod. Co. v. Big Sandy Co., L.P., 590 S.W.3d 275, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 200 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

Widow’s counterclaim against administrators arising out of settlement of rights of estate in firm partly owned by decedent was barred when brought more than 20 years after widow’s discovery of alleged fraud. Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ).

Action by a bank president for deceit in inducing him to purchase bank stock was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 , although the condition of the bank was not discovered until within five (5) years prior to institution of the action, since a bank president should be required at least to exercise ordinary diligence to ascertain facts which, as president, it was his duty to know. Exchange Bank of Kentucky v. Trimble, 108 Ky. 230 , 56 S.W. 156, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1681 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 36 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Where deed executed by debtor to his wife was not recorded in the proper county and there was nothing to put anyone on notice, an action brought by a creditor to set aside the deed soon after he discovered its existence, which was seven (7) years after execution, was not barred by the statute of limitations. McGehee v. Cox, 58 S.W. 532, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 619 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 286 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

Where debtor’s son-in-law was not in possession until one year prior to suit, creditor could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have sooner discovered that debtor had paid for land and had the deed made to his son-in-law and his action was not barred by the statute of limitations. Wilhoit v. Musselman, 72 S.W. 1112, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2011 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 315 (Ky. Ct. App. 1903).

Failure to bring action within five (5) years from the time the fraud ought by ordinary diligence to have been discovered barred plaintiff under this section of his right to recover. Meehan v. Peck, 89 S.W. 491, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 446 (1905).

The statute of limitations does not bar right to reformation of a deed for fraud or mistake where the discovery of the fraud or mistake in the procurement of the deed was made within ten (10) years of the date of its execution and the action brought within the ten (10) years, and within five (5) years of the discovery of the fraud or mistake, and the evidence shows the discovery could not have been sooner made. Morgan v. Combs, 108 S.W. 272, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 1205 (1908), modified, 111 S.W. 294, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 817 (1908).

Insured’s right to have policy corrected for fraud or mistake accrued at the time of delivery to and acceptance by him since he had the policy and could have looked at it at any time so an action brought seven (7) years after acceptance was barred by the statute of limitations. Provident Sav. Life Assurance Soc. v. Withers, 132 Ky. 541 , 116 S.W. 350, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1909 ).

A wife whose husband under duress had used her money in settlement of an alleged claim against him had five (5) years from her discovery of such fraud or duress, and not later than ten (10) years succeeding the date of its perpetration or payment, within which to sue for recovery of the money. Jett v. Jett, 171 Ky. 548 , 188 S.W. 669, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 403 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Surviving wife, in an action by assignee of her husband’s heirs for partition of land conveyed to her husband individually more than five (5) years prior to institution of the action, was not barred by the statute of limitations from counterclaiming for a reformation of the deed on ground of mistake where she alleged she did not and could not have so discovered the mistake with due diligence and effort. Saylor v. Helton, 194 Ky. 195 , 238 S.W. 405, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Ignorance of one’s rights does not prevent the running of the statute after the cause of action has accrued. Falls Branch Coal Co. v. Proctor Coal Co., 203 Ky. 307 , 262 S.W. 300, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 915 ( Ky. 1924 ).

In suit by corporation to compel its agent to convey lands which he fraudulently acquired, the corporation could rely on the faithfulness of its agent until it had actual notice of his fraud; thus, constructive notice by reason of the fact that deed was recorded was not sufficient notice under this section, for the fraud only runs from the time that the fraud is discovered or should by reasonable diligence have been discovered. Hoge v. Kentucky River Coal Corp., 216 Ky. 51 , 287 S.W. 226, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 840 ( Ky. 1926 ).

If plaintiff could have discovered the fraud and failed to exercise diligence to do so, the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 may not be extended to ten (10) years under this section because he did not know of the existence of the fraud. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The phrase “discovery of fraud or mistake” means the acquisition of knowledge of the fraud and in contemplation of the law, knowledge consists not only of what one certainly knows but also of information which he might have obtained by an investigation of facts which he does know and which impose upon him the duty to make that investigation. Mussman v. Pepples, 243 Ky. 674 , 49 S.W.2d 592, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where, in an action against a county clerk to recover fees paid illegally, defendant pleaded the five (5) year statute of limitations and plaintiff replied, alleging claims had been fraudulently obtained from county, and the fraud could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered until within five (5) years prior to suit, the court properly sustained defendant’s demurrer to plaintiff’s reply. Taylor v. Jones, 253 Ky. 285 , 69 S.W.2d 372, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1934 ).

An action to rescind the purchase of a note was not barred by limitations where it was brought within five (5) years of the plaintiff’s discovery of the fraud and within ten (10) years of the perpetration of the fraud. Farmers' Trust Co. v. Threlkeld's Adm'x, 257 Ky. 211 , 77 S.W.2d 616, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 538 ( Ky. 1934 ).

KRS 413.120 , which applies to all cases of fraud, requires an action for relief on the ground of fraud to be commenced within five (5) years next after the cause of action accrued and this section, insofar as it provides that the cause of action shall not be deemed to have accrued until the discovery of the fraud, is merely declaratory of the rule that would have been applied by the courts in the absence of such a statute. Thomas v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 258 Ky. 360 , 80 S.W.2d 8, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 162 ( Ky. 1935 ).

Where bank did not discover, and could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have discovered the misappropriations of its president prior to April 1, 1929, when by chance the matter was brought to the attention of two (2) of the directors, as there was no unreasonable or unexplained delay in the enforcement of its rights after they became known, its action for an accounting was not barred by KRS 413.120 or this section. Blackburn's Adm'x v. Union Bank & Trust Co., 269 Ky. 699 , 108 S.W.2d 806, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 667 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Grantee’s action to cancel or reform deed on ground that provisions were inserted in deed through fraud or mistake was barred where grantee had possession of deed for more than five (5) years before action was filed and grantee could read and write and did not exercise the slightest diligence to discover contents of deed. Mullins v. Jennings' Guardian, 273 Ky. 68 , 115 S.W.2d 340, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 580 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A ward’s cause of action to surcharge his guardian’s settlement for fraud accrues when the final settlement is filed, and limitations begin to run from the date the minor came of age and, where minor knew of fraud when he came of age, the five (5) year limitation applied. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Action by stockholder to rescind transaction for fraud, consisting of representation by president of holding company that impending merger with certain company would not be effected until an audit of that company’s affairs had been made, was not barred by limitations or by laches when brought on day that holding company went into receivership, and brought again in proper Circuit Court less than seven (7) months after it was finally determined that suit was originally brought in wrong venue, in spite of fact that merger had been published in newspapers in June before holding company went into receivership in November, since in all events action was brought within five (5) years of discovery. Kentucky Title Trust Co. v. Weil, 281 Ky. 763 , 136 S.W.2d 1097, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The five (5) year limitation on actions for relief for fraud begins to run when the fraud is discovered, or when it could have been discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence on the part of the one defrauded. Kentucky Title Trust Co. v. Weil, 281 Ky. 763 , 136 S.W.2d 1097, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 40 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where fraud in securing judgment was not discovered within five (5) years after its perpetration, this section applied rather than KRS 413.120 . Sutton v. Davis, 283 Ky. 146 , 140 S.W.2d 1020, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 306 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where transaction conveying real property from a client to his attorney was consummated and the facts known or discoverable by the client through the exercise of reasonable diligence more than five (5) years before he sought relief, his cause of action was barred by KRS 413.120 and this section did not apply. Hunt v. Picklesimer, 290 Ky. 573 , 162 S.W.2d 27, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 453 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where plaintiff discovered three (3) years after he purchased stones alleged to be genuine diamonds worth $600 that they were not diamonds and were worth only $6.00, he had five (5) years thereafter in which to bring an action for fraud and deceit. Shilling v. McCraw, 298 Ky. 783 , 184 S.W.2d 97, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 999 ( Ky. 1944 ).

If master commissioner made a mistake or was guilty of oversight in failing to make sale or execute deed according to judgment of court, relief from such mistake or oversight became barred after the expiration of ten (10) years from time deed was approved by court and delivered to purchaser. Jones v. Bell, 304 Ky. 827 , 202 S.W.2d 641, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 741 ( Ky. 1947 ).

An action to recover the value of coal removed from a tract of land by concealed, subterranean mining methods by the lessee of an adjoining tract is barred both by subsection (3) of this section and subsections (4) and (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 when suit was not commenced until more than ten (10) years after the last removal of coal and more than five (5) years after the time when diligence would have resulted in disclosure of the trespass. Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 305 S.W.2d 308, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1957 ).

When the sole heirs and beneficiaries of a decedent were furnished in 1945 with maps and surveys which were sufficient to put them on inquiry as to whether coal had been, during the lifetime of the decedent, wrongfully removed from real estate owned by the decedent, an action by the personal representative of the decedent, filed in 1951, to recover damages for the removal was barred by the provisions of subsections (4) and (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 and subsection (3) of this section since it was not brought, even under the “discovery” theory, within five (5) years of the time when diligence would have resulted in disclosure of the trespass. Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 305 S.W.2d 308, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1957 ).

A complaint, filed on December 31, 1959, which alleged in substance that a former county clerk’s annual settlements for the years 1949 to 1952 were fraudulently made, that the former clerk knowingly omitted true figures and inserted false ones in each report, that these acts were done with the intent to defraud and resulted in defrauding the county, that the fraud was not ascertained until December 1, 1959, when an audit by a CPA was filed, and that the fraud was not and could not have been discovered before that time alleged a case within the ten (10) year limitation of subsection (3) of this section and was not limited by the five (5) year provision of KRS 413.120 , since the negligence or laches of public officials in failing to make a thorough annual audit of each report cannot be imputed to the public. Madison County v. Arnett, 360 S.W.2d 208, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Subsection (3) of this section, and not subsection (1) of KRS 413.120 , applied to action by county against former clerk to recover sums allegedly received by clerk in excess of annual salary and expenses, where county alleged that it could not discover fraud until certain audit was made. Madison County v. Arnett, 360 S.W.2d 208, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Appellant's action to reform its mortgage on debtors' property was barred by Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.120(12), the five-year statute of limitations; as appellant could have discovered with reasonable diligence the mistake in the mortgage's legal description, the 10-year statute of limitations, Ky. Rev. Stat. § 413.130(3), did not apply. Assocs. First Capital Corp. v. Hensley (In re Hensley), 578 Fed. Appx. 530, 2014 FED App. 0671N, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16859 (6th Cir. Ky. 2014 ).

12.— —Mistake in Acreage.

A cause of action to recover overpayment of purchase money was based upon an implied contract to refund the money paid as a result of mutual mistake in acreage and not on the deed; thus, the statute of limitations did not run from the date of the deed but from the date of overpayment. Nave v. Price, 108 Ky. 105 , 55 S.W. 882, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1538 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Although a mistake in acreage was discovered within a year prior to institution of action, purchaser did not use due diligence to ascertain the quantity of land the boundary contained where it was in an irregular shape and he failed to have a survey made at an earlier date; therefore, the action brought almost ten (10) years after the last payment of the purchase price was barred by the statute of limitations. Nave v. Price, 108 Ky. 105 , 55 S.W. 882, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1538 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Purchaser was not entitled to a judgment on its counterclaim arising from an implied promise on the part of payee to refund money paid by mistake in acreage where the payment was made and the mistake discovered more than five (5) years before the claim was asserted since the plea of limitation as to the claim was good. Pond Creek Coal Co. v. Runyon, 199 Ky. 539 , 251 S.W. 841, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 895 ( Ky. 1923 ).

The correct rule for applying the statute of limitations in purchaser’s action for shortage in acreage through a mistake in the deed seems to be that the statute shall run from the discovery of the mistake, or from such time as, by the exercise of ordinary diligence, it ought to have been discovered by the plaintiff and failure to solve the doubt as to the quantity of the tract by having it surveyed is not the exercise of ordinary diligence; thus, an action brought more than five (5) years after payment for the land is barred by the statute of limitations. Harlan v. Buckley, 268 Ky. 148 , 103 S.W.2d 946, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 774 ( Ky. 1936 ).

13.— —Recorded Instruments.

Where the facts of the fraud appear on the face of a recorded deed, ignorance of the fraud will not extend the limitation period. Elkhorn Coal Corp. v. Hite, 225 Ky. 735 , 9 S.W.2d 1083, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1928 ).

In action for reformation of a mortgage, where an examination of the record would not have revealed mistake, rule that recorded instruments furnish constructive notice of mistake revealed thereby, so as to start statute of limitations running, did not apply. Schroath v. Pioneer Bldg. Ass'n, 274 Ky. 685 , 119 S.W.2d 1113, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 314 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Whether recording of alleged fraudulent deed by vendee of real estate to his daughter constituted such notice of fraud as to bar action to set aside deed after five (5) years from date of recording was not necessary to decide, in action by original vendor to recover balance of purchase price, since vendor could enforce implied vendor’s lien against daughter of vendee without having deed set aside, she not being a bona fide purchaser, and five (5) years not having elapsed from date purchase price was due. Sparkman v. Triplett, 292 Ky. 569 , 167 S.W.2d 323, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Recording of deed alleged to have been obtained by fraud constitutes notice of the fraud, and cause of action to set aside deed is barred five (5) years after deed is recorded, regardless of actual notice of fraud. Hollifield v. Blackburn, 294 Ky. 74 , 170 S.W.2d 910, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1943 ).

In action to reform deed on ground of mistake, recording of deed was constructive notice of the mistake and the cause of action accrued when the deed was recorded since due diligence required that the mistake be discovered at least within five (5) years from the date of the recording of the deed. Martin v. Wagers, 310 Ky. 363 , 220 S.W.2d 580, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 903 ( Ky. 1949 ).

14.— —Public Records.

Cause of action to surcharge the settlement of an estate arose when the settlement was made, which was nine (9) years prior to institution of the action, and, where the facts were disclosed by a public record which was required to be kept and no examination was made of it, that was not the exercise of ordinary diligence and action was barred by the statute of limitations. Hall's Adm'r v. Hall's Ex'r, 265 Ky. 528 , 97 S.W.2d 23, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 516 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where the inspection of court records would have disclosed fraud in obtaining a judgment, action for relief against the fraud must be brought within five (5) years of its perpetration. County Debt Com. v. Morgan County, 279 Ky. 476 , 130 S.W.2d 779, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 279 ( Ky. 1939 ), overruled, Fiscal Court of Estill County v. Debt Com. of Kentucky, 286 Ky. 114 , 149 S.W.2d 735, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1941 ).

15.— —Confidential Relationship.

An action to set aside a deed recorded more than five (5) years before the action was instituted and to subject land to debt was not barred by the ten-year statute of limitations where it was brought soon after actual notice of the conveyance by debtor to his son, the father and son lived together, there was no change of possession, son did not give it in for taxation in his own name and there was nothing in the way in which the property was held and used to put the creditor, who lived in another county, on notice. Chinn v. Curtis, 71 S.W. 923, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1563 (1903).

In action by daughter for division of land on ground that deed from her grandfather to her mother, her brother and herself conveyed an undivided interest, the daughter was estopped from pleading the statute of limitations to her brother’s answer asking the court to correct the mistake of the draftsman and to reform the deed so as to convey all of the land to his mother for life and the remainder to him and his sister, since all three (3) grantees had for more than five (5) years construed the deed as giving the mother a life estate with remainder to the children. Swinebroad v. Wood, 123 Ky. 664 , 97 S.W. 25, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 1202 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1906 ).

Although recording of a deed constitutes constructive notice to the public, son and his heirs were estopped from pleading and running of the ten (10) year statute of limitations as against his mother where son purchased land by oral agreement and persuaded his mother to pay for it with the promise he would have it conveyed to her but he, in fact, had it conveyed to himself, informed her deed was made to her and that he was taking care of it at his house, and placed her in possession of the land and acknowledged her title thereto. Loy v. Nelson, 201 Ky. 710 , 258 S.W. 303, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 632 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Where wife did not discover fraud committed upon her by husband in recorded antenuptial contract until after his death, more than five (5) years after the contract was made, and then brought suit, less than ten (10) years after the contract was made, to cancel the contract, the suit was not barred by limitations, since the recording of the contract did not constitute notice to the wife of the fraud. Clore v. Clore, 280 Ky. 131 , 132 S.W.2d 548, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 71 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Grantee occupying position of special confidence in relation to grantor could not have relied upon the statute of limitations and it would follow that those claiming through him would also be estopped from asserting limitations in an action to reform a deed on ground of mutual mistake, especially where they, through their own actions, prevented plaintiff from discovering and asserting a right before the statute had run. Strode v. Spoden, 284 S.W.2d 663, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where deed mother executed to son reserving to herself a life estate in the oil and gas was recorded almost 30 years before action was instituted by her other children, who claimed by virtue of their mother’s later deed to all her children of a remainder interest in all of her property, to reform the deed reserving the life estate in the oil and gas, on the ground of mutual mistake, to a reservation by their mother of the oil and gas outright, their action was barred by lapse of five (5) years from the date of their mother’s death, at which time their right of action accrued and statute of limitations commenced to run, since they could have discovered the mistake during such period by the slightest diligence. Stepp v. Stepp, 288 S.W.2d 337, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1956 ).

In view of the fiducial relationship between brothers and sisters, constructive notice through recordation of a deed conveying mineral interests of several brothers and sisters to one brother did not constitute such actual discovery of the fraud in the execution of the deed so as to toll the statute of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ).

The rule that equity will not protect plaintiffs against their own folly by way of reformation or cancellation even in the presence of fraud if the negligence is so gross that plaintiff is victim of his own folly and not the fraud would not apply unless a brother had done something which would cause his brothers and sisters to lose faith in him, the relationship being fiducial and giving them a right to rely upon their brother’s representations that an instrument they signed was to get money to pay their father’s funeral expenses and to divide the balance of his estate between the heirs when in fact it was a conveyance of the father’s mineral interests in land to their brother. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Where a confidential relationship existed between the parties and there had been fraud in the inception of the execution of a deed, mere recordation of the deed was not actual discovery of the fraud and did not begin the five (5) year period of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Where a confidential relationship exists and there has been fraud in the inception of the contract, constructive notice of the provisions by way of recordation may not be construed to mean actual discovery of the fraud or mistake to toll the running of the statute of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ); Jennings v. Fain, 226 Ky. 290 , 10 S.W.2d 1101, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1928 ); Hollifield v. Blackburn, 294 Ky. 74 , 170 S.W.2d 910, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1943 ); McCoy v. Arena, 295 Ky. 403 , 174 S.W.2d 726, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 266 ( Ky. 1943 ); Morgan v. Hughett, 301 Ky. 409 , 192 S.W.2d 197, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 496 ( Ky. 1946 ); Stepp v. Stepp, 288 S.W.2d 337, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Where a confidential relationship exists and there is fraud in the inception, mere recordation of the instrument is not sufficient notice to begin the running of the statute. McMurray v. McMurray, 410 S.W.2d 139, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 30 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Where father loaned money to son to purchase land and land was deeded to son and wife as tenants by entirety, action against wife after son’s death to set aside conveyance under KRS 378.020 and to recover amount of loan accrued when father actually learned of conveyance to wife, since confidential relation existed between father and son, rather than on date of recording of deed. McMurray v. McMurray, 410 S.W.2d 139, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 30 ( Ky. 1966 ).

16.—Sheriff’s Settlement.

No action to recover tax penalties collected by a sheriff by surcharging his settlement accrued until the settlement was made and, where petition did not disclose when it was made and statute of limitations was not pleaded, court should not have sustained demurrer to petition and dismissed it even though more than five (5) years had elapsed since settlement. Commonwealth use of Breckenridge County v. Pate, 85 S.W. 1096, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 623 (1905).

Ordinarily, neglect or laches of public officials is not chargeable to the public, as barring a suit by lapse of time, where no intervening right of a third person is to be affected. Alexander v. Owen County, 136 Ky. 420 , 124 S.W. 386, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 500 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The statute of limitations began to run against the right of a county to surcharge a sheriff’s tax collection settlement when a mistake therein was discoverable by the exercise of reasonable diligence. Alexander v. Owen County, 136 Ky. 420 , 124 S.W. 386, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 500 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Attack for fraud or mistake on settlement as to revenues collected by sheriff must be made within five (5) years after discovery of fraud or mistake but within ten (10) years after final approval. American Surety Co. v. Bales, 228 Ky. 543 , 15 S.W.2d 481, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 620 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Action to surcharge sheriff’s settlement must be instituted within five (5) years after settlement or subsequent discovery of mistake, but not over ten (10) years after confirmation. Steele v. Commonwealth, 233 Ky. 719 , 26 S.W.2d 747, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 465 ( Ky. 1929 ).

17.—Judgments In Rem.

A judgment in proceedings in rem, in which constructive service is permitted, can be attacked on the ground of fraud in the affidavits upon which constructive service was made only within five (5) years from the time the fraud was discovered, or in any event within ten (10) years from the time the fraud was committed, except in the case of will contests, where relief is limited to three (3) years by KRS 394.280 . Miller v. Hill, 293 Ky. 242 , 168 S.W.2d 769, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1943 ).

18.—Conveyance Fraudulent as to Creditors.

An action to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent as to creditors is not governed by the six months’ limitation of KRS 378.070 but by KRS 413.120 , providing that such action is not barred until five (5) years from the time the cause of action accrued, and this section, providing that such cause of action does not accrue until the fraud is discovered, but that in any event the action is barred ten (10) years from the time the fraud was perpetrated. Morgan v. Hibbard, Spencer, Bartlett & Co., 299 Ky. 57 , 184 S.W.2d 218, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 1015 ( Ky. 1944 ).

19.—Ten-year Maximum.

Action by owner of coal and mineral rights under defendant’s land to enjoin defendant from interfering with relocation of new truck road was barred by subsection (3) of this section after ten (10) years from the date of the contract, since, in order for the court to find that the language of the mineral deed represented a mistake on the part of the clerk who copied it into the public record, plaintiff’s action would have to be treated as one seeking relief from fraud or mistake that was barred by the ten (10) year limitation. Hi Hat Elkhorn Coal Co. v. Kelly, 205 F. Supp. 764, 1962 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4759 (E.D. Ky. 1962 ).

Where daughter was distributed bonds as her portion of her father’s estate and the bonds were declared invalid 14 years later, her cause of action for contribution from the other heirs if based on the ground of mistake accrued on distribution of the bonds to her and was barred by the ten (10) year statute of limitations. Pusey's Trustee v. Wathen, 90 Ky. 473 , 14 S.W. 418, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 425 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 108 ( Ky. 1890 ).

An action for fraud brought against the guardian of an insane ward more than ten (10) years after distribution of the ward’s estate to the ward’s heirs without administration was barred by the statute of limitations. Willis' Adm'r v. Roberts, 27 S.W. 976, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 366 (1894).

Where more than ten (10) years has elapsed since the perpetration of the alleged fraud before the institution of the action, the action is barred by this section. Sanders v. Wade, 30 S.W. 656, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 205 (1895).

An action instituted against a grantor nearly 20 years after the contract was made to correct a deed and to compel the grantor to convey the land left out of the deed by fraud or mistake was barred by the ten (10) year statute of limitations provided by this section. Abner v. Gabbard, 31 S.W. 285, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 410 (1895).

If ten (10) years is allowed to elapse after the recording of a deed, the right of grantee is perfected and an action to set aside the deed as fraudulent is barred. Blake v. Wolfe, 105 Ky. 380 , 49 S.W. 19, 50 S.W. 2, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1212 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1899 ).

The ten (10) year statute of limitations, if it had been properly pleaded, would have been a defense against the recovery of all insurance premiums which had been paid more than ten (10) years. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Blesch, 58 S.W. 436, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 530 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 259 (Ky. Ct. App. 1900).

Insurance policies, like other contracts, may be corrected or reformed by reason of fraud or mistake in issuing them but under this section a mistake in naming the beneficiary could not be corrected after more than ten (10) years had elapsed since the policy was issued. Webb v. Webb, 64 S.W. 839, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1057 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 578 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

Defendant in trespass, asking that a mistake in the description of a deed to plaintiff’s remote grantor be corrected, was barred by this section, barring a cause of action on the ground of mistake in ten (10) years. Bennett Jellico Coal Co. v. East Jellico Coal Co., 152 Ky. 838 , 154 S.W. 922, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 756 ( Ky. 1913 ).

An action seeking a rescission of an insurance contract and the recovery of the annual premium paid upon the ground that the insured was induced to accept the new policy and pay the premiums by the false representations of the agent as to the terms and conditions of the policy and what the company would do was barred within ten (10) years after the alleged misrepresentations were made. Schoolfield v. Provident Sav. Life Assurance Soc., 158 Ky. 687 , 166 S.W. 207, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 692 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Under this section and KRS 413.260 , efforts of debtor to defeat liability, delaying judgment, did not extend time for bringing suit to subject property, voluntarily transferred without consideration, to the payment of the judgment. Graham's Adm'r v. English, 160 Ky. 375 , 169 S.W. 836, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Under this section, the utmost limit within which an action for relief from fraud or mistake may be brought is ten (10) years, unless facts are brought within exceptions mentioned in KRS 413.020 and 413.170 , relative to disability. Lockhart v. Justice, 203 Ky. 675 , 262 S.W. 1101, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 983 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The statute of limitations was an effectual bar to reformation of a deed granting a passway 25 years after its execution, delivery and acceptance. Gossett v. Chandler, 204 Ky. 402 , 264 S.W. 853, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 464 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The ten (10) year statutory period of limitations is not extended by concealment of cause of action for fraud. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where surviving partner failed to exercise diligence to discover fraud of deceased partner in settlement, the concealment of the fraud by the deceased partner did not extend the surviving partner’s time for bringing an action for settlement of partnership beyond ten (10) years. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

An action to set aside an original note and mortgage executed some 24 years before the filing of the action was long since barred by KRS 413.120 and this section. Bohn v. German Protestant Orphans Home Co., 283 Ky. 509 , 142 S.W.2d 167, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 381 ( Ky. 1940 ).

If plaintiff’s alleged cause of action to quiet title to real estate was bottomed upon a fraud perpetrated upon him by his brother, then KRS 413.120 and this section barred such an action 22 years after plaintiff first asserted the mistake in defendant’s deed to him; on the other hand, if plaintiff’s cause of action could by any possible interpretation be considered as one of the recovery of real estate, then it was barred by the 15 year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.010 . Francis v. Francis, 288 Ky. 685 , 157 S.W.2d 289, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 186 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Action to set aside deed on ground that it was procured by fraud was barred after expiration of ten (10) years from time of execution of deed, regardless of when fraud was discovered. Hollifield v. Blackburn, 294 Ky. 74 , 170 S.W.2d 910, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Action by holder of note, against original payee, claiming that payee had fraudulently received payment from the maker of the note and released lien securing the note was barred by limitations where more than ten (10) years had elapsed since commission of the alleged fraud. Redding v. Main, 303 Ky. 41 , 196 S.W.2d 887, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1946 ).

An action commenced in 1958 to reform, on the theory of mutual mistake, deeds executed in 1944 and 1945 which reserved an interest in oil and gas to the grantors was barred by subsection (3) of this section, despite plaintiff’s contention that they had no reason to believe that their interest was questioned or that there was any difference of opinion as to its nature and extent until the year preceding suit. Gallin v. Combs, 341 S.W.2d 778, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 87 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Where action by personal representative to set aside a deed on ground of fraud was barred under all circumstances by the lapse of ten (10) years as to the decedent, the other heirs of the decedent stood in his shoes and the action being barred as to him also was barred as to them. Tarter v. Arnold, 343 S.W.2d 377, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1960 ).

An action to set aside a deed on the ground of undue influence is governed by the five-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.120 (12) (now (11)) and may be extended by subsection (3) of this section. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

Fraud claims were dismissed because, since the alleged fraud occurred at the very latest in 1979, when a husband stopped working at a plant, it was barred by the 10-year fraud statute of repose under KRS 413.130(3); the 10-year statute of repose was not invalid under the Kentucky constitution’s “open courts” provision. Hogan v. Goodrich Corp., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2004 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 17, 2006).

Where plaintiff insurer, as subrogee of defendant debtor's former employer, sought damages from debtor arising out of allegations of fraud, based on undisputed date of discovery of fraud, plaintiff's action was brought within five-year statute of limitations period but, according to Kentucky's statute of repose, only alleged acts of fraud committed 10 years prior to filing of action could be litigated. Fed. Ins. Co. v. Woods (In re Woods), 558 B.R. 164, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 3388 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2016 ).

20.Pleading and Proof.

It is settled that under this section the defendant must plead limitation if he relies upon it, and then plaintiff must by his reply set up facts sufficient to avoid the running of the statute, and, if these facts are denied, the burden is on him to prove them. Stair v. Gilbert, 209 Ky. 243 , 272 S.W. 732, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Plea of statute of limitations is personal, and, if the party in whose favor it exists does not rely on it, such plea cannot be invoked by a third party. Lowe v. Taylor, 222 Ky. 846 , 2 S.W.2d 1042, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 263 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The defense of limitations cannot, as a general rule, be raised by demurrer but must be pleaded. Crady v. Hubrich, 299 Ky. 461 , 185 S.W.2d 949, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1945 ).

21.—Fraud or Mistake.

A pleading declaring that more than ten (10) years had elapsed since the alleged fraud was insufficient to afford ground for relief, and it was proper to so declare on demurrer. Gowdy v. Johnson, 104 Ky. 648 , 47 S.W. 624, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 997 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 1898 ), overruled in part, Yager's Adm'r v. Bank of Kentucky, 125 Ky. 177 , 100 S.W. 848, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 1287 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The ten (10) year statute of limitations cannot be taken advantage of by demurrer to petition to recover damages for deceit. Schneider v. Schleutker, 64 S.W. 505, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 951 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 476 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

Where pleadings in action to correct mistake in deed showed the action was commenced 18 years after the mistake was made, the action was barred by the ten (10) year statute of limitations and it was proper for the court to sustain a demurrer to the pleadings. Green's Adm'r v. Irvine, 66 S.W. 278, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1762 (1902).

There is no reason why a plaintiff in an action for reformation of a deed should be required to anticipate in his petition a plea of the statute of limitations and allege matter in avoidance of it but, when pleaded, he may set forth matter in avoidance of the plea. Swinebroad v. Wood, 123 Ky. 664 , 97 S.W. 25, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 1202 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1906 ).

The statute of limitations must be pleaded and cannot be reached by a demurrer to a pleading seeking reformation of a deed for mistake of the draftsman. Swinebroad v. Wood, 123 Ky. 664 , 97 S.W. 25, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 1202 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1906 ).

If the defendant pleads limitation in an action to surcharge a tax collector’s settlement and the plaintiff does not by his reply show facts sufficient to avoid the plea of the statute, the court may sustain a demurrer to the reply. Green County v. Howard, 127 Ky. 379 , 105 S.W. 897, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 243 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1907 ).

Where defendants pleaded fraud in defense to a suit, they were not bound, because it appeared that the fraud occurred more than ten (10) years before suit was brought, to anticipate the plea of limitations and allege facts in the answer in avoidance. Baker v. Begley, 155 Ky. 234 , 159 S.W. 691, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1913 ).

In action for reformation of deed, complaint was not defective for failure to negative the running of the statute of limitations. Kirk v. Kirk's Ex'r, 167 Ky. 69 , 179 S.W. 1065, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 796 ( Ky. 1915 ).

Limitations against suit to set aside deed for fraud must be pleaded and cannot be relied on by demurrer. Stair v. Gilbert, 209 Ky. 243 , 272 S.W. 732, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Although limitations generally must be pleaded and may not be raised by demurrer, the rule respecting an action for relief from fraud brought more than five (5) years after the fraud was perpetrated is that the plaintiff must allege facts to excuse the delay or he fails to state a cause of action. Forman v. Gault, 236 Ky. 213 , 32 S.W.2d 977, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 712 ( Ky. 1930 ). See Roush v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 310 Ky. 408 , 220 S.W.2d 984, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1949 ).

In the absence of allegation of facts excusing delay, the action of creditors against a husband who by the use of his own money caused substantial improvements to be erected on his wife’s property, brought more than five (5) years after the erection of the improvements, was barred by the statutes of limitation. Pierce v. J. B. Pierce's Trustee in Bankruptcy, 238 Ky. 495 , 38 S.W.2d 254, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The question of limitation in an action for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake may be raised by demurrer where the petition contains no allegation excusing the delay in filing action. Mullins v. Jennings' Guardian, 273 Ky. 68 , 115 S.W.2d 340, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 580 ( Ky. 1938 ). See Clore v. Clore, 280 Ky. 131 , 132 S.W.2d 548, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 71 ( Ky. 1939 ); Flynn v. Fike, 291 Ky. 316 , 164 S.W.2d 470, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 227 ( Ky. 1942 ), overruled in part, Townsend v. Cable, 378 S.W.2d 806, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 211 ( Ky. 1964 ).

An action for relief from fraud brought more than five (5) years after the fraud was perpetrated is an exception to the general rule that the defense of limitations cannot be raised by demurrer, since the plaintiff in such an action must allege facts to excuse the delay. Crady v. Hubrich, 299 Ky. 461 , 185 S.W.2d 949, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 446 ( Ky. 1945 ).

In order to recover damages in an action brought later than five (5) years after the alleged perpetration of fraud there must be an allegation and proof that the fraud was not discovered within the five-year period allowed under KRS 413.120 and that by the exercise of ordinary care could not have been discovered within that time. Boone v. Gonzalez, 550 S.W.2d 571, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 685 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

When a confidential relationship exists between the parties, the statute of limitations for fraud does not begin to run until actual discovery of the fraud, there being no duty on the part of the injured party to exercise due diligence to discover the fraud; however, the party seeking to prosecute an action after the expiration of the general statutory time limit is not wholly relieved of the burden of pleading and proving that the tardiness is excusable. Boone v. Gonzalez, 550 S.W.2d 571, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 685 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

Action brought by grantor attacking validity of deed on ground of fraud, mistake and undue influence was barred by five-year statute of limitations, in absence of allegation that confidential relationship existed between grantor and grantees, and in absence of allegation that alleged fraud was not discovered and could not have been discovered by the exercise of reasonable diligence within the five-year period. Skaggs v. Vaughn, 550 S.W.2d 574, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 686 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

22.— —Discovery.

All claims arising out of transactions for purchase of working interests in oil and gas leases on grounds they were induced by representations which were fraudulent were barred by the Kentucky five (5) year statute of limitations where plaintiffs failed to disclose by proof any facts or circumstances which precluded them from discovering the alleged fraud by the exercise of reasonable diligence before the lapse of the five (5) year period of limitations. Terrill v. Carpenter, 143 F. Supp. 747, 1956 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3028 (D. Ky. 1956 ), aff'd, 249 F.2d 142, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 3942 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ).

It was unnecessary for defendant to aver, in pleading statute of limitations to an action for relief on ground of mistake, that the plaintiff had not used due diligence to discover the mistake sooner than was done in view of the allegations of the petition that the failure to discover the mistake was not the result of the lack of diligence. Nave v. Price, 108 Ky. 105 , 55 S.W. 882, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1538 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 13 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Plaintiff is not required to anticipate the plea of statute of limitations and he need not aver that the fraud was discovered within five (5) years next before the bringing of the action and that he could not have discovered it sooner by the use of reasonable diligence. Coldiron v. Combs, 60 S.W. 386, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1187 (1901).

If the action is brought after five (5) years from the making of the mistake or the perpetration of the fraud, the plaintiff must allege and prove that he discovered it within five (5) years before the bringing of the suit, and must allege and prove facts showing that he could not by reasonable diligence have discovered it sooner. German Sec. Bank v. Columbia Finance & Trust Co., 85 S.W. 761, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 581 (1905).

The sufficiency of the answer and counterclaim was not affected by defendant’s failure to state when he discovered the mistake, since the questions of limitation and laches were not raised by the demurrer. Stark v. Suttle, 181 Ky. 646 , 205 S.W. 673, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 578 ( Ky. 1918 ).

In an action brought by executors of purchaser, more than five (5) years after mistake in deed as to the acreage, to recover the amount paid vendor in excess of the total purchase price per acre, evidence that executors resurveyed land and discovered mistake within preceding five (5) years showed when the executors found the deficiency in acreage, whether for the first time or not, but did not prove that their decedent, the purchaser, did not know of the mistake all the time and their action was barred by the ten (10) year statute of limitations. Gragg v. Levi, 183 Ky. 182 , 208 S.W. 813, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 456 ( Ky. 1919 ).

The burden of proof was upon plaintiffs in an action to recover amount paid vendor in excess of the total purchase price per acre for a shortage in acreage and the five (5) year period having elapsed, it was incumbent upon them to establish by evidence that the mistake was not discovered and could not have been discovered by the exercise of reasonable diligence until within five (5) years before the action was commenced. Gragg v. Levi, 183 Ky. 182 , 208 S.W. 813, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 456 ( Ky. 1919 ).

In action for fraud, defendants’ plea of limitations must prevail unless it is avoided by a reply showing that the action was brought within five (5) years after plaintiffs discovered the fraud, and that they could not by reasonable diligence have discovered it sooner. Mounts v. Charles, 187 Ky. 421 , 219 S.W. 184, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1920 ).

In an action to avoid agreed division of land and deed of partition on the ground of fraud, where defendant traversed the allegations of fraud and pleaded in bar of action thereon the five (5) year statute of limitations, and plaintiff in avoidance of the plea of limitations alleged that she did not discover and could not have discovered the fraud until within five (5) years next before the filing of the action, plaintiff was required to prove that same could not have been discovered within five (5) years. Dyer v. Higgins, 202 Ky. 66 , 258 S.W. 955, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 668 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Petition alleging that cause of action did not accrue within the five (5) year limitation of the statute because plaintiff did not discover the fraud until within 12 months of bringing suit and defendant’s denial of that matter of avoidance raised the issue without additional pleading but plaintiff did, in his reply, deny that his cause of action “as set up in the petition” was barred by the statute of limitations. Klineline v. Head, 205 Ky. 644 , 266 S.W. 370, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1924 ).

To sustain an action for relief against alleged fraud or mistake, brought after the expiration of five (5) years from the commission thereof and within ten (10) years from that time, so as to be within the provisions of this section, the petition must allege, and the proof must show, that the plaintiff did not, and could not by reasonable diligence, discover the fraud or mistake until within five (5) years before the commencement of the action. Elkhorn Coal Corp. v. Hite, 225 Ky. 735 , 9 S.W.2d 1083, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 862 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where, independently of any constructive notice of the fraud, plaintiff failed to prove his inability to discover the alleged fraud upon which he relied within the five (5) year period for the bringing of his action, his action for fraudulent representation that land in possession of a third party was included in the deed was barred by the statutes of limitation. Jennings v. Fain, 226 Ky. 290 , 10 S.W.2d 1101, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Although limitations generally must be pleaded and may not be raised by demurrer, the rule respecting an action for relief from fraud brought more than five (5) years after the fraud was perpetrated is that the plaintiff must allege facts to excuse the delay or he fails to state a cause of action. Forman v. Gault, 236 Ky. 213 , 32 S.W.2d 977, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 712 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Petition for relief from fraud filed more than five (5) but within ten (10) years after the cause of action accrues must allege facts showing that the fraud was not discovered within five (5) years and by reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered within that period. Pierce v. J. B. Pierce's Trustee in Bankruptcy, 238 Ky. 495 , 38 S.W.2d 254, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 267 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The burden was on plaintiff claiming shortage in acreage to prove that, by the exercise of ordinary diligence, he did not and could not have discovered the shortage alleged sooner than five (5) years before filing the suit. Jordan v. Howard, 246 Ky. 142 , 54 S.W.2d 613, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Cause of action for damages for malpractice accrues when a party has a right and capacity to sue and, even if the running of the one year statute of limitations could be suspended under this section by fraud, the intent being controlling, fraudulent concealment is necessarily based on knowledge and not on what may be discovered by the exercise of ordinary care, and the allegation that the defendants knew, or by the exercise of ordinary care should have known, that forceps were left in abdomen was not sufficient to show fraudulent concealment. Carter v. Harlan Hospital Ass'n, 265 Ky. 452 , 97 S.W.2d 9, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 509 ( Ky. 1936 ).

An action to construe a newly found will and thus set aside the agreed settlement of an estate some ten (10) years after the death of the decedent and nine (9) years after the settlement must fail where plaintiff’s proof fails completely to show that the discovery of the will was not made within five (5) years before the commencement of the action. Dycus v. Dycus, 295 Ky. 847 , 175 S.W.2d 997, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 353 ( Ky. 1943 ).

A person seeking to avoid the five (5) year statute on ground of fraud or mistake must allege and prove not only that the fraud or mistake was not discovered within the five (5) year period but that it could not have been discovered sooner by reasonable diligence and in no event can an action be maintained after the lapse of ten (10) years from the perpetration of the fraud. Redding v. Main, 303 Ky. 41 , 196 S.W.2d 887, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 787 ( Ky. 1946 ).

In order to enlarge the five (5) year statute of limitations to ten (10) years, it must be alleged and proved that the fraud was not discovered within the five (5) year period and also alleged and proved that the fraud could not have been discovered within that period by the exercise of reasonable diligence. Madison County v. Arnett, 360 S.W.2d 208, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 216 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Where plaintiff salesman could not have discovered defendant employer’s alleged fraud in calculating his compensation prior to 1999, due to the employer’s nondisclosure of deductions from his sales commissions, the five-year limitations period of KRS 413.120(12) was not violated. Dodd v. Dyke Indus., 518 F. Supp. 2d 970, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78248 (W.D. Ky. 2007 ).

23.—Amendment.

Bank holding company’s amendment of pleading denominated “objections and exceptions” to “amended answer, counterclaim and setoff” related back to the filing of the original pleading and the cause of action stated in it was not barred since the original pleading was filed on time and did not state a new ground of relief but merely perfected a cause of action already defectively set out. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Under CR 15.03, an action filed within the period of limitations by administrator of the estate may be continued by amendment after the expiration of the period of limitation even though the appointment as administrator was defective. Modern Bakery, Inc. v. Brashear, 405 S.W.2d 742, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1966 ).

24.—Estoppel.

Estoppel, to be available, should be pleaded as well as proven but where all the facts were fully stated and relied on in petition to establish a trust in land, and issue joined and proof taken thereon, the Court of Appeals could determine whether defendants were estopped from pleading the running of the ten (10) year statute of limitations, although the reply contained no plea of estoppel. Loy v. Nelson, 201 Ky. 710 , 258 S.W. 303, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 632 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Cited in:

United States v. 14.99 Acres of Land, 27 F. Supp. 843, 1939 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2725 (D. Ky. 1939 ); Glock v. Carpenter, 184 F. Supp. 829, 1960 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4273 (E.D. Ky. 1960 ); Towles v. Campbell’s Adm’r, 249 Ky. 123 , 60 S.W.2d 378, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1933 ); Broyles v. Broyles, 271 Ky. 461 , 112 S.W.2d 686, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 14 ( Ky. 1938 ); Shepherd v. Haymond, 291 Ky. 780 , 165 S.W.2d 812, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1942 ); Brewster v. Bradley, 379 S.W.2d 480, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 249 ( Ky. 1964 ); Vaughn v. Perkins, 576 S.W.2d 257, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 379 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979); In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, Bryant Electric Co. v. Kiser, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (1983); Groupwell Int’l (HK) Ltd. v. Gourmet Express, LLC, — F. Supp. 2d —, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10037 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Fraud or Mistake.
2.—Accrual of Action.

Unpublished decision: Even if buyer’s fraud claim was not barred by the five-year statute of limitation, it was foreclosed by KRS 413.130(3), Kentucky’s absolute 10-year limitation on fraud claims; the seller and the buyer signed the sale agreement in 1987, 16 years prior to the buyer’s first attempt to claim fraud. 500 Assocs. v. Vt. Am. Corp., 496 Fed. Appx. 589, 2012 FED App. 0947N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 18272 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

3.—Discovery.

Unpublished decision: Misrepresentation claim by an insured against two companies that marketed disability insurance was properly dismissed because the claim was barred by the applicable five-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120(2), (12) since the limitations period began to run from the time the misrepresentation could have been discovered through ordinary diligence under KRS 413.130(3). Daugherty v. Am. Express Co., 485 Fed. Appx. 746, 2012 FED App. 0548N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10795 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey, Ham, Corporations, 65 Ky. L.J. 255 (1976-77).

Brickey, Products Liability in Kentucky: The Doctrinal Dilemma, 65 Ky. L.J. 593 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey, Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Kentucky Law Survey, Connelly, Torts, 68 Ky. L.J. 709 (1979-1980).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 212.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant to Complaint Under KRS 378.020 , Form 306.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint on Claim for Debt and to Set Aside Fraudulent Conveyance Under Ky. CR 18.02, Form 306.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Accounts and Accounting, § 212.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Fraud, § 122.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Dissolution Decree, § 24.24.

413.135. Action for damages arising out of injury.

  1. No action to recover damages, whether based upon contract or sounding in tort, resulting from or arising out of any deficiency in the construction components, design, planning, supervision, inspection, or construction of any improvement to real property, or for any injury to property, either real or personal, arising out of such deficiency, or for injury to the person or for wrongful death arising out of any such deficiency, shall be brought against any person after the expiration of seven (7) years following the substantial completion of such improvement.
  2. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, in the case of such an injury to property or the person or wrongful death resulting from such injury, which injury occurred during the seventh year following substantial completion of such improvement, an action to recover damages for such injury or wrongful death may only be brought within one (1) year from the date upon which such injury occurred (irrespective of the date of death), but in no event may such an action be brought more than eight (8) years after the substantial completion of construction of such improvement.
  3. Nothing in this section shall be construed as extending the period prescribed by statute for the bringing of any action for damages.
  4. As used in this section, the term “person” shall mean an individual, corporation, partnership, business trust, unincorporated association, or joint stock company; the term “substantial completion” shall be construed to mean the date upon which the owner of the structure, project, or facility first entered upon the occupancy or commenced the use thereof.

History. Enact. 1966, ch. 246, § 1; 1986, ch. 479, § 1, effective July 15, 1986; repealed and reenact., Acts 1990, ch. 425, § 4, effective July 13, 1990.

Compiler’s Notes.

This section, as it existed prior to the 1986 amendment, was held unconstitutional in Tabler v. Wallace, 704 S.W.2d 179 ( Ky. 1985 ) and as amended in 1986 was declared unconstitutional in Perkins v. Northeastern Log Homes, 808 S.W.2d 809 ( Ky. 1991 ).

Legislative Research Commission Note.

Subsection (1) of this section was amended in 1986 Acts Ch. 479, Section 1, to extend the period of time in which certain actions may be brought from five to seven years. Inadvertently, when the period of time was extended by committee amendment, subsection (2) was not amended to conform. Pursuant to KRS 7.136 , the Reviser of Statutes has made a technical correction in order to make the subsections consistent.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Constitutionality.

Since the only apparent basis for this section is that a special class, builders, architects and engineers involved in construction, faced with a growing exposure to litigation, lobbied for a statute limiting their liability, and there is no social or economic basis presented to justify a special class, and other groups similarly situated do not share in their legislative windfall, this section is in fundamental conflict with the fifth clause of Ky. Const., § 59 and its historical development. Tabler v. Wallace, 704 S.W.2d 179, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1985 ), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 822, 107 S. Ct. 89, 93 L. Ed. 2d 41, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 3436 (1986), cert. denied, Tabler v. Wallace, 479 U.S. 822, 107 S. Ct. 89, 93 L. Ed. 2d 41, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 3436 (1986). (Decision prior to 1986 amendment.).

Where the plaintiff did not give the trial court the opportunity to gauge the constitutionality of this section in the light of Ky. Const., § 59, she waived her right to depend on Ky. Const., § 59 protection when it was raised for the first time on appeal. Massie v. Persson, 729 S.W.2d 448, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 444 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The 1986 version of this section is still constitutionally defective as special legislation and further attempts to amend it to overcome the constitutional defects fatally impale upon Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54 and 241. Perkins v. Northeastern Log Homes, 808 S.W.2d 809, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 44 ( Ky. 1991 ).

2.Purpose.

The purpose of this section was to protect a builder from liability for accidents occurring after the specified time and not to extend the right of an individual to sue. Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

This section is called a “statute of limitations” but its purpose is not to limit the time in which to bring causes of action which have accrued but to extinguish causes of action which have not yet accrued, and, whereas the title to this section is generalized, the contents of this section refer to a narrowly defined and exclusively protected class. Tabler v. Wallace, 704 S.W.2d 179, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1985 ), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 822, 107 S. Ct. 89, 93 L. Ed. 2d 41, 1986 U.S. LEXIS 3436 (U.S. 1986).

3.Construction.

This section enlarges the scope of the five (5) year limitation on actions against a builder of a home to include actions for injury to real or personal property; it also provides for the same five (5) year limitation on actions for personal injury against a builder of a home as was provided for in subsection (14) of KRS 413.120 . Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ). (Decision prior to 1988 amendment of KRS 413.120 ).

All actions for personal injury are subject to the limitations contained in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of KRS 413.140 and must be brought within one (1) year from the date of injury, but when the cause of action is against a builder of a home or other improvement, this section imposes the added limitation that the action cannot be brought at all more than five (5) years after completion of the home or other improvement, or, when the injury occurs in the fifth year, the action cannot be brought more than six years following completion of the home. Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

4.Application.

The application of this section to bar an action for damages for injuries and death allegedly caused by the building contractor’s negligent construction of a fireplace was constitutionally impermissible in that its application destroyed the common-law right to bring an action for negligence that proximately caused personal injury or death and violated the spirit and language of Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54, and 241. Saylor v. Hall, 497 S.W.2d 218, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 304 ( Ky. 1973 ).

Although this section was enacted in 1966, and at that time the law of this state did not provide a cause of action, which was later developed, by the vendee of real estate against the vendor on the basis of an implied warranty, there was no constitutional impediment to the application of this section to damage sustained by vendee due to alleged breach of such warranty. Ball Homes, Inc. v. Volpert, 633 S.W.2d 63, 1982 Ky. LEXIS 247 ( Ky. 1982 ).

This section applies only to constructions of real estate; it does not apply to manufacturers of personal property. In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (U.S. 1983).

This section is not applicable in an action against manufacturers of products used in the design or construction of a permanent improvement to real estate; if this section did include such manufacturers within its protected class, it would be unconstitutional as special legislation in violation of Ky. Const., § 59. In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 672 S.W.2d 922, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 239 ( Ky. 1984 ).

5.Materialmen.

Where the Kentucky courts had never considered whether “materialmen” who designed products for construction projects were within the contemplation of subsection (1) of this section, the federal Court of Appeals had to make a considered “educated guess” as to how Kentucky courts would view this section, and since there was no evidence in the language of this section indicating an intent to exclude materialmen from protection of the section, the “educated guess” of the Court of Appeals was that there was no reason to preclude materialmen from asserting the statute of limitations of this section as a defense. In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (U.S. 1983).

In an action against materialmen who designed and furnished aluminum circuit wiring in 1970 that allegedly caused a supper club fire in 1977, Ky. Const., §§ 14, 51 and 241 precluded application of the five-year statute of limitations of this section to bar suit against the defendants, as it would have extinguished a common law right of action before the injury occurred and before the plaintiffs had any reasonable opportunity to seek redress in court. In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 929, 103 S. Ct. 2090, 77 L. Ed. 2d 300, 1983 U.S. LEXIS 4603 (U.S. 1983).

6.Running of Statute.

The rule that a cause of action does not accrue under a statute of limitations until the discovery of the injury does not apply to this section which establishes the date of substantial completion as the point at which the limitations period begins to run. Housing Now-Village West, Inc. v. Cox & Crawley, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 350, 1982 Ky. App. LEXIS 283 (Ky. Ct. App. 1982).

Where building owners signed contract document establishing a date of substantial completion of buildings, such date started the running of the statute of limitations and action for damages resulting from defects in construction was barred when brought more than five (5) years after the date established. Housing Now-Village West, Inc. v. Cox & Crawley, Inc., 646 S.W.2d 350, 1982 Ky. App. LEXIS 283 (Ky. Ct. App. 1982).

Where plaintiff developed cancer after living for 12 years in a house treated with a toxic chemical, the statute of limitations commenced from the date the plaintiff knew or should have discovered not only that she had been injured but also that her injury may have been caused by the defendant’s product. Perkins v. Northeastern Log Homes, 808 S.W.2d 809, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 44 ( Ky. 1991 ).

Cited:

Prudential Life Ins. Co. v. Moody, 696 S.W.2d 503, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1985 ); Reda Pump Co., Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Finck, 713 S.W.2d 818, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1986 ); In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 639 F. Supp. 915, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25607 (E.D. Ky. 1986 ); Stewart v. William H. Jolly Plumbing Co., 743 S.W.2d 861, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988); Radcliff Homes, Inc. v. Jackson, 766 S.W.2d 63, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 19 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989); Nucor Corp. v. General Electric Co., 812 S.W.2d 136, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 54 ( Ky. 1991 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Palmore, A Summary of Significant Decisions by the Supreme Court of Kentucky April 1982-April 1983, Vol. 47, No. 3, July 1983, Ky. Bench & Bar 14.

Stipanowich, Kentucky’s “No-Action” Statute: Recalled to Life?, Volume 51, No. 3, Summer 1987 Ky. Bench & B. 11.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Smith, Recent Statutory Developments Concerning the Limitations of Actions Against Architects, Engineers, and Builders, 60 Ky. L.J. 462 (1972).

Kentucky Law Survey, Grise, Torts, 71 Ky. L.J. 307 (1982-83).

Comments, Design for Challenge: The Kentucky Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property, 73 Ky. L.J. 1143 (1984-85).

Rogers, Apportionment in Kentucky After Comparative Negligence, 75 Ky. L.J. 103 (1986-87).

Comments, The Kentucky No Action Statute: Down for the Count?, 79 Ky. L.J. 159 (1992).

Lewis, Jural Rights under Kentucky’s Constitution: Realities Grounded in Myth, 80 Ky. L.J. 953 (1992).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Busald and Tankersley, Survey of Kentucky Tort Law: 1991-92, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 687 (1993).

413.137. Action for damages for injury or illness suffered as a result of female genital mutilation.

  1. A civil action for recovery of damages for injury or illness suffered as a result of female genital mutilation as defined in KRS 508.125 shall be brought within ten (10) years:
    1. Of the procedure being performed; or
    2. After the victim attains the age of eighteen (18) years.
  2. The court may award actual, compensatory, and punitive damages, and any other appropriate relief.
  3. Treble damages may be awarded if the plaintiff proves the defendant’s acts were willful and malicious.

HISTORY: 2020 ch. 74, § 5, effective April 2, 2020.

413.140. Actions to be brought within one (1) year.

  1. The following actions shall be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued:
    1. An action for an injury to the person of the plaintiff, or of her husband, his wife, child, ward, apprentice, or servant;
    2. An action for injuries to persons, cattle, or other livestock by railroads or other corporations, with the exception of hospitals licensed pursuant to KRS Chapter 216;
    3. An action for malicious prosecution, conspiracy, arrest, seduction, criminal conversation, or breach of promise of marriage;
    4. An action for libel or slander;
    5. An action against a physician, surgeon, dentist, or hospital licensed pursuant to KRS Chapter 216, for negligence or malpractice;
    6. A civil action, arising out of any act or omission in rendering, or failing to render, professional services for others, whether brought in tort or contract, against a real estate appraiser holding a certificate or license issued under KRS Chapter 324A or a real estate broker or sales associate holding a license issued under KRS Chapter 324;
    7. An action for the escape of a prisoner, arrested or imprisoned on civil process;
    8. An action for the recovery of usury paid for the loan or forbearance of money or other thing, against the loaner or forbearer or assignee of either;
    9. An action for the recovery of stolen property, by the owner thereof against any person having the same in his possession;
    10. An action for the recovery of damages or the value of stolen property, against the thief or any accessory;
    11. An action arising out of a detention facility disciplinary proceeding, whether based upon state or federal law;
    12. An action for damages arising out of a deficiency, defect, omission, error, or miscalculation in any survey or plat, whether brought in tort or contract, against a licensed professional land surveyor holding a license under KRS Chapter 322;
    13. An action for violating KRS 311.782 ; and
    14. An action for violating KRS 311.731 .
  2. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (e) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue at the time the injury is first discovered or in the exercise of reasonable care should have been discovered; provided that such action shall be commenced within five (5) years from the date on which the alleged negligent act or omission is said to have occurred.
  3. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (f) or (l) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue within one (1) year from the date of the occurrence or from the date when the cause of action was, or reasonably should have been, discovered by the party injured.
  4. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (h) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue at the time of payment. This limitation shall apply to all payments made on all demands, whether evidenced by writing or existing only in parol.
  5. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (i) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue at the time the property is found by its owner.
  6. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (j) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue at the time of discovery of the liability.
  7. In respect to the action referred to in paragraph (k) of subsection (1) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue on the date an appeal of the disciplinary proceeding is decided by the institutional warden.
  8. In respect to the action referred to in subsection (1)(m) and (n) of this section, the cause of action shall be deemed to accrue after the performance or inducement or attempt to perform or induce the abortion.

History. 2516, 2517, 2553: amend. Acts 1972, ch. 20, § 1; 1974, ch. 386, § 98; 2000, ch. 309, § 1, effective July 14, 2000; 2002, ch. 11, § 3, effective July 15, 2002; 2013, ch. 48, § 1, effective June 25, 2013; 2017 ch. 5, § 10, effective January 9, 2017; 2019 ch. 37, § 7, effective March 19, 2019; 2019 ch. 135, § 10, effective June 27, 2019.

Legislative Research Commission Notes.

(6/27/2019). This statute was amended by 2019 Ky. Acts chs. 37 and 135, which do not appear to be in conflict and have been codified together.

(3/19/2019). 2019 Ky. Acts ch. 37, sec. 8, provides that 2019 Ky. Acts ch. 37 may be cited as the “Human Rights of the Unborn Child and Anti-Discrimination Act.” This statute was amended in Section 7 of that Act.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Constitutionality.

This section is not unconstitutional as violative of Ky. Const., § 51 on the basis that the title to the act did not name both the chapter and the section of the statute which it was proposed to amend when this section was amended in 1916. Guess v. Linton, 236 Ky. 87 , 32 S.W.2d 718, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 691 ( Ky. 1930 ).

Paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section is not unconstitutional as “special” legislation because it is applicable to railroads and other corporations and not to individuals, since it makes a reasonable classification and operates equally on all members of the class. Carr v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 344 S.W.2d 619, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1961 ).

That portion of subsection (2) of this section which purports to cut off negligence and malpractice actions against physicians, surgeons, dentists, and hospitals at five (5) years is unconstitutional under Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54, and 241. McCollum v. Sisters of Charity of Nazareth Health Corp., 799 S.W.2d 15, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1990 ).

Supreme court declined to discuss the issue of whether the one-year statute of limitations was unconstitutional because a tenant failed to comply with the notice requirements in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 418.075 . Shaw v. Handy, 588 S.W.3d 459, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 188 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

2.Construction.

An action for tort, when barred by the statute of limitations, cannot, like a case founded upon contract, be revived by a new promise or acknowledgment. Luther & Morgan v. Payne, 197 Ky. 359 , 247 S.W. 39, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 645 ( Ky. 1923 ).

This section limits the time in which an action for damages “for injuries to the person” may be brought to within one (1) year next after the cause of action accrued and is applicable alike, whether considered as an action based upon contract or one in tort, and applies in preference to the general contract statute, KRS 413.120 , limiting to five (5) years the time for bringing actions ex contractu. Howard v. Middlesborough Hospital, 242 Ky. 602 , 47 S.W.2d 77, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1932 ).

The running of the period of limitations of this section is not suspended by KRS 413.290 , providing that limitations shall not run in favor of persons coming temporarily into this state but shall attach only in favor of actual residents in good faith and after notice to the person to be affected, as to defendants who were nonresidents of Kentucky at the time the cause of action arose. Rockwood v. Huey, 348 S.W.2d 915, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Where a personal injury action arising from an accident which occurred on July 25, 1973, was filed on July 25, 1974, such action was timely under this section since the day of the accident must be excluded in computing the limitation period pursuant to KRS 446.030 . Derossett v. Burgher, 555 S.W.2d 579, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1977 ).

This section provides both a limitations period and a repose period; subdivision 1(e), read with the discovery rule contained in the first part of subsection 2, provides that an action must be brought against physicians, etc., within one (1) year after the cause of action accrues, and that the cause of action accrues at the time the injury is first discovered, or with reasonable care should have been discovered. This is a statute of limitations, since it limits the time in which a plaintiff may bring suit after a cause of action accrues; the second part of subsection 2 provides that in no event shall a plaintiff commence an action more than five (5) years after the date on which the alleged negligent act was inflicted, and since it is possible that an injury and damages brought about by an allegedly negligent act may not be discovered within the five (5) years provided by this part of the statute, the cause of action would be destroyed before it legally existed; thus, this portion of the statute constitutes a statute of repose. McCollum v. Sisters of Charity of Nazareth Health Corp., 799 S.W.2d 15, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1990 ).

3.Application.

An action for personal injuries brought against the builder of a model home is limited by this section and must be brought within one (1) year from the date of injury. Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

This section applies to all actions for personal injury and they are to be brought within one (1) year from the date of the injury, but when the cause of action for personal injury is against a builder of a home or other improvement, there is the added limitation provided by subsection (14) of KRS 413.120 and KRS 413.135 that the action cannot be brought at all more than five (5) years after the completion of the home or other improvement (or six (6) years of the injury occurred in the fifth year following the completion of the home). Lee v. Fister, 413 F.2d 1286, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11286 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ) (decision prior to 1988 amendment of KRS 413.120 ).

A husband’s right of action to recover damages for the loss of services and consortium of his wife, who was injured while a passenger on a train, was an action for personal injuries barred one (1) year after the date of the injury under the one (1) year statute of limitations and not an action growing out of a contract of carriage to which the five (5) year statute of limitations would apply. Cravens v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 188 Ky. 579 , 222 S.W. 930, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 326 ( Ky. 1920 ).

This section is applicable to a suit for personal injuries prosecuted under the state employers’ liability act. Watson v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 242 Ky. 14 , 45 S.W.2d 499, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 707 ( Ky. 1931 ). (Now see KRS 342.270 .).

This section is applicable to an action against a hospital for injuries to person due to unskillful and negligent operation of the hospital. Howard v. Middlesborough Hospital, 242 Ky. 602 , 47 S.W.2d 77, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 335 ( Ky. 1932 ).

An action against the parent of a minor, under KRS 186.590 , for personal injuries arising from negligent operation of an automobile by the minor, is an action for personal injuries governed by the one (1) year period of limitations fixed by paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, and not an action upon a liability created by statute for which a five (5) year period of limitations is fixed by subsection (2) of KRS 413.120 . The fact that a judgment has been obtained against the minor and that the judgment may be conclusive against the parent on the questions of negligence and damages makes no difference. Robinson v. Hardaway, 293 Ky. 627 , 169 S.W.2d 823, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 675 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where a suit is brought in the name of the state, a defense of limitations may be made when its name is used to enforce a right which inures to the benefit of an individual or corporation and the state has no real interest in the litigation. The converse of this is true also, and when a suit is for the sole benefit of the state although not brought in its name, the defense of the statute of limitations cannot be made; therefore, a suit brought against the department of welfare is barred by the statutes of limitation. Department of Welfare v. Fox, 240 S.W.2d 65, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 944 ( Ky. 1951 ).

The one (1) year limitation is applicable to a parent’s action for loss of services and medical expenses arising out of an injury to his child. Blackburn v. Burchett, 335 S.W.2d 342, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 258 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Where the statute of limitations had run against the operator of the automobile involved in a collision, but the operator was not an essential party to the action, the defendant owner could not take advantage of the same statute of limitations, because, being a serviceman, the soldiers’ and sailors’ relief act was pre-emptive in nature and tolled the applicable Kentucky statute during the period of his military service. Ray v. Porter, 464 F.2d 452, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 8220 (6th Cir. Ky. 1972 ).

Since the Kentucky courts have never resolved the apparent conflict between KRS 355.2-725 and subdivision (1)(a) of this section over which limitation statute applies in a breach of warranty action for personal injuries, a federal court applied the four-year limitations period of KRS 355.2-725, because when substantial doubt exists as to which of two (2) limitations statutes is applicable, the longer period will be applied. Teel v. American Steel Foundries, 529 F. Supp. 337, 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16835 (E.D. Mo. 1981).

The one-year limitations period of subdivision (1)(a) of this section should be applied to product liability claims; therefore, where a personal injury action was not commenced until almost three (3) years from the date of the accident, the court properly dismissed the products liability count of plaintiff’s complaint. Teel v. American Steel Foundries, 529 F. Supp. 337, 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16835 (E.D. Mo. 1981).

Since plaintiff was member of armed forces at time of accident and at time of the filing of the complaint, running of the statute of limitations of Kentucky was tolled by Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act. Kilfoile v. Sherman, 535 S.W.2d 69, 1975 Ky. LEXIS 5 ( Ky. 1975 ).

Where an essential element of each cause of action pled by plaintiff was the publication of an utterly false derogatory report about the plaintiff by defendant, the gist of the entire action was libel, and the one-year statute of limitations was properly applied to all counts no matter how labeled. Lashlee v. Sumner, 570 F.2d 107, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12711 (6th Cir. Ky. 1978 ).

Where personal injury case based on accident occurring in Ohio was transferred by Ohio federal district court to federal district court in Kentucky upon finding that court in Ohio lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant, Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations was applicable. T-Birds, Inc. v. Thoroughbred Helicopter Service, Inc., 540 F. Supp. 548, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14161 (E.D. Ky. 1982 ).

In a case arising out of the plaintiff’s operation of a motor vehicle where the defendant was a nonmotorist, the statute of limitations was two (2) years as provided in KRS 304.39-230 (6) rather than the one (1) year as provided in this section. Bailey v. Reeves, 662 S.W.2d 832, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 202 ( Ky. 1984 ).

Subdivision (1)(a) of this section is the general provision which applies to all personal injury actions with certain specific exceptions, and as such, is the statute which the Supreme Court in Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 109 S. Ct. 573, 102 L. Ed. 2d 594, 1989 U.S. LEXIS 305 (1989), requires to be applied in Kentucky personal injury cases. Hambrick v. Davies, 711 F. Supp. 884, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10856 (E.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 886 F.2d 1315, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14982 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

While state law governs the substantive limitation period, federal law governs when the cause of action accrues, and thus when the statute begins to run. Leonard v. Corrections Cabinet, 828 S.W.2d 668, 1992 Ky. App. LEXIS 75 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).

Action by owner of building fireproofed with material that contained asbestos against manufacturer of the fireproofing seeking relief on the theory of conspiracy after owner found that building had been contaminated with asbestos fibers, was barred by subsection (1)(c) of this section where Bank had information available to it in 1985 that its building contained asbestos. which had been found to have dangerous propensities and that defendant was its manufacturer, but did not file the action until 1991. Farm Credit Bank v. United States Mineral Prods. Co., 864 F. Supp. 643, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14642 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ).

The Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA) (KRS 304.39-010 et seq.) does not apply to all-terrain vehicles (ATVs); thus, the one-year limitations period of this section, not the two-year period in KRS 304.39-230 , applied to an action arising from an ATV accident. Manies v. Croan, 977 S.W.2d 22, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 98 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

This section does not state that it applies to either the writ of habeas corpus or a petition for declaration of rights regarding good time credit; therefore, there was no reason for the court to apply it to the petition of the inmate. Washington v. Commonwealth, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 158 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 1999).

The statutory language in KRS 304.39-230 (6) applied rather than the statutory language in subdivision (1)(a) of this section because the cause of action was both a motor vehicle accident and a wrongful death claim. Worldwide Equip. v. Mullins, 11 S.W.3d 50, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 34 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).

Drug manufacturer was entitled to summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 in a product liability action that arose from the use of OxyContin, a pain-relieving medicine, which allegedly caused plaintiffs’ drug addiction; plaintiffs were aware of their alleged addiction more than one (1) year before the filing of their complaint and, thus, the claims were barred by the statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(a). Foister v. Purdue Pharma, L.P., 295 F. Supp. 2d 693, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24274 (E.D. Ky. 2003 ).

Inmate’s declaratory judgment action, despite alleging that his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were violated, was actually premised on a state law personal injury claim; thus, it was subject to a one-year limitations period under KRS 413.140 . Million v. Raymer, 136 S.W.3d 460, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 146 ( Ky. 2004 ).

One (1) year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140 was applicable to claims asserted in a District Court in Kentucky under 42 USCS § 1983, and the court had authority to dismiss the claims sua sponte when it was clear that they were barred by the one (1) year limitation period. Mucker v. Reed, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18219 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 25, 2005).

KRS 413.245 is not intended to govern the limitations period for any action that would otherwise be governed by KRS 413.140 . Combs v. Albert Kahn & Assocs., 183 S.W.3d 190, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 2 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

One-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 applied to claims for negligence and unlawful imprisonment. Delong v. Arms, 251 F.R.D. 253, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77733 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

Workers’ compensation insurer’s rights, as subrogee to a workers’ compensation claimant, were strictly derivative of any claims the claimant might pursue against the manufacturer of the all-terrain vehicle in which the claimant was injured on the job while riding as a passenger, and, as a result, the insurer’s subrogation action was subject to the same statute of limitations as a direct action by the claimant against the manufacturer. Because the insurer failed to file its subrogation claim against the manufacturer within one year of the claimant’s date of injury, a trial court correctly held that its claims were barred by the statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 . Bridgefield Cas. Ins. Co. v. Yamaha Motor Mfg. Corp. of Am., 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 176 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 21, 2012).

Subrogee who sued the alleged manufacturer after the subrogee paid workers’ compensation benefits to the subrogor had only the same amount of time to sue the alleged manufacturer that the subrogor would have had if the subrogor had sued directly. Since the subrogee did not sue the alleged manufacturer within one year of the date of the relevant accident, its claim was time barred under KRS 413.140 because the subrogor only would have had one year to sue under that statute. Bridgefield Cas. Ins. Co. v. Yamaha Motor Mfg. Corp. of Am., 385 S.W.3d 430, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 224 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

In a pro se former inmate’s 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which three employees of a health services company moved for summary judgment, the former inmate’s § 1983 claims were time-barred under the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1)(a). October 21, 2010, was the first date that the employees had or could possibly have had notice of the action, the former inmate’s contention that the case commenced on March 15, 2010 was contradicted by his own words in his response brief, and he could not credibly argue that the October 2010 complaint related back to the March 15, 2010 filing. Browder v. Parker, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156882 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 30, 2012).

One-year statute of limitations for defamation claims in KRS 413.140(1)(d) was not tolled by a settlement agreement that did not specifically preserve the claims. Business Payment Sys., LLC v. Nat'l Processing Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171810 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 30, 2012).

Even if Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations governed voters’ 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 action alleging the state House and Senate districts violated U.S. Const. amend. XIV’s Equal Protection Clause, as the most recent election was held less than one year before suit was filed, the action was not time-barred. Brown v. Ky. Legislative Research Comm'n, 966 F. Supp. 2d 709, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116191 (E.D. Ky. 2013 ).

Statute of limitations for contractual claims, rather than statute of limitations for personal injury claims, applied when a passenger sued a taxicab company for breach of an oral contract of safe passage after the driver of a taxicab sexually assaulted the passenger, because liability was based upon the taxicab company’s oral contract with the passenger and its corresponding duty of safe passage implied by that contract. The fact that the passenger sought damages for personal injuries was not determinative of the nature of the claim. Kendall v. Cmty. Cab Co., 610 S.W.3d 694, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

4.Damages.

A claim of damages for diminution of value of use of real estate is not a claim for damages for personal injury within this section, but for injury to the real estate. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Co. v. Lafferty, 174 F.2d 848, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2293 (6th Cir. Ky. 1949 ).

This section did not apply to an action for damages by a coal tipple operator against a union as the action was not founded in conspiracy but was an action for destruction of property and resulting damage to business governed by KRS 413.120 . Ritchie v. United Mine Workers, 410 F.2d 827, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12428 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

The one (1) year statute of limitations has no application to an action against a city to recover damages for injury to property. Louisville v. Seibert, 51 S.W. 310, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 328 (1899).

Action by lessee against lessor to recover damages paid to employee for injuries lessee was compelled to pay employee as a result of the failure of lessor to comply with his promise and agreement to repair and make safe the leased premises was not an action for personal injury to which the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section applied but an action on the breach of contract to which the five (5) year statute applied. Altsheler v. Conrad, 118 Ky. 647 , 82 S.W. 257, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 538 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1904 ).

The damages for failure to deliver, or to promptly deliver, a telegram is not an injury to the person within the meaning of subdivisions (1)(a) and (1)(b) of this section. Western Union Tel. Co. v. Witt, 110 S.W. 889, 33 Ky. L. Rptr. 685 (1908).

Action for damages for railroad’s mutilation of corpse through negligent dropping of casket could not be maintained in tort but was an action on contract to which the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section had no application. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Hall, 219 Ky. 528 , 293 S.W. 1091, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 395 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Action for damages for mental suffering caused by disinterment of body of wife by cemetery company without notice was not an action for injury to the person to which the one-year statute of limitations under this section applied but an injury to the rights of plaintiff not arising on contract to which the five-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 applied. Resthaven Memorial Cemetery, Inc. v. Volk, 286 Ky. 291 , 150 S.W.2d 908, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Action given employer’s carrier against employee for recoupment of amount paid employee by carrier under workers’ compensation act where employee recovers a larger amount from a third party tortfeasor is impliedly given by KRS 342.055 (now repealed) and does not arise out of subrogation; therefore, subsection (2) of KRS 413.120 applying to liabilities created by statute for which no other limitation time is fixed is applicable and not this section. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Snyder, 291 S.W.2d 14, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 357 ( Ky. 1956 ), overruled, Charles Seligman Distributing Co. v. Brown, 360 S.W.2d 509, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 221 ( Ky. 1962 ).

Where plaintiff filed a complaint to recover damages because of desecration of her children’s graves based on two (2) theories, one for trespass and the other for mental anguish, the portion which dealt with injury to her feelings was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120 and not the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section where plaintiff discovered the condition of the graves in 1945 and did not commence action until 1952. Fergerson v. Utilities Elkhorn Coal Co., 313 S.W.2d 395, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Where a motorist struck a child running after an ice cream vending truck and the motorist settled with the child and then sued the vending company and its driver for contribution, the five (5) year statute of limitations for liabilities created by statute and not this section applied to the suit for contribution. Baker v. Richeson, 440 S.W.2d 272, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 340 ( Ky. 1969 ).

5.Injuries to Person.

“An action for an injury to the person” refers to those cases where the personal injury is the gist of the action, such as assault and battery and the like. Resthaven Memorial Cemetery, Inc. v. Volk, 286 Ky. 291 , 150 S.W.2d 908, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Parents’ action for loss of services and medical expenditures arising out of an injury to their child arose out of such injury and must be brought within one (1) year. Blackburn v. Burchett, 335 S.W.2d 342, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 258 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Where plaintiff who was injured in an accident which occurred on May 20, 1975 before the effective date of Kentucky’s no-fault insurance law which established a two-year statute of limitations for torts arising from auto mishaps, did not file her complaint until September 14, 1976, time for filing complaint was not extended to the two-year limitation but was subject to one-year limitation of this section and was properly dismissed. Everman v. Miller, 597 S.W.2d 153, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 526 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

Where an automobile accident occurred in June, 1978, and a third-party tort complaint alleging damages exceeding the threshold amount in subsection (2) of KRS 304.39-060 was filed in April, 1980, the action was not barred by the one-year statute of limitations under this section, since the two-year statute of limitations set forth in subsection (6) of KRS 304.39-230 was applicable. Tucker v. Johnson, 619 S.W.2d 496, 1981 Ky. App. LEXIS 264 (Ky. Ct. App. 1981).

The trial court erred in applying the two-year no-fault statute of limitations and should have applied the one-year statute of limitations mandated in this section in an action for injuries sustained by one who was “standing” on a flatbed trailer attempting to secure the tarpaulin when a bungee strap struck him in the eye. Simply because the injured person was standing on the trailer did not amount to his occupying, entering into or alighting from the motor vehicle within the contemplation of KRS 304.39-020 (6). Clark v. Young, 692 S.W.2d 285, 1985 Ky. App. LEXIS 584 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).

Where the employer discharged the employee on December 2, 1982, and the employee commenced a civil rights action, 42 USCS §§ 1981 and 1983, alleging that the employer discharged her because of her race and sex on January 30, 1985, her claim was barred by subdivision (1)(a) of this section. Bass v. NKC, Inc., 644 F. Supp. 24, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12745 (W.D. Ky. 1985 ).

The plaintiff’s action against a former FBI agent alleging that his constitutional rights were violated by the agent’s surveillance of him was governed by the one-year limitation of subdivision (1)(a) of this section, not the five-year limitations period of subdivision (7) (now (6)) of KRS 413.120 . McSurely v. Hutchison, 823 F.2d 1002, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 9881 (6th Cir. Ky. 1987 ), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 934, 108 S. Ct. 1107, 99 L. Ed. 2d 269, 1988 U.S. LEXIS 1189 (U.S. 1988).

Where the cause of action is both a motor vehicle accident and a personal injury claim, the statutory language in subsection (6) of KRS 304.39-230 applies rather than the statutory language in subdivision (1)(a) of this section. Troxell v. Trammell, 730 S.W.2d 525, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 277 ( Ky. 1987 ).

The trial court erred as a matter of law in applying Kentucky’s Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA) to the circumstances attendant to the operation of a golf cart on a public course, and the one-year personal injury statute of limitations was applicable and not the two-year statute of limitations under MVRA. Kenton County Pub. Parks Corp. v. Modlin, 901 S.W.2d 876, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 70 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Where summons issued on December 9, 1994, but held by plaintiff’s attorney until May, 1995, action for damages as a result of a fall on December 12, 1994, was not commenced with the limitation period of one (1) year. Gibson v. EPI Corp., 940 S.W.2d 912, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

The statute does not apply to an action for common law indemnity as such an action is not a claim in which the claimant seeks damages for his/her own personal injuries, but is one in which the claimant seeks restitution for damages he/she was required to pay for injuries sustained by another and which were entirely or primarily caused by the party against whom indemnity is sought. Degener v. Hall Contr. Corp., 27 S.W.3d 775, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 63 ( Ky. 2000 ).

Under KRS 413.320 , the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(a) applies to actions brought in Kentucky premised on the Colorado Ski Safety Act of 1979, specifically Colo. Rev. Stat. § 33-44-109(2). Stivers v. Ellington, 140 S.W.3d 599, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied because she failed to demonstrate an inability to pay the filing fee, and her complaint was dismissed as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because it was filed outside Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140 ; while plaintiff commenced her negligence action in Ohio just barely within Ohio’s two-year statute of limitations for bodily injury, the case was transferred pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1406(a) to cure a defect in venue under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1391(a), and the suit was filed well outside Kentucky’s one-year limitations period. Townsend v. Dollar Rental, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122705 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 18, 2010).

One or two-year limitation periods for personal injury actions, and not the five-year period for a cause of action created by statute, applied to a suit against a health care facility alleging personal injury and violation of a resident’s rights; accordingly, the suit, filed over three years after the resident died, was untimely. Kindred Nursing Ctrs. Ltd. P'ship v. Overstreet, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 124 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2013), aff'd, 479 S.W.3d 69, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 1754 ( Ky. 2015 ).

6.—Wrongful Death.

Paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section is applicable to actions for wrongful death under KRS 411.130 and 411.150 . Carden v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 101 Ky. 113 , 39 S.W. 1027, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 132 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 160 ( Ky. 1897 ). See Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Kelley's Adm'r, 48 S.W. 993, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1238 (1899); Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Brantley's Adm'r, 106 Ky. 849 , 51 S.W. 585, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 473 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1899 ); Wilson's Adm'r v. Illinois C. R. Co., 92 S.W. 572, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 148 (1906); Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Simrall's Adm'r, 127 Ky. 55 , 104 S.W. 1011, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1907 ); Irwin v. Smith, 150 Ky. 147 , 150 S.W. 22, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 85 0 ( Ky. 1912 ); Faulkner's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 184 Ky. 533 , 212 S.W. 130, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1919 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ); Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ); Cottengim's Adm'r v. Adams' Adm'x, 255 S.W.2d 637, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 678 ( Ky. 1953 ).

An administrator who qualifies within one (1) year after death may bring an action to recover for pain and suffering within one (1) year after qualification. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Brantley's Adm'r, 106 Ky. 849 , 51 S.W. 585, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 473 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1899 ). But see Totten v. Loventhal, 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1963 ), overruled, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Where action for wrongful death brought by nonresident administrator was not maintainable because administrator had no authority to sue in Kentucky, the filing of the action did not operate to suspend the running of the statute of limitations; therefore, an attempt, after the statute had run, to substitute as plaintiff an ancillary administrator appointed in Kentucky was too late. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Under KRS 413.270 , where a death action was commenced in the state circuit court over two (2) years after the death but within three (3) months of the decision of the United States Court of Appeals affirming the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky dismissing for lack of diversity of citizenship, an action which had been commenced within one (1) year of the death, the action in the state circuit court was not barred by this section. Ockerman v. Wise, 274 S.W.2d 385, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1263 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).

Where no suit was instituted by proper party within one (1) year after death, an action for wrongful death was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations. Lair v. Johnson, 313 S.W.2d 272, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 249 ( Ky. 1958 ).

The two-year limitation provided by subsection (3) of KRS 413.180 , and not this section, applied to an action against a decedent driver by his guest, both of whom were residents of Indiana, for injuries sustained by the guest while a passenger in decedent’s car and based on an accident occurring in Crittenden County, Kentucky, where decedent driver died before the expiration of one (1) year and, although a personal representative qualified in the state of Indiana, no personal representative qualified in Kentucky within the contemplation of subsection (3) of KRS 413.180 . Witherspoon v. Salm, 346 S.W.2d 48, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1961 ) (decision prior to 1988 amendment of KRS 413.180).

An action for wrongful death is barred one (1) year after the date of injury by the provisions of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section and is not within the provisions of subsection (1) of KRS 413.180 , barring action one (1) year after appointment of representative. Totten v. Loventhal, 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1963 ), overruled, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Son’s filing of a wrongful death action for the death of his mother sufficiently tolled the time period allowed by this section for bringing such actions, even though son had not yet been named personal representative of his mother’s estate; an amended complaint filed after the expiration of the statutory period related back to the original complaint. Richardson v. Dodson, 832 S.W.2d 888, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Subsection (1) of this section provides a one (1) year statute of limitations for actions relating to “an injury to the person of the plaintiff.” Death is simply the final injury to a person. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The General Assembly has reenacted the inclusive reference to this section which the courts have stated expresses the wrongful death limitation, but restricted the extension in KRS 413.180(2) to one (1) year, so that the effect of including the wrongful death limitation in subsection (1) of this section within the reach of KRS 413.180(2) is a reasonable extension to two (2) years from date of death. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Summary judgment for a tortfeasor was reversed as under the public policy of Kentucky, KRS 413.140 did not bar a decedent’s administrator from bringing a wrongful death suit against a tortfeasor convicted of murdering the decedent more than one-year after discovering, when the tortfeasor’s preliminary criminal hearing was held, that the tortfeasor might have been responsible for the crime; the public policy was furthered by allowing the family of a murder victim to wait until a tortfeasor’s conviction before filing suit. DiGiuro v. Ragland, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 188 (Ky. Ct. App. June 25, 2004), overruled, Flick v. Estate of Wittich, 2015 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 859 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015).

Products liability claims for wrongful death were timely under KRS 413.140(14) because they were filed within one year of discovery of the harm, which was a husband’s death. Hogan v. Goodrich Corp., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2004 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 17, 2006).

Dismissal of certain corporate entities was warranted in plaintiff estate executor’s wrongful death suit because the claims against these entities were time-barred since they were brought more than a year after the decedent’s death, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c) relation back was not warranted since the executor sought to name additional parties, rather than merely correct a misnomer or effect a substitution of parties. Hiler v. Extendicare Health Network, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26548 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 26, 2013).

7.—Workers' Compensation Act.

Labor contract whereunder employer was required to take steps to provide silicosis compensation coverage contemplated more than an action for personal injuries in that it was to provide a different procedure for the settlement of claims, and action by representative of employee who had died of silicosis for damages for breach of the contract obligation was not governed by this section. Reliford v. Eastern Coal Corp., 260 F.2d 447, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5104 (6th Cir. 1958).

KRS 342.055 (now repealed), a part of the workers’ compensation act, does not create a new cause of action against third parties in favor of the employer or the insurance carrier making the five (5) year statute under KRS 413.120 applicable but subrogates the employer or the insurer to the rights of the employee, thus requiring them to bring their independent action, or intervene in the employee’s action, within one (1) year as provided in this section. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co. v. Brown Wood Preserving Co., 298 Ky. 194 , 182 S.W.2d 30, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 844 ( Ky. 194 4 ).

Action filed by coal miner to recover damages for fraud, deceit and misrepresentation was properly dismissed where he alleged in his petition that his employer concealed the fact it had withdrawn from the workers’ compensation act until more than one (1) year after the accident when his cause of action at law to recover damages for his injuries had been barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations but failed to allege that his employer failed to give notice in the manner prescribed by KRS 342.405 (now repealed) that it had withdrawn its election to operate under the act. Wilson v. Williams Coal Co., 307 Ky. 842 , 212 S.W.2d 318, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 838 ( Ky. 1948 ).

8.—Disabilities.

The statute of limitations in KRS 304.39-230 (6) modifies only that language contained in this section and does not abolish the entire statute of limitations for those torts arising from motor vehicle accidents; consequently KRS 413.170 tolls the two-year statute of limitations under the no-fault statute in cases of minors and persons under disability. Lemmons v. Ransom, 670 S.W.2d 478, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1984 ).

9.— —Infancy.

By amendment of KRS 413.170 to remove coverture as a disability, the Legislature disallowed infant married women the right to postpone an action by a claim of disability of infancy and the one (1) year statute of limitations barred a personal injury action brought by an infant married woman after the expiration of one (1) year from the date of the injury. Hicks v. Steele, 309 Ky. 833 , 219 S.W.2d 35, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 817 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Action by infant married woman instituted more than one (1) year after date of her injury was barred by this section. Williamson v. Carr-Consolidated Biscuit Co., 313 Ky. 235 , 230 S.W.2d 917, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 856 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Where an infant is represented by a nonresident as next friend, who was not qualified as such, upon obtaining majority he does not have to commence a new action, but can proceed on the existing action after dropping the next friend from the case, so that there is no statute of limitations question, if the original action was timely. Cozine v. Bonnick, 245 S.W.2d 935, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 608 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The unqualified term “infant” in KRS 413.170 does not include a married infant; thus, an action for personal injuries sustained by a 14-year-old infant in 1955 who married in 1960 at age 19 was barred by the statute of limitations under this section when it was brought in 1962 within one (1) year after she attained 21 years of age. Wenneker v. Bailey, 392 S.W.2d 453, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where a young woman, who was blinded in infancy as a result of possible negligence by her physician, first knew the cause of her injury when she was 15 or 16 years old, but did not commence a malpractice action until some time after her twenty-first birthday, such action was barred under this section and KRS 413.170 . Ferguson v. Cunningham, 556 S.W.2d 164, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 810 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

A claim did not become time-barred when the plaintiff made no motion to substitute herself as the real party in interest within one (1) year after she reached the age of majority since she was always the real party in interest and her failure to promptly remove her next friend did not invalidate the proceeding. Wilson v. Webb, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 23585 (6th Cir. Ky. Sept. 13, 2000).

Although plaintiff’s action against defendants as to the shooting death of plaintiff’s parent was not commenced within the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1), the statute of limitations was tolled until one year after plaintiff reached the age of majority under KRS 413.170(1) because plaintiff was a minor; although plaintiff initiated litigation through plaintiff’s other parent as next friend, KRS 413.170(1)’s savings provision, unlike KRS 342.210 , had no exceptions for a committee, guardian, or next friend. Bradford v. Bracken County, 767 F. Supp. 2d 740, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3894 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

Claim against school staff members concerning the members’ alleged failure to prevent or report alleged sexual abuse of a student by a special education teacher was time-barred because it was not filed within one year of the student’s eighteenth birthday, and the extended limitations period did not apply to claims against non-perpetrator third parties. Doe v. Logan, 602 S.W.3d 177, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

10.— —Unsound Mind.

A diagnosis of hysteria and secondary affective disorder with depressive syndrome with dysphoric mood and accompanying loss of interest in usual interests, feelings of hopelessness and weight loss did not constitute proof that the plaintiff was of unsound mind which would toll the statute of limitations for a wrongful death action alleging medical malpractice. Southeastern Kentucky Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. Gaylor, 756 S.W.2d 467, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1988 ).

District court erred when it rejected the individual’s argument that the statute of limitations should have been tolled because she was of unsound mind because if the individual could have proved that she was immediately rendered mentally unsound by the blow to her head, which was the very injury that gave rise to the individual’s lawsuit, then the individual’s action would have been within the purview of KRS 413.170(1), and the individual would have therefore complied with Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(a). Powell v. Jacor Communs. Corporate, 320 F.3d 599, 2003 FED App. 0063P, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 3435 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Summary judgment was granted in favor of the owner and operator of a plane that crashed into a residence because the action was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 ; the doctrine of unsound mind did not toll the limitations period because an injured party was capable of managing her affairs since she missed only a limited amount of work, she was able to complete an inventory of her home, and she engaged in negotiations to purchase another home. Osborne v. Quesenberry, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27018 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 8, 2005).

11.—Accrual.

It is an indisputable rule that the statute of limitations can never begin to run until the cause of action accrues and, if a person injured or his administrator sues for the injury sustained, the cause of action accrues from and at the time of the infliction of the injury and the one (1) year statute of limitations then begins to run; but if the administrator sues to recover for the death of his intestate, the cause of action does not accrue until the death of the person injured and the statute of limitations begins to run at the death. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Simrall's Adm'r, 127 Ky. 55 , 104 S.W. 1011, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1269 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 114 ( Ky. 1907 ).

A cause of action accrues when a party has the right and capacity to sue, and his right of action is not suspended until he ascertains that he has a cause of action. Carter v. Harlan Hospital Ass'n, 265 Ky. 452 , 97 S.W.2d 9, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 509 ( Ky. 1936 ).

An action for injuries to one’s wife accrues at time of injury resulting in the loss of services or consortium. Carter v. Harlan Hospital Ass'n, 265 Ky. 452 , 97 S.W.2d 9, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 509 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Where buyer’s husband was allegedly injured on drinking beverage purchased from retailer, limitation of one (1) year for action for injury to person applied, and limitation commenced to run at time of injury. Finck v. Albers Super Markets, Inc., 136 F.2d 191, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2994 (6th Cir. Ky. 1943 ).

The statutory requirement for an accident report to the state police under the provisions of KRS 189.580 dispenses with any other efforts on the part of a personal representative to make the necessary discovery as to who was responsible for negligently producing his decedent’s death; therefore, where defendant failed to file the required report, plaintiff’s action did not accrue under the provisions of subsection (2) of KRS 413.190 until discovery of the identify of defendant and action filed within one (1) year after discovery was timely although it was filed one (1) year, four (4) months and 12 days after the accident. St. Clair v. Bardstown Transfer Line, Inc., 310 Ky. 776 , 221 S.W.2d 679, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1274 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Even assuming an independent suit to recover damages for annoyance and discomfort caused by the operation of a gas company pumping station could be brought, the injuries were caused at the time of or soon after the completion of the station in 1941, and the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section was a complete bar to an action commenced in 1952. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Co. v. Matny, 279 S.W.2d 805, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 548 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Where defendant received what appeared to be minor injuries in a school bus accident in 1963 but did not file this action until 1969 after exploratory surgery indicated more extensive injury, the cause of action accrued on the day of the accident when he was injured, and limitation began to run from that date even though he was not made fully aware of the extent of his injury until several years later. Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

A cause of action for defamation accrues at the time of publication, not when the plaintiff learns or should learn of its existence. Lashlee v. Sumner, 570 F.2d 107, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12711 (6th Cir. Ky. 1978 ).

Under this section, a personal injury cause of action accrues at the time of the accident and the one-year limitations period begins to run at that time; and, in computing this one-year time period, the day of the accident is excluded. Teel v. American Steel Foundries, 529 F. Supp. 337, 1981 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16835 (E.D. Mo. 1981).

In tort actions for injury from a latent disease caused by exposure to a harmful substance, whether the action is based on negligence or on a products liability theory, a cause of action will not accrue until the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, not only that he has been injured but also that his injury may have been caused by defendant’s conduct. Louisville Trust Co. v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 580 S.W.2d 497, 1979 Ky. LEXIS 251 ( Ky. 1979 ).

The statute of limitations under subsection (1) of this section begins to run from the date the plaintiff discovers or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered not only that he has been injured but also that his injury may have been caused by the defendant’s conduct. Drake v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 782 F.2d 638, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 21993 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

In consolidated personal injury and wrongful death actions arising out of exposure to toxic chemicals on the job, where it was uncontested that plaintiff and plaintiff’s decedents discovered their injuries and that these injuries may have been caused by defendant between 1973-1974, the district court did not err in holding that the one-year statute of limitation had expired when plaintiffs filed suit in 1981 and 1982; the argument that the statute of limitations begins to run not from the date of discovery of injuries and who was responsible for them, but rather from the date plaintiffs discovered that they had a cause of action, was rejected. Drake v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 782 F.2d 638, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 21993 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

The limitation of subsection (1) of this section applied to action brought by plaintiff who while driving a truck manufactured by defendant was injured in accident in which plaintiff lost control of vehicle, which struck a utility pole and as a result the fuel tanks were apparently ruptured causing an explosion and fire, since his cause of action arose at the time of the accident for plaintiff knew at that time that a fuel-fed automobile fire had caused his injuries. Hazel v. General Motors Corp., 863 F. Supp. 435, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14185 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ), aff'd, in part, 83 F.3d 422, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 26040 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ).

The discovery rule set forth in subsection (2) of this section did not apply to an action against a supplier of durable medical equipment. Davis v. All Care Med., Inc., 986 S.W.2d 902, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1999 ).

An action for lung cancer accrued on the date of the diagnosis of the cancer, rather than on the diagnosis of asbestosis, which is a separate and distinct disease, notwithstanding that the plaintiff’s lung cancer was alleged to have been caused by his exposure to asbestos. Carroll v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 37 S.W.3d 699, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 2000 ), modified, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 49 (Ky. Mar. 22, 2001).

Where plaintiffs alleged that a doctor negligently prescribed certain diet drugs and fraudulently concealed their harmful effects, plaintiffs’ negligence claims were time-barred by Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations for claims against medical professionals, KRS 413.140(1)(e), because extensive media coverage of the drugs’ harmful side effects put plaintiffs on notice of the existence of their claims more than four (4) years before they filed suit. Adkins v. Duff, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26688 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 31, 2004).

Because the savings provisions of KRS 413.270(1) applied to a dismissal based upon forum non conveniens, the Circuit Court erred by dismissing a customer’s negligence action against a store as time-barred by KRS 413.140 . Smith v. Dollar Gen. Stores, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 218 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2005), aff'd, 237 S.W.3d 162, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Injured persons’ original complaint being timely filed did not save any untimely claims brought later against the newly-added defendants because those claims, for lung cancer, did not relate back to the original complaint. It was clear that the injured persons knew there was a greater risk of contracting lung cancer due to the exposure to asbestos; thus, the latter complaint was barred by the statute of limitations. Combs v. Albert Kahn & Assocs., 183 S.W.3d 190, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 2 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Pursuant to the discovery rule, defendant companies were entitled to summary judgment on the personal injury claims of two (2) plaintiffs in a ground-water contamination case because those plaintiffs knew of their injuries and should have suspected the contamination as a cause thereof more than one year prior to filing suit; thus, the claims were barred by KRS 413.140(1). Adams v. Cooper Indus., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75565 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 17, 2006).

Statute of limitations on an excessive force claim stemming from an arrest began to run at the time of the arrest. Since the arrestee filed suit over one year after the arrest, the suit was time-barred by KRS 413.140(1)(a). Dunn v. Felty, 226 S.W.3d 68, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 127 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Personal injury claims were not timely filed under KRS 413.140 because plaintiffs claimed to have suffered immediate symptoms as a result of their alleged exposure to carbon monoxide gas, which occurred over a year before they filed their claims; because they claimed to have had immediate symptoms, their claims were not tolled by the discovery rule. Asher v. Unarco Material Handling, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50288 (E.D. Ky. June 20, 2008), aff'd, 596 F.3d 313, 2010 FED App. 0060P, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4403 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ).

Parent did not file a complaint until well past the time the one-year limitations period had expired because the limitations period began to run when the parent received the child custody report in a dissolution proceeding and participated in a conference related to that report. Nave v. Feinberg, 539 S.W.3d 685, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 374 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

12.—Computation of Time.

There being no prohibition in the federal constitution against retrospective legislation, the war power of congress, authorizing it to take control of the railroads, gave it power to provide that the period of federal control should not be computed as a part of the periods of limitation in suits against such carriers in state or federal courts for causes of action for personal injuries arising prior to federal control. Cravens v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 195 Ky. 257 , 242 S.W. 628, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 341 ( Ky. 1922 ).

If the basis of the action has been so completely consummated on the day of its commission or omission as to afford a right of action on that day, the day of its commission or omission must be included in the count; whereas, it may not be included in the count if the passing of the full day is a prerequisite to the determination that the cause of action has accrued. Preston v. Preston, 289 Ky. 552 , 159 S.W.2d 414, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1942 ) (see CR 6.01).

Right to maintain action for personal injuries sustained on October 4, 1937, tolled on October 3, 1938. Since the suit was not filed until October 4, 1938, defendant’s plea of limitations should have been sustained. Preston v. Preston, 289 Ky. 552 , 159 S.W.2d 414, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1942 ) (see CR 6.01).

In this state, in the computation of time, if the time within which an act may be done exceeds a week, Sundays are to be included but if less than a week, Sundays are excluded; thus, where an automobile accident occurred on Sunday and the last day on which an action for personal injuries could have been brought under this section was a Sunday, both Sundays must be included in the computation of the one (1) year statute of limitations. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ) (see CR 6.01).

Under this section computation of time is made from the event of the accrual of the cause of action, rather than from the day upon which it accrued. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ) (see CR 6.01).

The time specified in the general statute of limitations for the commencement of actions for personal injuries includes Sunday and, where decedent died on a Sunday and the day on which the one (1) year expired was on a Sunday, a claim filed on the following Monday was barred although the office with which the claim was required to be filed was closed on Sunday. Inland Gas Corp. v. Flint, 255 S.W.2d 1006, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 701 ( Ky. 1953 ) (see CR 6.01).

Cause of action accruing on October 19, 1961, was barred by this section on October 19, 1962, and suit filed on that date was barred notwithstanding CR 6.01 because the computation under KRS 446.030 was complete before said rule became applicable. Randall v. L. L. Morris Transport Co., 380 S.W.2d 221, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 286 ( Ky. 1964 ).

The rule that the one (1) year statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the discovery of the injury, or on the date it should, in the exercise of ordinary care and diligence, have been discovered extends the beginning of the statute of limitations only until the time the harmful effects of the negligence first manifests itself. Hall v. Musgrave, 517 F.2d 1163, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14420 (6th Cir. Ky. 1975 ).

Where the individual’s claim of personal injury alleged that the tortious activity which caused the injury occurred on or about July 1, 1985, the action filed on July 1, 1986, was filed within one (1) year of the tortious activity and was therefore within the limitations period. MHC, Inc. v. International Union, United Mine Workers, 685 F. Supp. 1370, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4002 (E.D. Ky. 1988 ).

Where patient was informed by physician in September 1987, that the nail inserted in his femur had cracked and where he admitted that he suspected that the crack was the result of a defect, these admissions, coupled with patient’s knowledge that the nail had in fact cracked were sufficient to begin the one (1) year time period for claims based upon strict liability and negligence due to an alleged defect in the first nail, and having filed his cause of action on January 3, 1990, patient’s strict liability and negligence claims against manufacturer of nail for injuries sustained due to an alleged defect in the nail were barred. Munn v. Pfizer Hosp. Products Group, Inc., 750 F. Supp. 244, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15750 (W.D. Ky. 1990 ).

Where patient brought products liability action in January 1990, against manufacturer of nail which was implanted in his femur, patient’s unconfirmed suspicions in December 1988 did not, as a matter of law, lead to the conclusion that his strict liability and negligence claims based upon an alleged defect in the nail accrued at that time; rather, genuine issues of fact existed as to whether patient had, in December 1988, discovered or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered that he was injured and that his injury may have been caused by a defect in the nail and thus, as to whether his action was time barred pursuant to subdivision (1)(a) of this section. Munn v. Pfizer Hosp. Products Group, Inc., 750 F. Supp. 244, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15750 (W.D. Ky. 1990 ).

Because KRS 235.300 and 446.070 merely codified common law liability for watercraft accidents and did not create a new theory of liability, a passenger’s claim against a festival’s sponsor and organizers remained a common law personal injury claim; therefore, the trial court properly applied the one-year statute of limitations of KRS 413.140(1)(a). Toche v. Am. Watercraft Ass'n, 176 S.W.3d 694, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 237 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).

Since Kentucky’s statute of limitations for personal injuries, KRS 413.140 , governed claims under the federal constitution and 42 USCS § 1983, a federal prisoner’s malicious prosecution and abuse of process claims were time-barred because the prisoner did not comply with the one-year time limit to file the complaint. Bates v. Stapleton, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29935 (E.D. Ky. Apr. 11, 2008).

In an action by a consumer that alleged the manufacturer of medical equipment was negligent and strictly liable, Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(a) did not bar the consumer’s claims. There was no evidence that the consumer had medical knowledge or training to discover the alleged injuries within the one-year limitation period. Whalen v. Stryker Corp., 783 F. Supp. 2d 977, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23303 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

Claims for negligent failure to warn and negligence arising out of the malfunction of, and failure to fix, water filtrations systems were properly dismissed as time-barred because the plaintiffs had enough information by October 9, 2013 to warrant their own prompt, independent investigation of their household water quality, but they did not file this suit until March 16, 2017. Newberry v. Serv. Experts Heating & Air Conditioning, LLC, 806 Fed. Appx. 348, 2022 FED App. 132N, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 7092 (6th Cir. Ky. 2020 ).

Circuit court properly dismissed a vehicle owner’s action against the owners of an automatic car wash for personal injuries because the claims were statutorily time-barred, and, as the owner’s complaint did not concern use or operation of a motor vehicle, it did not fall under the business premises exception. Bell v. NLB Props., LLC, 2021 Ky. App. LEXIS 14 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 5, 2021).

13.— —Tolling.

Where evidence of the cause of action was clearly discoverable from analysis of the instrumentality, and plaintiff failed to examine the instrumentality, the statute of limitations would not be tolled in a products liabilty action where defendant fraudulently concealed evidence of liability, where sufficient facts were apparent from which a complaint could have been filed, and where the plainfiff took no steps on his own behalf to bring a claim within the limitations period. Hazel v. General Motors Corp., 863 F. Supp. 435, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14185 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ), aff'd, in part, 83 F.3d 422, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 26040 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ).

Where plaintiff who was injured in accident when he lost control of his truck and it struck a utility pole thereby rupturing the visible outside fuel tank causing an explosion and fire which caused his injuries, since sufficient facts were apparent from which a complaint could had been filed but plaintiff took no steps on his own behalf to bring a claim within the limitations period, statute of limitations was not tolled by defendant truck manufacturer’s failure to notify the government of any defect in its product. Hazel v. General Motors Corp., 863 F. Supp. 435, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14185 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ), aff'd, in part, 83 F.3d 422, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 26040 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ).

District court erred when it dismissed the individual’s diversity action for personal injuries on the ground that the summons was not issued within the one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(a) because the statute of limitations was tolled while the individual’s in forma pauperis petition under 28 USCS § 1915 was pending. Powell v. Jacor Communs. Corporate, 320 F.3d 599, 2003 FED App. 0063P, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 3435 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Restaurant customer’s negligence claim against a restaurant after he contracted hepatitis A after dining there was not time barred even though it was not filed within one year of the customer’s illness because the restaurant engaged in active concealment, and the record reflected that the restaurant manager, in responding to a health department investigation, suppressed the fact that an employee had a hepatitis A infection and poor hygiene and work habits. Although the customer’s suit was filed nearly three years after he fell ill, the statute of limitations was tolled for the entire period of concealment; because the customer filed suit three months after learning of the source of his illness, his suit was timely filed. Emberton v. GMRI, Inc., 299 S.W.3d 565, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 2009 ).

In a personal injury case in which a property management company moved for summary judgment, a tenant's negligence claim was time-barred, and the statute of limitations would not be tolled based on the property management company's third-party administrator's conduct towards the tenant. Prout v. PRG Real Estate Mgmt., Inc., 51 F. Supp. 3d 702, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145697 (E.D. Ky. 2014 ).

14.—Restraint or Suspension.

Plaintiff’s right to file action for personal injury occurring on June 13 was not restrained or suspended so as to not count June 9, 10 and 11 of the following year in computation of the one (1) year statute of limitations or bring him within the provisions of subsection (1) of KRS 413.260 because at the time plaintiff’s attorney went to the clerk’s office to file the suit, the clerk’s office was closed, and the facts showed that the circuit court clerk was absent from office during the month of June but appointed two (2) deputy clerks, one of whom was in the office every weekday during the month except for two (2) afternoons when the other deputy clerk had the key at their joint home two (2) miles from the county seat and plaintiff’s attorney knew where they lived. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ).

15.—Obstruction of Prosecution.

A mere voluntary statement made by employer to keep employee on the payroll, without exacting from plaintiff any character of promise whatever or any mention of a suit, did not toll the one (1) year statute of limitations applicable to personal injury action. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Evidence in personal injury action by employee did not show fraudulent concealment as to whom his employer was, constituting an obstruction under subsection (2) of KRS 413.190 which would toll the one (1) year statute of limitations. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

The one (1) year statute of limitations applicable to actions for personal injuries was tolled by representations of officers of employer to injured employee that they would settle his injury if he would not sue and employee’s reliance on the promises and acts of the employer. Clover Splint Coal Co. v. Lorenz, 270 Ky. 676 , 110 S.W.2d 457, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The questions of whether employer promised to pay injured employee and requested him not to sue and whether employee relied on the promise, thus tolling the one (1) year statute of limitations, was for the jury. Clover Splint Coal Co. v. Lorenz, 270 Ky. 676 , 110 S.W.2d 457, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1937 ).

In action for wrongful death, plaintiff’s reply that defendant obstructed prosecution of the action by failing to stop the truck at the scene of the accident, by failing to file a report with the state police as required by KRS 189.580 , and by concealing the identity of the owner and operator of the truck and that plaintiff did not have sufficient information upon which to base her claim against defendant until after the expiration of the period of limitations was sufficient to toll the statute of limitations until discovery as provided by subsection (2) of KRS 413.190 and to avoid defendant’s plea of the one (1) year statute of limitations. St. Clair v. Bardstown Transfer Line, Inc., 310 Ky. 776 , 221 S.W.2d 679, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1274 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Negotiations of settlement for injuries received in an automobile accident which were conducted between the claimant and the driver’s attorney during which there was no firm offer by either party to settle for a specified amount, no promise of payment for an agreement not to sue or concealment of facts which prevented the institution of suit, and in which there was no fiducial or trust relationship between the parties, neither estopped the potential defendant from asserting the limitations of this section nor extended the period of limitations pursuant to subsection (2) of KRS 413.190 . Burke v. Blair, 349 S.W.2d 836, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Ordinarily, unless the conduct of defendant amounts to an absconding or concealment or obstructs the prosecution of the action, it will not toll the running of the statute of limitations. Hackworth v. Hart, 474 S.W.2d 377, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Where plaintiffs alleged that a doctor failed to tell them about the dangers associated with certain diet drugs or advise them to undergo a cardiovascular exam or echocardiogram, plaintiffs’ claims of fraudulent concealment were without merit because plaintiffs did not allege that the doctor took any action that would have prevented them from undergoing a cardiovascular exam or electrocardiogram or otherwise inquiring about or investigating the consequences of taking the drugs. Adkins v. Duff, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26688 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 31, 2004).

16.—Estoppels or Exceptions.

Continued promises by employer through its agents to pay injured brakeman’s hospital and doctor bills, to keep him on the payroll and later on to settle his claim if he would not sue and reliance by employee on these promises until employer went into receivership avoided the plea of limitations. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Carter, 226 Ky. 561 , 10 S.W.2d 1064, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 843 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Where no promises or representations were made to plaintiff, no payment was made to him after he signed agreement to settle claim for personal injuries six (6) months prior to expiration of the one (1) year statute of limitations and plaintiff did not get in communication with defendant concerning his claim until approximately a year after the statute of limitations had run, action brought more than three (3) years after the injury was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations. Kentucky Utilities Co. v. Wiggins, 254 Ky. 629 , 72 S.W.2d 12, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 120 ( Ky. 1934 ).

Where employee’s cause of action for personal injuries was against a partnership continuing business of a properly dissolved corporation under the same name and the employee, omitting to avail himself of readily accessible information, asserted his cause of action against the nonexistent corporation within a year after its accrual, the partnership was not estopped, when sued after the one (1) year statute of limitations had expired, from pleading the statute of limitations. Lingar v. Harlan Fuel Co., 298 Ky. 216 , 182 S.W.2d 657, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 875 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where driver had promised to make settlement for injuries to guest but refused to make settlement six (6) months after accident, driver was not estopped from asserting statute of limitations as guest had six (6) months thereafter to file action. Bryant v. Bryant, 246 S.W.2d 457, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1952 ).

A complaint, filed in January 1957, seeking damages for personal injuries received in an automobile accident which occurred on August 19, 1955, was barred by this section, and an allegation that on August 17, 1956, plaintiff, who was aware that her complaint must be filed by August 19, 1956, was advised by defendant’s insurer that she had filed a claim with them and that it was not necessary to institute a civil action, coupled with the insurer’s denial of liability on September 19, 1956, for failure to institute a timely civil action, did not remove the bar. Jackson v. Jackson, 313 S.W.2d 868, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 282 ( Ky. 1958 ).

Representations made by the agent of automobile insurance carrier to a person injured while riding as a guest in an automobile owned and driven by its insured that the company assumed and recognized its liability, that a settlement would be made when all the bills were in, and that in due course she would be fully compensated if she did not consult or employ an attorney do not constitute grounds for estoppel and do not toll the statute of limitations. Pospisil v. Miller, 343 S.W.2d 392, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1961 ).

A party may be estopped in action for personal injuries to plead limitations where he has induced inaction on the part of plaintiff by false representations or fraudulent concealment. Cuppy v. General Acci. Fire & Life Assurance Corp., 378 S.W.2d 629, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 198 ( Ky. 1964 ), distinguishing Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Carter, 226 Ky. 561 , 10 S.W.2d 1064, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 843 ( Ky. 1927 ); and Clover Splint Coal Co. v. Lorenz, 270 Ky. 676 , 110 S.W.2d 457, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1937 ).

Complaint as amended failed to allege facts sufficient to warrant an estoppel against a plea of the one (1) year statute of limitations on the claim of plaintiffs for personal injuries arising out of collision of defendant’s truck with their automobile where the allegation simply amounted to the assertion that the plaintiffs did not realize the Kentucky limitation period for personal injury actions was one (1) year as opposed to Iowa’s limitation period of two (2) years without any allegation that adjuster for the liability carrier misrepresented any facts, nor made any representations about a limitation period. Brown v. Noland Co., 403 S.W.2d 33, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 321 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Alleged false representations by an insurance adjuster in the form of promises that the claims for personal injuries would be paid when the extent of the injuries was known and that an investigation was being conducted to determine in which state the accident occurred were not sufficient to toll the statute of limitations. Black v. Maglinger, 444 S.W.2d 747, 1969 Ky. LEXIS 226 ( Ky. 1969 ).

In determining whether the statute of limitations should apply to an action for personal injuries, the relevant inquiry should be whether or not under all the facts and circumstances the plaintiff was justified in relying upon the representations and activities of the insurance adjuster in delaying filing suit until time had run out. Miller v. Thacker, 481 S.W.2d 19, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1972 ).

In personal injury action involving differing statutes of limitation, different statutes prescribing the age of majority, coupled with misrepresentations that the plaintiff was a minor, and that the authorized plastic surgery eliminated any time element in concluding a settlement, plaintiff was justified in delaying the institution of the action until a reasonable time after the insurer gave notice of its intention to rely upon the expiration of the statutory limitations, and defendant was estopped to rely upon the expiration of the Kentucky limitations period. Miller v. Thacker, 481 S.W.2d 19, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1972 ).

17.—Diversity Cases.

Where object of action by passenger against bus company was to recover damages for injuries to her person sustained in an accident in which the bus was involved, the action was governed by the one (1) year statute relating to actions for personal injuries, and plaintiff could not escape the one (1) year limitation by attempting to base suit on theory of breach of implied contract by bus company to furnish safe carriage. Vandevoir v. Southeastern Greyhound Lines, 152 F.2d 150, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2254 (7th Cir. Ind. 1945), cert. denied, 327 U.S. 789, 66 S. Ct. 811, 90 L. Ed. 1016, 1946 U.S. LEXIS 2681 (U.S. 1946).

Negligence action arising out of a Kentucky collision was barred by this section. Sigler v. Allstate Ins. Co., 319 F.2d 418, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4656 (7th Cir. Wis. 1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 965, 84 S. Ct. 482, 11 L. Ed. 2d 414, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 2055 (U.S. 1964).

Where Kentucky resident, in good faith and in due time, sued a foreign corporation in state circuit court for personal injuries and action was dismissed because of court’s lack of jurisdiction of defendant, and plaintiff then instituted an action in the federal district court, defendant’s contention that the action was barred by this section was erroneous and his motion for a judgment on the pleadings properly was denied. Fulkerson v. American Chain & Cable Co., 72 F. Supp. 334, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2510 (D. Pa. 1947).

Where the plaintiff sustained personal injuries in an automobile collision on March 24, 1952, and an action for recovery for such personal injuries was filed on March 24, 1953, the action was barred by this section. Edwards v. McCullogh, 114 F. Supp. 766, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4074 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

Where an action against a Kentucky resident motorist to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident which occurred in Kentucky was instituted by a nonresident motorist more than one (1) year after the date of the accident, such action was barred by this section. Boughton v. Shoulders, 116 F. Supp. 391, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2231 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

Fact that suits for personal injuries are barred in Kentucky does not necessarily mean that they are barred in Tennessee. Sigler Sigler v. Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 61, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3823 (D. Tenn. 1957). See Gore v. Debaryshe, 278 F. Supp. 883, 1968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7902 (W.D. Ky. 1968 ).

The provision for service of process under Kentucky nonresident motor statute did not make the defendant a resident of Kentucky so as to create a bar to a suit in Tennessee for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident in Kentucky under the Tennessee statute providing that a cause of action barred in the lex loci state was barred in Tennessee. Sigler v. Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 61, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3823 (D. Tenn. 1957).

Action against Kentucky resident by Virginia resident for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident occurring in Kentucky was not barred by the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations, since plaintiffs had done everything possible to protect their rights where their attorney, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year statute, attempted to file their complaint, found the clerk’s office closed, contacted the deputy clerk at her home, took the complaints to her, paid the required fees and delivered the summonses with a request they be issued but summonses were not issued until after expiration of the one (1) year period. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

Although statutes of limitation are favored by the law, when no one will be made to suffer by reason of a few hours’ delay and a litigant has done all that is within his power to do to seek redress in a court of justice for an alleged wrong done to him, and there is a grave doubt in the mind of the court that the statute has run, in the interest of justice this doubt should be construed on the side of the litigant. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

Plaintiffs suing to recover for injuries sustained in an automobile accident were under no compunction to seek their remedies at an earlier time than they deemed necessary, and where they were given a year from the time the action accrued to assert their claims, the fact that they waited until the eleventh hour was no bar to their causes of action. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

Action arising out of an automobile accident occurring March 8, 1953, in Kentucky while plaintiff was a passenger in an automobile owned and operated by defendant’s decedent, filed in federal court against administrator on March 6, 1954, was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section and the three (3) year New York statute of limitations where clerk’s office was asked to retain the complaint and not issue summons because the whereabouts of driver’s administrator was unknown and on March 13, 1957, complaint was served upon the clerk of the New York surrogate court. Decker v. Boyle, 162 F. Supp. 164, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2699 (D.N.Y. 1957).

Doctor and company were fraudulently joined in an action brought by consumers against pharmaceutical companies, the doctor, and the company for injuries caused by the taking of prescription diet medications because the claims against the doctor and company, who were non-diverse defendants, were time-barred pursuant to the one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(e); therefore, the pharmaceutical companies properly removed the action, and it would not be remanded. Contrary to the consumers’ contentions, the common defense rule was inapplicable because any determination that the claims against the doctor and company were time-barred would not relieve the pharmaceutical companies of liability on the same grounds, and a settlement agreement in multidistrict litigation from which the consumers had opted out did not prohibit the pharmaceutical companies from raising statute of limitations arguments for jurisdictional purposes. Adams v. Duff, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26689 (E.D. Ky. Dec. 8, 2004).

18.— —Governing Law.

Under KRS 413.320 , if a cause of action arising in another state or country between residents of such state or country, or between them and residents of another state or country, is not barred by the laws of that state or country, it is not barred in an action between the same parties in the courts of Kentucky. Burton v. Miller, 185 F.2d 817, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 3366 (6th Cir. Ky. 1950 ). See also Totten v. Loventhal, 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1963 ), overruled, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled in part, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ), overruled in part, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ), overruled on other grounds, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 (Ky. 1981); and Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Action in United States District Court in Kentucky for personal injuries arising in New York, in which the plaintiff was, at the time of the injuries, a resident, need not be brought within the period of one (1) year as provided by this section but could be brought within the three-year period as provided by New York, the state in which the claim arose. Koeppe v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 250 F.2d 270, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4137 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ). See also Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The Indiana two-year statute of limitations and not the one-year statute of limitations provided by this section applied to an action brought in Kentucky for personal injuries sustained in Indiana. Collins v. Clayton & Lambert Mfg. Co., 299 F.2d 362, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 5940 (6th Cir. Ky. 1962 ). See also Atkins v. Schmutz Mfg. Co., 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 829, 88 S. Ct. 92, 19 L. Ed. 2d 86, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 687 (1967) and Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The federal district court applied the limitation statute of the foreign state and not that of Kentucky where under Kentucky law the foreign state statute of limitations applied if it was for a longer time because the federal court was bound by the construction presently placed on the Kentucky statute by state courts even if it was satisfied that the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, when called upon to construe the statute, would embrace the law of the forum which was the prevailing law in 47 other states. Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ). See also Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Under KRS 413.320 , the New Jersey two (2) year statute of limitations and not the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations provided by this section applied to action for personal injuries brought in Kentucky but arising in New Jersey between a resident of New Jersey and a resident of Kentucky. Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ). See also Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ) and Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The right of plaintiffs, who were Virginia residents, to proceed in federal court in an action for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident in Kentucky against a resident of Kentucky was not based on a Kentucky statute but on a common-law right to recover in tort for negligence so, consequently, the Kentucky statute of limitations was not a part of the remedy made available to the plaintiffs for the alleged wrong. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

The one-year statute of limitations under this section was not applicable to an action brought in Indiana for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident in Kentucky between the Indiana plaintiff and an Ohio defendant, for the renvoi doctrine being applicable, the Indiana “borrowing statute” directed the Indiana court to apply the specific limitation provision of Ohio where the nonresident defendant resided and not that state’s “borrowing statute” which looked to limitation of Kentucky, the state where the injury occurred. Hobbs v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 195 F. Supp. 56, 17 Ohio Op. 2d 13, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2780 (N.D. Ind. 1961).

Pennsylvania federal court did not have jurisdiction of the subject matter where citizen of Kentucky was injured in Kentucky while unloading a freight car and the Kentucky statute of limitations had run when the action was filed in Pennsylvania. Fannin v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 204 F. Supp. 154, 1962 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3117 (W.D. Pa. 1962).

In an action by a resident of Kentucky for injuries sustained in Indiana, this section, requiring such actions to be brought within one (1) year, was applicable and not the Indiana statute of two (2) years. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Burkhart, 154 Ky. 92 , 157 S.W. 18, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1913 ).

As a general rule, limitations are governed by the law of the forum and not by the law of the place where the cause of action for personal injuries arose. Smith v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 157 Ky. 113 , 162 S.W. 564, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1914 ), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Action to recover for injury received in Illinois, while passenger on a bus, was barred after one (1) year under this section, rather than Illinois two-year statute. Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), overruling Labatt v. Smith, 83 Ky. 599 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 14 (1886), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), questioned, 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967); John Shillito Co. v. Richardson, 102 Ky. 51 , 42 S.W. 847, 1897 Ky. LEXIS 61 (1897), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965); Smith v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 157 Ky. 113 , 162 S.W. 564, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1914 ), to the extent of conflict.

A statute admitting the bar of the law of another state does not so adopt the foreign law as to lengthen the limitation period otherwise prescribed at the forum. Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), overruling Labatt v. Smith, 83 Ky. 599 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 14 (1886), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), questioned, 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967); John Shillito Co. v. Richardson, 102 Ky. 51 , 42 S.W. 847, 1897 Ky. LEXIS 61 (1897), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965); Smith v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 157 Ky. 113 , 162 S.W. 564, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1914 ), to the extent of conflict.

A statute of limitations does not extinguish a legal right but merely affects the remedy, and the law of the forum controls remedies and procedures. Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

This section is applicable to bar an action on a tort committed in another state if the statute of limitations in the foreign state is for a longer period of time than provided in this section. Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), overruling Labatt v. Smith, 83 Ky. 599 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 14 (1886), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), questioned, 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967); John Shillito Co. v. Richardson, 102 Ky. 51 , 42 S.W. 847, 1897 Ky. LEXIS 61 (1897), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965); Smith v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 157 Ky. 113 , 162 S.W. 564, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1914 ), to the extent of conflict.

In an action on a tort committed in another state, if the statute of limitations in the foreign state is for a longer period of time than the statute provides in Kentucky, then the law of Kentucky will prevail, but, on the other hand, if the period of time provided by the statute in the foreign state is shorter than that provided in Kentucky, then KRS 413.320 applies and the law of the foreign jurisdiction shall prevail. Wethington v. Griggs, 392 S.W.2d 56, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 262 ( Ky. 1965 ).

This section and not the Ohio two (2) year statute of limitations was applicable to an action filed in Kentucky more than one (1) year after an automobile accident in Ohio and the action was barred by the statute of limitations. Wethington v. Griggs, 392 S.W.2d 56, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 262 ( Ky. 1965 ).

12.—Computation of Time.

Farmer's constitutional and tort claims were properly dismissed as time barred Under the applicable statutes of limitations because the instant complaint was filed more than one year after the latest date his action could have accrued; with respect to the farmer's claim that defendants concealed information from him which prevented him from complying with the statutes of limitations, he failed to demonstrate that he relied on defendants' concealment, which was required for tolling. Lea v. USDA, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24835 (6th Cir. Ky. June 4, 2014).

13.5.—Excessive force.

Circuit court properly granted summary judgment in favor of a county and five corrections officers in defendant's action to recover damages for injuries she sustained when the officers used excessive force against her because she could not circumvent the one-year statute of limitations by characterizing her personal-injury tort claims as statutory violations, defendant waited nearly five years before she filed suit, and her plea agreement in the criminal action barred her subsequent claim of malicious prosecution as a matter of law. Goins v. LaFoe, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 89 (Ky. Ct. App. May 27, 2016), review denied, ordered not published, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 297 (Ky. Aug. 16, 2017).

19.Emotional Distress.

One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress, and if bodily harm to the other results from it, for such bodily harm; there is a right to be free of emotional distress arising from conduct by another. Because the essence of the tort is the interference with this right and not whether any bodily harm results, the five-year statute of limitations of KRS 413.120 applies, rather than the one-year limit of this section. Craft v. Rice, 671 S.W.2d 247, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 254 ( Ky. 1984 ).

Patient’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against a doctor was subject to the one-year limitation period because the one-year statute governed all causes of action against physicians and surgeons regardless of whether the claim be alleged in tort or in contract. Litsey v. Allen, 371 S.W.3d 786, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 84 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

20.Injuries to Cattle.

An action to recover damages for injury to cattle occurring during the construction of a pipeline across the field in which they were pastured was barred by paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section and the provisions of subsection (2) of KRS 413.090 were not made applicable by the existence of an easement agreement which provided that the pipeline company would not damage property off of the right of way of the easement. Carr v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp., 344 S.W.2d 619, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1961 ).

The plaintiffs alleged that stray voltage injured their dairy herd and essentially, this was a “trespass” to the dairy herd; so, even assuming that the dairy herd’s exposure to stray voltage was continuous, the plaintiffs’ recovery was limited to damages for the injuries inflicted on the dairy herd during the one-year period immediately preceding the commencement of the action on September 8, 1989. G & K Dairy v. Princeton Electric Plant Bd., 781 F. Supp. 485, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20439 (W.D. Ky. 1991 ).

Where the plaintiffs learned that stray voltage endangered their dairy herd in April, 1987, and the plaintiffs knew about their dairy herd’s injuries in the spring of 1988, the dairy herd’s injuries were not “latent.” G & K Dairy v. Princeton Electric Plant Bd., 781 F. Supp. 485, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20439 (W.D. Ky. 1991 ).

21.Conspiracy.

This section governing actions for conspiracy applied to treble damage under the Sherman act. Northern Kentucky Tel. Co. v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 73 F.2d 333, 1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 2692 (6th Cir. Ky. 1934 ), cert. denied, 294 U.S. 719, 55 S. Ct. 546, 79 L. Ed. 1251, 1935 U.S. LEXIS 174 (U.S. 1935).

Conspiracy is not an element of an action based on a violation of section 303 of the labor management relations act of 1947 and the limitation contained in subsection (c) of this section is not applicable to an action brought thereunder. Riverside Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers, 410 F.2d 267, U.S. App. LEXIS 12971 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 846, 90 S. Ct. 89, 24 L. Ed. 2d 95, 1969 U.S. LEXIS 3236 (U.S. 1969).

Paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of this statute relating to the civil action for conspiracy apparently was suspended until June 30, 1946, by federal act of Oct. 10, 1942, ch. 589, 56 Stat. 781, as amended June 30, 1945, ch. 213, 59 Stat. 306. Fifth & Walnut, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc., 76 F. Supp. 64, 1948 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2805 (D.N.Y. 1948), disapproved, In re Air Crash Disaster near New Orleans, 821 F.2d 1147, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 9873 (5th Cir. La. 1987).

The one (1) year statute of limitations for damages by a union to a meat packing plant did not commence to run until the last overt act performed in compliance with the objective of the conspiracy had been accomplished where the conspiracy was a continuing conspiracy contemplating a series of overt acts. District Union, Amalgamated Meat Cutters, etc. v. Fleischaker, 384 S.W.2d 68, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1964 ).

Employer was entitled to summary judgment on an employee’s common law claim of conspiracy because it was time-barred under KRS 413.140(1), and alternatively it was preempted by the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. Szabo v. UPS, Inc., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10600 (W.D. Ky. May 24, 2004).

Plaintiffs failed to timely file a civil conspiracy claim, under KRS 413.140(1)(c), because plaintiffs knew they were injured in December of 2001 and knew at whose hands they had suffered this injury, and they had a duty to exercise reasonable diligence in attempting to ascertain the nature and extent of their claims within the limitations period. Kerman v. Chenery Assocs., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30164 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 22, 2011).

Limitations periods of KRS 413.120(7) and 413.140(1)(c) were applicable to claims for breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste, and the aiding and abetting corporate waste claims, brought under 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 544(b), 547, and 548(a)(1)(A) and (B), and under KRS 378.010 and a civil conspiracy claim against insiders KRS 378.020 . Liquidating Trustee of App Fuels Creditors Trust v. Energy Coal Res., Inc. (In re Appalachian Fuels, LLC), 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 4290 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Sept. 14, 2012).

Investor's civil conspiracy claim was time-barred because he failed to file his civil conspiracy claim within one year of the underlying tort. Muncy v. InterCloud Sys., 92 F. Supp. 3d 621, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29741 (E.D. Ky. 2015 ).

22.Criminal Conversation.

In a husband’s suit for alienation, the complaint showing on its face, through a typographical error, that the acts complained of occurred more than the period of one (1) year before date limited for bringing of such an action by this section, was not subject to demurrer, as the statute is a personal defense that must be pleaded. Merritt v. Cravens, 168 Ky. 155 , 181 S.W. 970, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 519 ( Ky. 1916 ) ( Ky. 1916 ).

In action for criminal conversation, testimony of plaintiff that alleged act was committed within year preceding date on which action was brought was sufficient to submit case to jury, notwithstanding contention of defendant that there was not a scintilla of evidence that alleged act had been committed within that time. Bailey v. Travis, 311 Ky. 624 , 224 S.W.2d 941, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1211 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Criminal conversation, enticement, and alienation of affections come under this section rather than KRS 413.120 . Skaggs v. Stanton, 532 S.W.2d 442, 1975 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1975 ).

23.—Accrual.

The statute of limitation pertaining to tortious interference with a marriage begins to run on the day the last tortious act takes place. Plummer v. Summe, 687 S.W.2d 543, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 622 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

24.Slander.

In an action for slander, it is the occurrence of the tort which marks the beginning of the running of the limitation contained in this section and the fact that the injury sustained is of a continuing nature does not extend the limitation. Barnett v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 407 F.2d 1333, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 13215 (6th Cir. Ky. 1969 ).

Although an action for deprivation of due process in connection with failure to renew a nontenured teacher’s contract could not be brought in the absence of the employment relation and a legitimate expectancy of reemployment, the primary interest which the due process right served to protect was the interest in plaintiff’s reputation, and not a contractual interest; thus the civil rights action was analogous to a state cause of action for slander and was therefore subject to the one-year statute of limitations. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

Circuit Court properly dismissed an adjacent landowner’s suit filed against various county entities and individuals, in which he alleged that one of the county defendants, the Executive Director of the Laurel County Industrial Development Authority, made false statements about certain property, discouraging a hospital from building thereon, as the adjacent landowner failed to show that he owned the land allegedly affected by the claimed false statements, failed to plead special damages with any degree of certainty, and filed his suit outside of the time limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(d). Keith v. Laurel County Fiscal Court, 254 S.W.3d 842, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 157 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008), overruled in part, Ballard v. 1400 Willow Council of Co-Owners, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 229, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 579 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Only defamation claims that escaped preemption predated the time when the company received notice of the inaccuracy of the disputed item, which was December 15, 2010 at the latest, well outside the one year statute of limitations under state law. Eddins v. Cenlar FSB, 964 F. Supp. 2d 843, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113171 (W.D. Ky. 2013 ).

24.5.Slander of Title.

Condominium owner’s slander of title claim was filed outside the applicable one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(c) because the owner had to file it within one year of a lien and a lis pendens being filed by a condominium association and the amendment adding the claim could not relate back to the filing of the original complaint under CR 15.03(1) because the lien and the lis pendens had not been filed then.1400 Willow Council of Co-Owners, Inc. v. Ballard, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1007 (Ky. Ct. App. May 21, 2010), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 430 S.W.3d 229, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 579 ( Ky. 2013 ).

KRS 413.120(7)’s five-year limitations period applied to slander of title, not KRS 413.140(1)(d)’s one-year period, because slander of title alleged injury to real property rights due to title disparagement. Ballard v. 1400 Willow Council of Co-Owners, Inc., 430 S.W.3d 229, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 579 ( Ky. 2013 ).

25.Libel.

Since it is the publication of libelous matter that causes the defamation or injury thus commencing the running of the statute of limitations where date of “publication” of written performance appraisals was March 25, 1977, an action filed April 28, 1978 was barred. Caslin v. General Electric Co., 608 S.W.2d 69, 1980 Ky. App. LEXIS 385 (Ky. Ct. App. 1980).

Because the single publication rule applied to the alleged libelous statements posted by the website creators on the Internet, the individual’s cause of action for libel accrued at the time of publication of the statements; therefore, the individual’s libel claims based on statements the creators posted on the Internet before December 29, 1999, which was one (1) year before the individual filed his libel suit, were barred by Kentucky’s one (1) year statute of limitations, KRS 413.140 . Mitan v. Davis, 243 F. Supp. 2d 719, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1585 (W.D. Ky. 2003 ).

Individual’s libel claims against the Chapter 13 debtors were not barred by KRS 413.140(1)(d) where the changes the debtors made to a internet website constituted a re-publication, the changes related to the original allegedly defamatory material regarding the individual, and the changes altered both the substance and form of the original material. Davis v. Davis (In re Davis), 334 B.R. 874, 2005 Bankr. LEXIS 2556 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2005 ), aff'd in part and rev'd in part, 347 B.R. 607, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57257 (W.D. Ky. 2006 ).

Because material that was added to a defamatory Internet website contained substantive information, a republication occurred, restarting the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(d). Davis v. Mitan (In re Davis), 347 B.R. 607, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57257 (W.D. Ky. 2006 ).

Although an attorney’s defamation action against a publisher appeared to be barred by the statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(d), the case was not dismissed because the issue remained whether changes to a website’s content may have occurred that would have constituted substantial modification and restarted the limitations period. Salyer v. Southern Poverty Law Ctr., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33176 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 16, 2009).

One year limitation period applied to a plaintiff’s case for defamation; the statute accrued one year from the date of publication, and Kentucky did not recognize a discovery rule. Publication on the Internet would apply for the single publication rule, but a plaintiff could potentially establish an exception to the one year period based on the doctrine of republication. Salyer v. Southern Poverty Law Ctr., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35226 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 23, 2009).

Plaintiff’s defamation claim was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(d) because the original defamatory article was published more than one year before the action was commenced, and neither the posting of articles referencing and hyperlinking to the article nor mailing a copy of the article to a researcher constituted republication; further, amendment of the complaint to add a false light claim would be futile because the same conduct underlay the claims, and thus, a false light claim would be barred by the statute of limitations. Salyer v. Southern Poverty Law Ctr., Inc., 701 F. Supp. 2d 912, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113511 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

26.Malpractice.

Where plaintiff became patient of doctor on July 12, 1953, following an automobile accident on that day in which plaintiff was seriously injured, and such relationship continued thereafter until its termination August 19, 1953, and on August 19, 1954, plaintiff filed action to recover damages from the doctor because of his alleged failure to examine and treat plaintiff with due care and to perform his duties as such physician, the action was not commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued as required by paragraph (e) of subsection (1) of this section. Fredericks v. Rust, 228 F.2d 893, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3723 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

An action seeking damages for an alleged unskillful and negligent operation by a physician is barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations. Guess v. Linton, 236 Ky. 87 , 32 S.W.2d 718, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 691 ( Ky. 1930 ).

An action against a physician for failure to remove tonsils as agreed is an action for malpractice governed by this section. Roush v. Wolfe, 243 Ky. 180 , 47 S.W.2d 1021, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1932 ).

According to petition, wife was injured when first operation was performed and forceps left in her abdomen through surgeon’s negligence, although discovery was not made until 30 months later when the forceps were discharged through her bowels, and husband’s action for loss of society and services of his wife and for medical bills incurred through the negligence of the surgeon was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations. Carter v. Harlan Hospital Ass'n, 265 Ky. 452 , 97 S.W.2d 9, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 509 ( Ky. 1936 ).

In malpractice action evidence showed facts which tolled statute of limitations under subsection (2) of KRS 413.190 . Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ).

With respect to the statute of limitations, the time of the injury itself is the controlling fact and not the means by which the injury is inflicted. Philpot v. Stacy, 371 S.W.2d 11, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 84 ( Ky. 1963 ).

With a few exceptions a cause of action against a physician or surgeon for malpractice accrues when a party has the right and capacity to sue and his right of action is not suspended until after he ascertains that he has a cause of action. Turner v. Rust, 385 S.W.2d 175, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 140 ( Ky. 1964 ).

A malpractice action against a surgeon is barred by the one (1) year provision of this section and not by the five (5) year provision of subsection (1) of KRS 413.120 , notwithstanding the fact that the complaint alleges a special contract. Jones v. Furnell, 406 S.W.2d 154, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Where a physician performed a sterilization operation and the wife subsequently became pregnant, the cause of action of the husband for loss of consortium accrued at the time of the discovery of the pregnancy. Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ), limited, Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

Where a physician was sued in a malpractice action for negligently performing a sterilization operation, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the discovery of the pregnancy. Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ), limited, Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

By the use of “negligence or malpractice” in this section, the legislature intended for “malpractice” to mean something other than “negligence” and hence the law governs all causes of action against physicians and surgeons, regardless of whether the claim be alleged in tort or in contract, for the purposes of limitation period. Hackworth v. Hart, 474 S.W.2d 377, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Under this section, limitation period in cases of negligence begins to run on date of discovery of the injury or from the date it should, in the exercise of ordinary care and diligence, have been discovered. Hackworth v. Hart, 474 S.W.2d 377, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Where pregnancy is the critical question, cause of action in medical malpractice cases commences to run from the time pregnancy was or should have been discovered. Hackworth v. Hart, 474 S.W.2d 377, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 109 ( Ky. 1971 ).

In an action for malpractice against a physician, where plaintiff, according to her own testimony, knew no later than May 5, 1969 that she had a hole in her urethra that needed surgical repair and that this condition was probably a result of childbirth, some 21 months before the filing of the initial complaint, the suit was barred by the one-year statute of limitations. Hall v. Musgrave, 517 F.2d 1163, 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14420 (6th Cir. Ky. 1975 ).

Where the defendant doctor allegedly misdiagnosed the decedent’s cancerous condition in May of 1979, but it was undisputed that the deceased underwent a series of operations in September of 1979 as a result of which cancer was discovered, the decedent’s action for malpractice and her husband’s action for loss of consortium, which were not filed until July of 1981, were barred by subdivision (1)(e) of this section because the alleged medical negligence was discovered, or should reasonably have been discovered, in September of 1979. Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Rice, 674 S.W.2d 510, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 1984 ).

Cause of action for lack of informed consent attendant to the risks of a cervical laminectomy and drainage of the syrinx accrued when medical malpractice plaintiff became aware that his physical condition had deteriorated, rather than improved, as soon as he regained post-operative consciousness. Gregory v. Poor, 862 F. Supp. 171, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12728 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ), aff'd, 70 F.3d 1271, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 39267 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ).

The plaintiff filed her medical malpractice complaint in a timely manner where the action was filed less than one (1) year after another physician removed a piece of a metal medical instrument from the plaintiff’s body which was allegedly left in her body during a procedure performed by the defendant, notwithstanding that the defendant began to suffer pain shortly after that procedure and suspected for many years that her pain was caused by the procedure. Wiseman v. Alliant Hosps., Inc., 37 S.W.3d 709, 2000 Ky. LEXIS 142 ( Ky. 2000 ).

Where a patient alleged that a doctor who prescribed her diet drugs was negligent and fraudulently concealed the dangers of the diet drugs because he failed to advise her to undergo a thorough cardiovascular examination, the patient’s medical negligence and fraud claims were barred by the statute of limitations because they were not filed within one (1) year after the patient knew or should have known of her injuries and her claims. The patient had constructive knowledge of her claims against the doctor from the extensive national and local media coverage concerning the withdrawal of the drugs from the market. Collett v. Freid, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19937 (E.D. Ky. July 15, 2004).

Where a patient’s medical negligence and fraud claims against a doctor were barred by the statute of limitations because they were not filed within one (1) year after the patient knew or should have known of her injuries and her claims, the statute of limitations was not subject to tolling because the doctor did not fraudulently conceal the patient’s injuries by neglecting to inform her that she should undergo a cardiovascular examination and echocardiogram. Collett v. Freid, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19937 (E.D. Ky. July 15, 2004).

Consumers claims against a doctor and a company for injuries caused by the taking of prescription diet medications were barred under the one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(e) because the consumers were on constructive notice of the risks of the medication given the wide publicity surrounding the medications beginning in 1997, and the first complaint was not filed until December 2003. Therefore, the doctor and company were entitled to summary judgment. Adams v. Duff, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26689 (E.D. Ky. Dec. 8, 2004).

Continuous course of treatment doctrine applied where a patient’s medical malpractice suit, filed three years after the surgery at issue, but within one year of the patient’s last appointment with the doctor, was timely, since during that time the patient remained in the doctor’s care regarding the surgery. Harrison v. Valentini, 184 S.W.3d 521, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 384 ( Ky. 2005 ), limited, Sneed v. Univ. of Louisville Hosp., 600 S.W.3d 221, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Summary judgment was properly granted, dismissing a patient’s medical malpractice suit on the ground that it was not filed within the statutory period set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(e) because the evidence showed that the patient knew more than one year before suit was brought that he had vestibular damage to his ear, that his damage was caused, at least in part, by a certain antibiotic, and that the doctor prescribed and monitored the antibiotic. The patient’s argument that the one-year period did not begin to accrue until he learned he had an actionable claim was rejected. Vannoy v. Milum, 171 S.W.3d 745, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 186 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).

Continuous course of treatment doctrine applied where a patient’s medical malpractice suit, filed three years after the surgery at issue, but within one year of the patient’s last appointment with the doctor, was timely, since during that time the patient remained in the doctor’s care regarding the surgery. Harrison v. Valentini, 184 S.W.3d 521, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 384 ( Ky. 2005 ), limited, Sneed v. Univ. of Louisville Hosp., 600 S.W.3d 221, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Although some of the arguments in favor of the loss of chance doctrine are appealing, permitting damages for the loss of the possibility of recovery from the medical condition, it represents a significant departure from the traditional meaning of causation in tort law. The decision to expand the definition of causation and thus the potential liability of the medical profession involves significant and far-reaching policy concerns more properly left to the Legislature. Kemper v. Gordon, 272 S.W.3d 146, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 153 ( Ky. 2008 ).

Prisoner’s malpractice claim against a physician, which arose from an alleged delay in the diagnosis and treatment of the prisoner’s recurrent cancer, was not barred by the one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1) because the claim did not accrue until the prisoner was diagnosed with the recurrence of cancer; it was not until the prisoner was diagnosed with cancer that he was on notice that he might have been harmed by a delay in receiving a colonoscopy and, therefore, it was not until the prisoner was diagnosed with cancer that he surmised that he had been injured by the physician. Runkle v. Pancake, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104280 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 23, 2008), vacated, set aside, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50879 (W.D. Ky. June 8, 2009).

Patient’s malpractice claim against her doctor was not tolled by the continuous course of treatment doctrine following her last visit with him where, in her deposition, she testified that she had no doubt that his conduct was inappropriate at the time she left his office on her last visit, which was more than one year prior to the filing of her claim. Although the patient continued to have her prescriptions renewed by the doctor after that date, she did not allege that she was relying on him to correct the consequences of poor treatment. Litsey v. Allen, 371 S.W.3d 786, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 84 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).

Supreme court declined to extend its continuous treatment doctrine to include situations when a patient continued to receive care at the same hospital but not by the same physician as there was no evidence that the patient was considered a patient of the medical group where all of the members participated in her treatment because the medical group treating the patient was composed of over 700 physicians with over 70 specialties; thus, that doctrine did not toll the statute of limitations for her claims against appellee doctors. Sneed v. Univ. of Louisville Hosp., 600 S.W.3d 221, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Statute of limitations was not tolled based on the concealment of the patient’s medical records as she was well aware of her cause of action prior to the running of the statute of limitations even without receiving her medical records. Sneed v. Univ. of Louisville Hosp., 600 S.W.3d 221, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 2020 ).

27.Usury.

Where a mortgagor pays his debt and accrues interest by making a conveyance of the fee-simple title of the property embraced in the mortgage to the mortgagee, and the latter surrenders the notes evidencing the debt, the mortgagor cannot maintain an action to recover usury so paid more than one (1) year after the transaction. Tygret v. Potter, 97 Ky. 54 , 29 S.W. 976, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 809 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 152 ( Ky. 1895 ).

A cause of action to recover money paid on the ground of usury did not accrue until it was paid. Anderson v. Trimble, 37 S.W. 71, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 507 (1896). See Paine v. Levy, 142 Ky. 619 , 134 S.W. 1160, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 272 ( Ky. 1911 ); Taulbee v. Hargis, 173 Ky. 433 , 191 S.W. 320, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 492 ( Ky. 1917 ).

A renewal note payable to another payee to avoid the usury laws did not stop the running of the one (1) year statute of limitations from the date of the last payment on the debt. Newdegate v. Early's Adm'r, 49 S.W. 338, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1452 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 504 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

Where the matter of usury was not contemplated by the parties at the time payee of a note told makers of a renewal note, who very well knew they had been paying usurious interest on the original note for years, that if the renewal note was not all right he would correct it, his statement did not stop the running of the statute of limitations against usury paid. Newdegate v. Early's Adm'r, 49 S.W. 338, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1452 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 504 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

Vendor’s right to recover usury on mortgage notes accrued when the purchasers took them up and executed their individual note and a new mortgage in their place and was barred after one (1) year; therefore, in an action on the new note, the purchasers could not plead usury on the old notes as a defense even with joinder of the vendor. Parker v. Zweigart, 56 S.W. 678, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 113 (1900).

The renewal of a usurious note is not payment of the usury so as to start limitations against it. Paine v. Levy, 142 Ky. 619 , 134 S.W. 1160, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 272 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The mere assignment of a usurious obligation does not pay the usury nor set statute of limitations to running, because it is the same usurious obligation, and no transaction has occurred sufficient to make a novation which could be deemed a payment of the obligation and a discharge of it. Taulbee v. Hargis, 173 Ky. 433 , 191 S.W. 320, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 492 ( Ky. 1917 ).

In an action by a bank upon a claim, defendants could as a defense seek to purge the claim of the usury which they alleged was embraced in the claim since it is well settled that a debt may be purged of usury so long as any part of the principal of the debt remains unpaid. Wren v. Peoples' Bank, 237 Ky. 398 , 35 S.W.2d 566, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 619 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Fifty-eight (58) transactions between construction contractor and broker were separate and distinct and were not a running account and contractor’s claim for usurious payments made more than one (1) year prior to suit was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations. Watts v. Chreste, 270 Ky. 407 , 109 S.W.2d 803, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 80 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The exchange of pledged collateral note with maker as payee in satisfaction of maker’s own note was a novation and not a renewal and an action to recover usurious payments made on maker’s own note prior to the exchange had to be commenced within one (1) year of the exchange. Dexter v. Beaver Dam Deposit Bank, 245 S.W.2d 599, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 598 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where employee borrowed money to buy employee stock and agreed to pay lender an annual dividend of 20 percent, a debtor-creditor relationship was established and the usurious excess paid was barred by paragraph (g) of subsection (1) of this section. Norman v. Judy, 251 S.W.2d 467, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 922 ( Ky. 1952 ).

28.Recovery of Stolen Property.

One in rightful possession of personalty cannot steal it; therefore, in an action by holder of legal title to an automobile against a vendee who purchased from one in rightful possession, action is not one concerning a theft and thereby barred in one (1) year, but rather is founded on a conversion which carries a five (5) year limitation. Eline v. Commercial Credit Corp., 307 Ky. 77 , 209 S.W.2d 846, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 695 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where the plaintiff’s bracelet was stolen and the defendant was in possession of it, the one (1) year statute of limitations under subdivision (1)(h) of this section applied. Lang v. Ft. Thomas Bellevue Bank, 717 S.W.2d 505, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1219 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.140(1)(i) and (j) did not bar an estate's suit to recover allegedly misappropriated funds from a realtor because (1) the estate sued under a conversion theory, so Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.125 applied, and (2) the statute was tolled by the decedent's disability between an adjudication of disability and the decedent's death. Watts v. Henry, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 154 (Ky. Ct. App. Nov. 13, 2015), review denied, ordered not published, 2016 Ky. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Apr. 27, 2016).

29.Recovery of Value of Stolen Property.

An action to recover the value of stolen bonds from a brokerage firm that participated in their sale was limited by the provisions of subsection (6) of KRS 413.120 which makes no provision for delayed discovery, and was not within the provisions of this section permitting suit within one (1) year of the discovery of theft when the brokerage firm was not itself the thief, was innocent of any criminal knowledge or intent, and did not have possession of the bonds at the time of suit. Amlung v. Bankers Bond Co., 411 S.W.2d 689, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 488 ( Ky. 1967 ).

30.Commencement of Action.

Where plaintiff’s attorney either deliberately withheld the actual legal issuance of summons in personal injury action or through oversight postponed the starting of the litigation until after the bell had rung out the hour barring his right of action, the trial court should have sustained the defendant’s plea of limitation and dismissed the action. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Little, 264 Ky. 579 , 95 S.W.2d 253, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 373 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Action against railroad for personal injuries sustained in February 1934, filed in August 1934, was not barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations under subdivision (1)(b) of this section, although summons was issued to county where it did not reside but where it had an agent and summons was not served until March 1935, since, under KRS 413.250 , action was commenced by filing the action and causing summons to issue. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Alexander, 277 Ky. 719 , 127 S.W.2d 395, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 573 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The one (1) year statute of limitations under this section was not a bar to an action against an express company for injuries resulting from a collision between two (2) trucks where the action was commenced within one (1) year but it was necessary to issue new summons more than six (6) weeks after expiration of one (1) year from date of injury because plaintiff’s attorney failed to execute the first summons which had been issued within one (1) year after the injury. Rucker's Adm'r v. Roadway Express, Inc., 279 Ky. 707 , 131 S.W.2d 840, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The commencement of an action was insufficient to toll the one (1) year statute of limitations where process was not served for more than six (6) months after the action was filed and more than one (1) year after the injury. Brock v. Turner Fuel Co., 296 Ky. 729 , 178 S.W.2d 427, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 624 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where summons was served on secretary of state in wrongful death action and secretary of state sent registered letter to address given in the petition which later proved to be incorrect address and notice was given to defendant after one (1) year from date of accident, facts failed to show that first summons was not issued in good faith and action was not barred by statute. Hausman's Adm'r v. Poehlman, 314 Ky. 453 , 236 S.W.2d 259, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 674 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Since under CR 3 a civil action for personal injuries is commenced by the filing of a complaint and the issuance of a summons in good faith, if the complaint is filed prior to the expiration of the period of limitations but the summons is not issued until the period of limitations has expired, the action is barred. Delong v. Delong, 335 S.W.2d 895, 1960 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1960 ).

Where complaint was filed three (3) days before the statute of limitations period would run and, upon discovering fact that the defendant was under 21, plaintiff’s counsel tried to obtain service upon him by serving his father and by having a guardian ad litem appointed, which were unnecessary actions in view of recent amendment to the law, and defendant was finally personally served eight days after the limitation period had run, action was timely commenced, as plaintiff’s counsel acted in good faith. Crowe v. Miller, 467 S.W.2d 330, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Where administrator was appointed and wrongful death commenced just before the expiration of the period of limitations, the fact that the judge did not sign the order book pages pertaining to the appointment until after the period had expired did not call for a dismissal, by summary judgment on the ground that the statute barred the action. Carter v. Southern R. Co., 502 S.W.2d 658, 1973 Ky. LEXIS 106 ( Ky. 1973 ).

Where a summons in a personal injury action was issued on the last day of the period of limitation but was held by the circuit court clerk at the express direction of plaintiff’s counsel until after the limitation period expired, the action was not timely. Whittinghill v. Smith, 562 S.W.2d 649, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 898 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

Since an issue of material fact existed as to whether a hospital fraudulently concealed information or misled plaintiffs with regard to the true circumstances surrounding the deaths of certain patients, it was improper for the circuit court to grant motion for summary judgment as the one-year statute may have been tolled by the conduct of the hospital. McCollum v. Sisters of Charity of Nazareth Health Corp., 799 S.W.2d 15, 1990 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1990 ).

All that is required is that the complaint be filed within the statute of limitations period and that a summons be issued in good faith and CR 3 does not require that actual service on the defendant be effectuated within the statute of limitations period; therefore, where plaintiff was injured on April 7, 1987 and filed his complaint on April 4, 1988, the action was deemed commenced within the one-year statute of limitations period and should not have been dismissed on this ground. Halderman v. Sanderson Forklifts Co., 818 S.W.2d 270, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 56 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

Although plaintiffs’ personal injury complaint was filed within the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1), plaintiffs failed to commence an action within the one-year statute of limitations because, under KRS 413.250 and CR 3, plaintiffs’ action did not commence until a summons was actually issued; the statute of limitations was not equitably tolled simply because plaintiffs moved to file an amended complaint within the one-year time frame. Bradford v. Bracken County, 767 F. Supp. 2d 740, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3894 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

31.—Failure to Comply.

Plaintiff’s contention that her failure to comply with the applicable statutes and Civil Rule regarding commencement of actions was induced by statements of adjusters for defendant’s insurance company did not afford a basis for estoppel to plead limitations; if in fact such agreement as plaintiff alleged did exist, KRS 413.265 provided a legitimate, binding manner to memorialize and enforce the same. Gibson v. EPI Corp., 940 S.W.2d 912, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

32.—Diversity Cases.

The filing of a petition does not commence an action within the meaning of the rules and statutes of Kentucky as it is necessary, in addition to the filing, that a summons be issued in good faith. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

Where, in New York federal court, defendants pleaded the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations to consolidated complaints for personal injuries arising out of an airplane crash occurring in Kentucky which was filed more than one (1) year after the date of the accident and one of the plaintiffs by affidavit asserted that the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations was tolled by reason of his military service, the federal court would not consider on motion matters outside the pleadings and the defense of the statute of limitations was permitted to stand, but where the records of which the court took judicial notice indicated that the complaint of another plaintiff was filed within one (1) year of the date of the accident, the defense was insufficient and stricken, since, under CR 3, a civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court. Lopez v. Resort Airlines, Inc., 18 F.R.D. 37, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4042 (D.N.Y. 1955).

Where plaintiffs, residents of Georgia, brought action in the federal district court in Georgia after 23 months of the recovery of damages resulting from injury to automobile sustained in Kentucky, against the defendants, residents of Kentucky, but the action was later transferred to the federal district court in Kentucky, Kentucky five-year statute of limitations was applied. Carson v. U-Haul Co., 307 F. Supp. 1086, 1969 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8733 (E.D. Ky. 1969 ), aff'd, 434 F.2d 916, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6095 (6th Cir. Ky. 1970 ).

31.Failure to Comply.

Employees’ defamation and false light claims against an employer were time-barred because they did not file their complaint until one month after the one-year statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(d), ran; their claims began to accrue on the last day of their employment. Bargo v. Goodwill Indus. of Ky., Inc., 969 F. Supp. 2d 819, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121679 (E.D. Ky. 2013 ), dismissed, in part sub. nom., Tuggle v. Goodwill Indus. of Ky., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45172 (E.D. Ky. Apr. 7, 2015).

33.Pleadings.

The defense of limitation could not be presented by demurrer in an action for personal injuries and it was, therefore, unnecessary for the plaintiff to anticipate the defense in his petition, for defendant might have chosen not to plead the statute, but when defendant did plead it, it was proper for the plaintiff to reply and set up matter in avoidance of the plea, showing that the statute had not run. Chesapeake & N. Ry. v. Speakman, 114 Ky. 628 , 71 S.W. 633, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1449 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1903 ).

Ordinarily the statute of limitations must be pleaded and the failure to plead constitutes waiver of the defense of limitation. Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ), limited, Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

Where the complaint shows upon its face that it is barred by limitation, the question may be reached by motion to dismiss. Tomlinson v. Siehl, 459 S.W.2d 166, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1970 ), limited, Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

Where a plaintiff amended her complaint to assert a claim of assault and battery against a named defendant, who had been identified only as a John Doe defendant in the initial complaint, the claim was time barred by KRS 413.140 ; the amended complaint did not relate back to the initial complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c) because there was no error in the defendant’s identity when the initial complaint was filed, only a lack of knowledge of his identity. Avery v. G & S Vending, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20483 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 19, 2005).

34.—Parties.

Where an insurance carrier has paid compensation benefits to an injured employee and relieved the employer of all liability therefor, the insurance carrier, for the purposes of reimbursement, may become a party to a suit against a negligent third party commenced within the period of limitation by the employee, although the addition of the party is effected after the running of the period of limitations. Roberts v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 273 S.W.2d 39, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1145 ( Ky. 1954 ).

35.—Amendment.

Where administrator under a void appointment filed libel in federal court to recover under the Kentucky wrongful death statute for his decedent’s wrongful death occurring in navigable waters, under Rule 23 of the Rules of Practice in Admiralty and Maritime Cases, it was permissible for him to amend to show a valid appointment of administrator after the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations had run. Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

Where, over a year after a demurrer to his petition was sustained, plaintiff filed an “amended, reformed, and substituted petition” which was neither a departure nor a new suit but a copy of the original petition for damages for personal injury sustained when a seat in defendant’s theater broke, with the additional allegations of the defendant’s knowledge and plaintiff’s ignorance of the defective seat, defendant’s plea of the one (1) year statute of limitations should have been stricken or put out on demurrer. Schang v. Alamo Theater Corp., 272 Ky. 744 , 115 S.W.2d 292, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 192 ( Ky. 1938 ).

An amendment of action for personal injuries is not barred by limitations if it does not introduce a new claim or different cause of action but merely restates in a different form the cause of action originally pleaded. Noe v. O'Neil, 314 Ky. 641 , 236 S.W.2d 893, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1951 ).

This section was a bar to an action against county board of education named in amended complaint for personal injuries alleged to have resulted from the gross negligence of a truck driver acting within the scope of his employment by the county board of education where the original complaint which was against named members of the county board of education failed to state a cause of action against the individual board members and the amended complaint was filed more than one (1) year following the date of the alleged injury. Gilbert v. Harlan County Board of Education, 309 S.W.2d 771, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1958 ).

In action for wrongful death by ancillary administrator, the trial court abused its discretion in permitting an amended answer to be filed six (6) months after the action was commenced raising the question of illegality of the appointment of the ancillary administrator where the executor waited deliberately until the one (1) year statute of limitations had run. Lawrence v. Marks, 355 S.W.2d 162, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 17 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Under CR 15.03, an action for wrongful death filed within the period of limitations by administrator of the estate may be continued by amendment after the expiration of limitation even though the appointment as administrator was defective. Modern Bakery, Inc. v. Brashear, 405 S.W.2d 742, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1966 ).

For the purpose of determining whether an action is barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations, an amended complaint to an action for personal injuries under provisions of CR 15.03 relates back to the date of the filing of the original complaint where the claim set out in the amended complaint arises out of the same occurrence referred to in the original complaint. Wimsatt v. Haydon Oil Co., 414 S.W.2d 908, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 375 ( Ky. 1967 ). See Modern Bakery, Inc. v. Brashear, 405 S.W.2d 742, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 269 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Where an action for personal injuries was filed against individual members of the county fiscal court one day before the statute of limitations would have run out and, by amended complaint filed after the statute of limitations had run, the plaintiff attempted to join the county as a party defendant, the original complaint against the individuals did not toll the statute of limitations against the county and the action against the county was barred. Rather v. Allen County War Memorial Hospital, 429 S.W.2d 860, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 764 ( Ky. 1968 ).

Where the plaintiffs, within one (1) year after they discovered the alleged negligence of the hospital employee in misrepresenting the presence of the physician in the emergency room, took reasonable steps to amend their complaint to add the additional defendant and allege negligence of the hospital through this employee, the amendment should have been permitted. Underhill v. Stephenson, 756 S.W.2d 459, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1988 ).

The amended complaint naming the manufacturer’s parent company as a party was timely filed where the claims set forth in the amended complaint arose from the same “transaction or occurrence” as did the claims in the original complaint. Halderman v. Sanderson Forklifts Co., 818 S.W.2d 270, 1991 Ky. App. LEXIS 56 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991).

36.—Counterclaims.

Where the plaintiff failed to reply to the defendant’s letter suggesting a compromise settlement, it did not estop him from raising the defense of the statute of limitations to the defendant’s counterclaim for personal injuries. Winkle v. Jones, 265 S.W.2d 792, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 759 ( Ky. 1954 ), overruled, Armstrong v. Logsdon, 469 S.W.2d 342, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1971 ).

37.— —Diversity Cases.

Under the federal rules defendant’s previously omitted counterclaim filed in a personal injury action after the expiration of one (1) year from the date of the injury could not be related back to the date of the original pleading and was barred by the statute of limitations. Stoner v. Terranella, 372 F.2d 89, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7612 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

38.Evidence.

The finding of jury that plaintiff, a railroad section hand, was injured on August 9, 1930, and not on August 5, 1930, the last date he handled creosoted railroad ties, and that his action for personal injuries was brought within one (1) year of accrual and was not barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations, was flagrantly against the evidence. Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. Robinette, 257 Ky. 558 , 78 S.W.2d 802, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 67 ( Ky. 1935 ).

39.Civil Rights Action.

Where plaintiff’s civil rights action was brought pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983, which does not provide for statute of limitations the federal court applied the most analogous state statute of limitations and held plaintiff was not barred by this section and was entitled to pursue her action under subsection (2) of KRS 413.120 . Garner v. Stephens, 460 F.2d 1144, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9258 (6th Cir. Ky. 1972 ), disapproved, Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 105 S. Ct. 1938, 85 L. Ed. 2d 254, 1985 U.S. LEXIS 1 (U.S. 1985).

A complaint under 42 USCS §§ 1983 and 1985 alleging that plaintiff’s neighbors and local officials had conspired to bring false charges against plaintiffs was most closely analogous to a state action for malicious prosecution, and therefore this section rather than KRS 413.120 , provided the applicable statute of limitations. Carmicle v. Weddle, 555 F.2d 554, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13295 (6th Cir. Ky. 1977 ).

Sixth circuit decisions dictate that the district court may not adopt across the board, in federal civil rights cases, the Kentucky five-year limitations period for a liability based on statute, as it would otherwise be inclined to do, rather, a more detailed analysis must be made in each case to determine if some other state cause of action is more analogous to the federal cause of action. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

The two (2) primary factors to be considered in attempting to analogize a federal civil rights claim to a state claim for the purpose of selecting an appropriate statute of limitations are the interest of plaintiff sought to be protected, and the operative facts comprising the claim. Hines v. Board of Education, 492 F. Supp. 469, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12817 (E.D. Ky. 1980 ), aff'd, 667 F.2d 564, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22764 (6th Cir. Ky. 1982 ).

Where a discharged police officer filed a civil rights action five (5) years after the Civil Service Board approved his discharge, the action was barred by this section. Fowler v. Louisville, 625 F. Supp. 181, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14293 (W.D. Ky. 1985 ), aff'd, 803 F.2d 719, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 31433 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

Where a civil rights action is brought pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983, said action is governed by the one (1) year limitation of subdivision (1)(a) of this section, and not by the five (5) year limitation period of KRS 413.120(6) as KRS 413.120(6) is not a statute for personal injury actions. Hambrick v. Davies, 711 F. Supp. 884, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10856 (E.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 886 F.2d 1315, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14982 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

A cause of action under 42 USCS § 1983 accrues when the plaintiff knows or should have reason to know of the injury so the statute of limitations began to run when the plaintiff was advised of his choice between retiring or being transferred, not when allegedly forced to retire. Salisbury v. McWhorter, 752 F. Supp. 243, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17256 (W.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd, 915 F.2d 1572, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 23613 (6th Cir. Ky. 1990 ).

Civil rights actions brought in Kentucky pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983 are limited by the one-year statute of limitations found in subdivision (1)(a) of this section. Collard v. Kentucky Bd. of Nursing, 896 F.2d 179, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 553 (6th Cir. Ky. 1990 ).

The state statute of limitations for personal injuries was applicable in a 42 USCS § 1983 action alleging discrimination against the plaintiff caused by the transfer of the plaintiff for political reasons and because of his age. Salisbury v. McWhorter, 752 F. Supp. 243, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17256 (W.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd, 915 F.2d 1572, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 23613 (6th Cir. Ky. 1990 ).

School officials’ mere adherence to a discrete decision regarding student’s academic standing in the fall of 1987, did not suffice to state a claim for a continuing violation in determining the statute of limitations for an action brought under 42 USCS § 1983 when the student was denied twelfth grade status in the fall of 1988. Vandiver v. Hardin County Bd. of Educ., 925 F.2d 927, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 2062 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ).

A one-year limitation that began to run on the effective date of the repeal of KRS 413.310 (now repealed) was fair and equitable; therefore, plaintiff’s 42 USCS § 1983 action filed more than eight months after the repeal of the tolling statute was timely. Smith v. Glasgow, 809 F. Supp. 514, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20213 (W.D. Ky. 1992 ).

Where the repeal of the tolling statute did no more than restore the original two-year limitation, 42 USCS § 1983 plaintiffs were given a reasonable time after the effective date of the repeal of KRS 413.310 (now repealed) to bring their claims. Smith v. Glasgow, 809 F. Supp. 514, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20213 (W.D. Ky. 1992 ).

Prison inmate, who filed a 42 USCS § 1983 action against prison officials, should have been given one (1) year from the effective date of the repeal of KRS 413.310 (now repealed) to file her complaint. Brown v. Wigginton, 981 F.2d 913, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32898 (6th Cir. Ky. 1992 ).

Actions under 42 USCS § 1983 are governed by the one-year statute of limitations contained in this section and accordingly, the applicable tolling provisions contained in KRS 413.180 . Ford v. Hill, 874 F. Supp. 149, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 596 (E.D. Ky. 1995 ).

Former state prisoner, whose conviction was reversed based on an unconstitutional search, timely filed an action under KRS 413.140(1)(a) against the officer who conducted the search, since the cause of action under 42 USCS § 1983 accrued when the indictment against the prisoner was dismissed on remand and the validity of state criminal proceedings were no longer implicated, rather than when the decision reversing the prisoner’s conviction became final. Wade v. Louisville Metro Police Dep't, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14822 (W.D. Ky. July 20, 2005).

In a terminated teacher’s 42 USCS§ 1983 suit, as the discriminatory act complained of was defendants’ allegedly creating fake photos and presenting them to a tribunal, KRS 413.140(1)(a)’s one-year statute of limitation began running when pictures were used at that hearing, not when his termination was upheld by a second tribunal nine years later. Dixon v. Clem, 404 F. Supp. 2d 961, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31190 (E.D. Ky. 2005 ), in part, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11790 (E.D. Ky. Mar. 21, 2006), aff'd, 2007 FED App. 0255P, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16247 (6th Cir. Ky. July 10, 2007).

Inmate’s Bivens claims against prison officials arising from a prison food service staff member’s stabbing the inmate in the chest using a meat thermometer were time-barred and had to be dismissed because he did not assert them until two-and-a-half (2-1/2) years after the staff member was convicted for the assault. Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(a) applied to civil rights claims arising in Kentucky. Clay v. United States, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68056 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 21, 2006), dismissed, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76598 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 28, 2007).

The possibility that plaintiff’s already-accrued claims for false arrest pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983 could impugn an anticipated future conviction did not trigger the rule for deferred accrual. Therefore, dismissal of the state law claims as time-barred was proper, and plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims were likewise barred by the one-year statute of limitation under KRS 413.140 and should have been dismissed as untimely. Fox v. DeSoto, 489 F.3d 227, 2007 FED App. 0206P, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12847 (6th Cir. Ky. 2007 ).

Where a second state administrative tribunal upheld a teacher’s termination eight years after the first tribunal found that the teacher had engaged in conduct unbecoming a teacher within the meaning of KRS 161.790(1)(b) by taking topless photographs of a female student, the teacher failed to comply with the applicable one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(a) when he filed an action under 42 USCS § 1983 after the second hearing and alleged that a principal and school attorney violated his due process rights by allowing “faked” photographs to be submitted against him at the original hearing; the alleged violation of due process was not an ongoing or continuing violation through the time of the second tribunal hearing. Dixon v. Clem, 2007 FED App. 0255P, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16247 (6th Cir. Ky. July 10, 2007), amended, 492 F.3d 665, 2007 FED App. 0296A, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 18614 (6th Cir. Ky. 2007 ).

Inmate’s Bivens claims and claims brought under 42 USCS § 1983 against other prisoners were barred by the one-year statute of limitations because the lawsuit was not filed until 18 months after the incident occurred. Jackson v. Walker, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67602 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 12, 2007), dismissed, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15070 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 27, 2008).

Inmate’s pro se 42 USCS § 1983 action was dismissed pursuant to 28 USCS § 1915(e)(2)(B) because the action was barred under the state one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(a) because the claims arose out of police conduct that occurred during his arrest on October 12, 2006 and the inmate did not file his complaint until over five months after the statute of limitations deadline. Elkins v. Ky. State Police, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49381 (W.D. Ky. June 23, 2008).

Former firefighter’s claims that imposition of work restrictions on his work activity violated his civil rights under 42 USCS § 1983 were barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140 because the restrictions were imposed more than one year before the firefighter filed his lawsuit and the continuing violations doctrine did not apply. Cherry v. City of Bowling Green, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67382 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 2, 2008), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 347 Fed. Appx. 214, 2009 FED App. 0672N, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22096 (6th Cir. Ky. 2009 ).

One (1) year statute of limitations applied for 42 USCS § 1983 actions under Kentucky law. Delong v. Arms, 251 F.R.D. 253, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77733 (E.D. Ky. 2008 ).

Pursuant to 42 USCS § 1988, KRS 413.140(1)(a), as a general personal injury limitations statute, applied to all 42 USCS § 1983 actions in Kentucky, and since plaintiff parolee did not challenge the findings that her action was filed three years after she was sexually abused by a parole officer, her claim against the defendant department of corrections was time barred. Bonner v. Perry, 564 F.3d 424, 2009 FED App. 0153P, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8174 (6th Cir. Ky. 2009 ).

An action under 42 USCS § 1983 by former students, who alleged school officials and employees molested them when they were students, was barred by the statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1); the students’ claims accrued in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and there was no indication that the students exercised any diligence, ordinary or otherwise, to uncover the source of their injuries prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations for their claims. Anderson v. Bd. of Educ., 616 F. Supp. 2d 662, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37476 (E.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Kentucky’s one-year of statute of limitations for personal injury actions applied to plaintiff inmate’s 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 and state law claims arising out of an incident where a prison guard allegedly forced the inmate to engage in non-consensual sexual acts with him, and then threatened her parole to prevent her from reporting his behavior. Dishman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86169 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 20, 2010).

Inmate’s Eighth Amendment excessive force claims were time-barred under KRS 413.140(1)(a), as he knew or had reason to know of all of his claims on the date they arose, but did not file his action until almost two years after the alleged events occurred. Because he did not administratively exhaust his claims under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e(a) of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, the one-year statute of limitations was not tolled; further, his transfer to another facility two days after the alleged events did not excuse his failure to exhaust his claims. Weekes v. Shuts, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11304 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 31, 2012).

Plaintiff’s illegal search claim was properly dismissed as untimely because his cause of action accrued on date of search, as plaintiff knew or should have known of his injury at that time, and he did not file his cause of action within one-year limitations period. Hornback v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County, 543 Fed. Appx. 499, 2013 FED App. 0880N, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 20720 (6th Cir. Ky. 2013 ).

Kentucky statute of limitations for personal injury claims applied to a parent's claims under 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.290 did not provide that the personal-injury statute of limitations was inapplicable to non-residents, but was designed only to effectuate Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.190 . Brown v. Univ. of Ky. Comprehensive Assessment & Training Servs., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 25049 (6th Cir. Ky. June 19, 2014).

In a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which county employees filed a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a mother's claim that she was deprived of a familial relationship with her three minor children and her related state law tort claims were time-barred under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.140(1); her injury occurred on January 16, 2013, and the case was not filed until February 21, 2014. Newton v. Dennison, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104594 (W.D. Ky. July 30, 2014).

In a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which county employees filed a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, following the logic of the Bradford decision, the Martin decision, and the T.S. decision, neither the § 1983 claim nor the state law claims asserted on behalf of the children were time- barred by the statute of limitations. Newton v. Dennison, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104594 (W.D. Ky. July 30, 2014).

Where a former employee alleged that defendants caused the employee to be prosecuted for crimes of which the employee was innocent and sought to cause the employee's termination, the employee's defamation claim was not dismissed as untimely, because the court could perceive a scenario wherein the employee might prove that the employee was defamed within the one-year limitations period; also, it was not apparent that the employee failed to seek timely relief for alleged civil rights violations. Tucker v. Heaton, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83180 (W.D. Ky. June 26, 2015).

In a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which defendants argued that the claims were time-barred, plaintiffs unsuccessfully argued that five-year statute of limitations in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.120 applied, rather than the one-year statute of limitations in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.140 . Fleet v. Commonwealth Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40165 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 25, 2016).

In a § 1983 action against the Commonwealth, the Medicaid Services agency, and its officers based on the state's beneficiary requirements for an annuity, the applicable one-year statute of limitations began to run when the deceased died and the deceased's children had reason to know of the Commonwealth's potentially unlawful claim to the annuity funds; however claims against John Doe defendants added in an amended complaint did not relate back and were time-barred. Singleton v. Kentucky, 176 F. Supp. 3d 704, U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43383 (E.D. Ky.), rev'd, 843 F.3d 238, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21694 (6th Cir. Ky. 2016 ).

Claims under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 were time-barred because (1) the claims were not filed within one year of an employee's knowledge of the claims, and (2) the employee did not show tolling for being of unsound mind was warranted, as the employee did not show the employee was of unsound mind when the claims accrued. McCord v. Bd. of Educ., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2374 (6th Cir. Ky. Jan. 30, 2018).

40.Malicious Prosecution.

In order to comply with the terms of the statute, an action for malicious prosecution must be “commenced” within one (1) year. Farris v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 415 F. Supp. 594, 1976 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15011 (W.D. Ky. 1976 ).

Where malicious prosecution and false arrest were alleged in a 42 USCS § 1983 action, the Court applied the one-year statute of limitations for personal injuries contained in subdivision (1)(c) of this section for actions “for malicious prosecution, conspiracy, false arrest, seduction, and criminal conversation or breach of promise of marriage. Alcorn v. Gordon, 762 S.W.2d 809, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 115 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

40.5.False Arrest.

Under KRS 413.140(1)(c), the statute of limitations on a false imprisonment claim stemming from an arrest, where the arrest is followed by criminal proceedings, begins to run at the time the plaintiff becomes detained pursuant to legal process. Dunn v. Felty, 226 S.W.3d 68, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 127 ( Ky. 2007 ).

The one year statute of limitations period in KRS 413.140(1)(c) began to run on an arrestee’s claim for false imprisonment when he was released from his alleged illegal restraint after his arraignment, not when the proceedings by which his arrest occurred terminated. As he filed suit over a year after his release from custody, the claim was time-barred. Dunn v. Felty, 226 S.W.3d 68, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 127 ( Ky. 2007 ).

41.Loss of Consortium.

The two (2) year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 304.39-230 (6) applies only to those tort actions within the purview of the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), and the loss of consortium is not a recoverable injury within the purview of the MVRA; accordingly, a wife’s action for loss of consortium, brought nearly 15 months after her husband was injured in an automobile accident, was barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations of subdivision (1)(a) of this section. Floyd v. Gray, 657 S.W.2d 936, 1983 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1983 ), limited, Hardin v. Action Graphics, Inc., 57 S.W.3d 844, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

Because the main plaintiffs’ bodily injury claims were time-barred, their spouses’ loss of consortium claims were also barred under KRS 413.140(1)(a) because consortium claims were derivative of the injured party’s bodily injury claims. Asher v. Unarco Material Handling, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50288 (E.D. Ky. June 20, 2008), aff'd, 596 F.3d 313, 2010 FED App. 0060P, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4403 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ).

42.Wrongful Discharge of Employee.

Where an employee of an insurance company was wrongfully discharged for reporting misconduct of insurance salesmen, the court applied the five (5) year statute of limitations under KRS 413.120(7) rather than the one-year statute of limitations provided by subsection (1) of this section, since the employee sought to recover damages for mental anguish, as well as damages for loss of past and future earnings. Brown v. Physicians Mut. Ins. Co., 679 S.W.2d 836, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 594 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984), disapproved, Grzyb v. Evans, 700 S.W.2d 399, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 279 ( Ky. 1985 ).

In action for wrongful discharge, the one (1) year statute of limitations for injury to the person contained in subdivision (1)(a) of this section was not the appropriate limitations statute; the essence of the tort alleged by the employee was an interference with a right, not a bodily injury, and the appropriate statute of limitations was subdivision (2) of KRS 413.120 . Pike v. Harold (Chubby) Baird Gate Co., 705 S.W.2d 947, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1050 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

Statute of limitations on an action by a former University of Kentucky professor seeking damages for wrongfully terminating his employment and also seeking reinstatement and award of tenure began to run on the date that the official notice of the rejection of plaintiff’s second tenure application was received, as it was on this date that the university’s decision became final; moreover, by operation of CR 15.03(1), plaintiff’s subsequently amended complaints averring violations of the United States Constitution and 42 USCS § 1983 related back to the date of his original complaint, because these claims arose out of the same conduct, transaction or occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in the original complaint. Board of Trustees v. Hayse, 782 S.W.2d 609, 1989 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1989 ), cert. denied, 497 U.S. 1025, 110 S. Ct. 3273, 111 L. Ed. 2d 783, 1990 U.S. LEXIS 3655 (U.S. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 938, 111 S. Ct. 341, 112 L. Ed. 2d 306, 1990 U.S. LEXIS 5568 (U.S. 1990), overruled in part, Yanero v. Davis, 65 S.W.3d 510, 2001 Ky. LEXIS 203 ( Ky. 2001 ).

43.Incarceration.

With regard to an action brought pursuant to 42 USCS § 1983, KRS 413.310 (now repealed) does not per se require the tolling of subdivision (1)(a) of this section during the incarceration of a prisoner. Hambrick v. Davies, 711 F. Supp. 884, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10856 (E.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 886 F.2d 1315, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14982 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

Where an inmate alleged that the Department of Corrections improperly denied a petition to enter a KRS 197.045 sex offender treatment program, the inmate alleged the sort of constitutional tort that was subject to a one-year limitations period; because the inmate’s reapplications were essentially requests to reconsider the initial decision, the trial court properly determined that KRS 418.040 et seq. applied, and that the declaratory action was untimely under KRS 413.140 . Tyler v. Taylor, 128 S.W.3d 495, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 304 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Inmate was a denied preliminary injunction requiring the Kentucky Department of Corrections to provide him with proper health care where he failed to demonstrate a strong likelihood of success on the merits because: (1) his claims arising between 2001 and 2003 were time-barred by the one-year statute of limitations of KRS 413.140(1)(a), as the complaint was not filed until November 2005; (2) the record showed that it was not that the inmate was not offered medical care so much as it was that the inmate did not prefer the kind of medical services that were offered; and (3) the inmate failed to demonstrate that he administratively exhausted any of his claims, as required by 42 USCS § 1997e(a). McDanel v. Rees, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37955 (E.D. Ky. Jan. 3, 2005).

When appellant returned to prison for a parole violation, he had no liberty interest in the receipt of meritorious good time under KRS 197.045(3). In any event, the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 barred his action for a declaration of rights alleging a violation of his constitutional rights. Hill v. Thompson, 297 S.W.3d 892, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 206 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

44.—Access to the Courts.

Denial of effective access to the federal court during one’s incarceration because of certain stated deficiencies in the prison’s law library did not require that subdivision (1)(a) of this section be tolled, where prisoner declined transfer to another facility which admittedly had the sought-after legal references available. Hambrick v. Davies, 711 F. Supp. 884, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10856 (E.D. Ky. 1989 ), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 886 F.2d 1315, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 14982 (6th Cir. Ky. 1989 ).

45.—Mail Box Rule.

Where plaintiff, a state prisoner acting pro se, placed a letter containing his complaint in the prison mail system one (1) day prior to the deadline imposed on the plaintiff’s lawsuit by one-year statute of limitations and where complaint was not received by the clerk of the court until one (1) day after deadline, the “mail box rule” was extended to prisoner and his complaint was deemed to have been received prior to the expiration of period of limitations. Higgenbottom v. McManus, 840 F. Supp. 454, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 275 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ).

Prisoner’s claim was timely filed under the one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140(1) and was, therefore, not subject to dismissal for untimeliness under 28 USCS § 1915(e)(2); although the court’s date stamp fell outside of the one-year limit, under the “prison mailbox rule,” the date of filing was presumed to have been on the day that the prisoner signed the complaint, which was the last day of the limitations period. Brand v. Motley, 526 F.3d 921, 2008 FED App. 0196P, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 11082 (6th Cir. Ky. 2008 ).

46.Alienation of Affection.

A filing for alienation of affection was not timely where wife did not file until one (1) year and three (3) months after she learned that her husband had renewed an affair which she had discovered four (4) months earlier. Loomer v. Rittinger, 789 S.W.2d 16, 1990 Ky. App. LEXIS 75 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

47.Breach of Promise of Marriage.

The cause of action for breach of promise to marry has become an anachronism that has out-lived its usefulness and would be removed from the common law. Gilbert v. Barkes, 987 S.W.2d 772, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1999 ).

48.Identifying Person Causing Injury.

The statute of limitations provided in this section is not tolled indefinitely while a plaintiff seeks the identity of the person causing his injury. Simmons v. South Cent. Skyworker's, Inc., 936 F.2d 268, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 12894 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ).

49.Rehabilitation Act Claim.

The limitations period for the plaintiff’s Rehabilitation Act claim was the one (1) year period prescribed by subsection (1)(a) of this section for actions based on injury to the person. Hall v. Knott County Bd. of Educ., 941 F.2d 402, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 15773 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1077, 112 S. Ct. 982, 117 L. Ed. 2d 144, 1992 U.S. LEXIS 693 (U.S. 1992).

This section establishes the limitations period for claims filed under § 504 of the Federal Rehabilitative Act. Southerland v. Hardaway Mgmt. Co., 41 F.3d 250, 1994 FED App. 0395P, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 33425 (6th Cir. Ky. 1994 ).

50.Discovery Rule.

In the absence of a controlling Kentucky statute, no Kentucky court or any federal court construing Kentucky law has held that the “discovery rule” applies to property damage actions. G & K Dairy v. Princeton Electric Plant Bd., 781 F. Supp. 485, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20439 (W.D. Ky. 1991 ).

Under the discovery rule, a cause of action will not accrue until the plaintiff discovers, or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered, not only that he has been injured but also that his injury may have been caused by the defendant’s conduct. Hazel v. General Motors Corp., 863 F. Supp. 435, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14185 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ), aff'd, in part, 83 F.3d 422, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 26040 (6th Cir. Ky. 1996 ).

In action against diocese for negligent hiring, supervision and retention of teacher who sexually abused students, cause of action accrued and statute of limitations began to run at time plaintiff discovered or should have discovered that the diocese was responsible for his injuries. Roman Catholic Diocese v. Secter, 966 S.W.2d 286, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Opt-out form that came with class action notification, stating that applicable statutes of limitation would resume six (6) months after form was received in claims office, did not operate to save a breast-implant claim, where the statute had long run; in rejecting the patient’s delayed discovery argument, the appellate court found that the patient was fully aware that the harm she experienced was attributable to the implants, as evidenced by her decision to have them removed a number of years earlier. Michals v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 289 F.3d 402, FED App. 0158P, U.S. App. LEXIS 8646 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 944, 123 S. Ct. 346, 154 L. Ed. 2d 252, 2002 U.S. LEXIS 7390 (U.S. 2002).

In a products liability case, where plaintiff individual sued defendant drug company for personal injury (a stroke) purportedly from the individual’s ingestion of Parlodel (a drug manufactured by the company), a prescription medication used for the prevention of lactation, the action was barred by Kentucky’s one (1) year statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(a); at the time of the individual’s stroke, the individual knew or should have known enough facts to trigger the duty to engage in further inquiry so as to discover that Parlodel possibly caused the stroke because, inter alia, the information regarding the possibility of stroke while taking the drug was publicly known at the time of the individual’s injury. Johnson v. Sandoz Pharms. Corp., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22510 (W.D. Ky. June 23, 2000), rev'd, 24 Fed. Appx. 533, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 27597 (6th Cir. Ky. 2001 ).

Summary judgment was granted in favor of the owner and operator of a plane that crashed into a residence because the action was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 ; the doctrine of discovery did not apply to such cases, and, at any rate, the injured party was aware of her injuries and damages on the date of the accident. Osborne v. Quesenberry, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27018 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 8, 2005).

An action against a restaurant alleging that the plaintiff contracted hepatitis A after eating at the restaurant was time barred because, after the plaintiff became ill, he simply did not attempt to determine where he contracted hepatitis A, and therefore was not entitled to invoke the discovery rule; the plaintiff testified that although he understood the health department contacted him to try to determine where he contracted the illness, he did not follow up with the health department. GMRI, Inc. v. Emberton, — S.W.3d —, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007), rev’d, v. GMRI, Inc., 299 S.W.3d 565, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 2009 ).

Since, until decedent’s death and subsequent tissue analysis, the spouse was unaware of the presence of talc in decedent’s tissue, and prior to that time and despite inquiries, the manufacturer’s denial that its talc was asbestos caused its identity as a defendant to be unknown, the jury properly found that the complaint was timely as there was evidence that the manufacturer misrepresented that its product contained asbestos and such knowledge was within its exclusive knowledge. R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v. Franklin, 290 S.W.3d 654, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 16 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

Summary judgment was prematurely granted because outstanding issues, regarding (1) whether plaintiffs should have known or investigated the possibility that an improperly installed furnace was the reason for their health problems and (2) when the plaintiffs were put on notice of a cause of action, were questions of fact that should generally have been answered by a jury. Salsman v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 59 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 12, 2010).

In light of the differences in testimony between plaintiff patient, his wife, and his son, the absence of the testimony of a doctor who conversed with plaintiff about defendant doctor’s placement of cardiac stents, and the various inferences that a factfinder could have made as to plaintiff’s knowledge and state of mind, there was a factual dispute as to whether plaintiff knew or should have known for purposes of KRS 413.140(2) that he had a medical malpractice claim after the conversation with the other doctor, and the issue, therefore, needed to be referred to a jury. Elam v. Dhananjai Menzies, 594 F.3d 463, 2010 FED App. 0019P, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 2350 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ).

Discovery rule did not apply to toll the one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1)(1) because plaintiff employees’ alleged injuries from exposure to carbon monoxide gas were not latent. Plaintiffs’ argument that they erroneously attributed their symptoms to influenza was unavailing because their injuries manifested immediately and were not inherently unknowable, and plaintiffs cited no authority that a mistaken belief about the cause of a non-latent injury triggered the discovery rule under Kentucky law. Asher v. Unarco Material Handling, Inc., 596 F.3d 313, 2010 FED App. 0060P, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4403 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ).

Summary judgment was properly denied based on the statute of limitation where one plaintiff's knowledge of other patients' complaints regarding a physician did not concern the hospital's role in causing her injuries, and knowledge her attorney learned independent of representing plaintiff did not impute to plaintiff. Spalding v. Spring View Hosp., LLC, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 35 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 742 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2016).

Trial court properly granted a real estate appraiser summary judgment on the ground that a bank's claims were barred by the statute of limitations because the bank filed its action outside the period provided by the parties' tolling agreement; the bank knew well before the date of a detailed inquiry about problems with the original appraisal that the appraiser's appraisal was seriously defective, and thus, it was put on notice of the appraiser's role as a potential wrongdoer. Victory Cmty. Bank v. Socol, 524 S.W.3d 24, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

51.Vehicle Use.

Ordinarily, a suit for negligent injury must be brought within one (1) year after the cause of action accrues under KRS 413.140(1)(a), but KRS 304.39-060 (6) extended the statute of limitations to two (2) years for actions with respect to accidents occurring in Kentucky and arising from the ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle, when not abolished by the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act. Fields v. Bellsouth Telcoms., Inc., 91 S.W.3d 571, 2002 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 2002 ).

Where a tractor-trailer driver was injured by materials that fell off of his truck after he had finished unloading materials for delivery—having completed all tasks necessary for the unloading process—but while he was preparing his vehicle to return to the roadway, the driver’s actions, while in proximity to his tractor-trailer in preparing it for continued use as a transport vehicle, were encompassed within the term “use” of his vehicle under KRS 304.39-020 (6) and 304.39-060 . As such, the driver as engaged in an activity covered by the Motor Vehicle Reparations Act, KRS ch. 304.39, and his personal injury claim was subject to the two-year statute of limitations under KRS 304.39-230 and not the one-year statute of limitations under KRS 413.140(1), and the trial court erred in granting summary judgment adverse to the driver by concluding that his claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Rawlings v. Interlock Indus., Inc., 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 60 (Ky. Ct. App. Mar. 19, 2010), rev'd, 358 S.W.3d 925, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 164 ( Ky. 2011 ).

Wrongful death statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1), barred an estate’s claim against a trailer manufacturer; the longer statute in the Motor Vehicle and Reparations Act, KRS 304.39-230 (6), did not apply because decedent’s death from a drug overdose three years after the accident was not an injury arising out of the use of a motor vehicle. Richardson v. Rose Transp., Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166102 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2013).

51.5.—Unloading.

Because a driver’s activity in releasing the straps and rolling them while a forklift operator unloaded a truck qualified the driver as a participant in the unloading process, the one-year personal injury statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(a) applied; therefore, the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the companies in the driver’s personal injury action. Interlock Indus. v. Rawlings, 358 S.W.3d 925, 2011 Ky. LEXIS 164 ( Ky. 2011 ).

52.Americans With Disabilities Act Claim.

Appropriate statute of limitations for a claim under 42 U.S.C.S. § 12132 of the Americans with Disabilities Act which is filed in Kentucky is that state’s one-year statute of limitations for a personal injury action. Shackleford v. Gutermuth, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27954 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 10, 2005).

53.Vicarious Liability of Franchisor.

The franchisor is vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of the franchisee when it, in fact, has control or right of control over the daily operation of the specific aspect of the franchisee’s business that is alleged to have caused the harm. Since the franchisor had no control over the franchisee delivery driver’s intentional, tortious conduct in this case, the franchisor cannot be held vicariously liable. Papa John's Int'l, Inc. v. McCoy, 244 S.W.3d 44, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 16 ( Ky. 2008 ).

54.Abuse of Process.

Statute of limitations on an abuse of process claim is one year, and the cause of action for an abuse of process claim accrues at the time the conduct complained of by the plaintiff occurred, not at the termination of the underlying litigation. Demoisey v. Ostermiller, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 71 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 876 (Ky. Ct. App. May 6, 2016).

Attorney complained that the lawyer’s alleged abuse of process occurred either when a malpractice action was filed in 2007 or when the lawyer procured a baseless attorney opinion in 2008 that the attorney had breached the standard of care; as the attorney did not file this action until 2012, his complaint was time-barred by the one-year statute of limitations. Demoisey v. Ostermiller, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 71 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 876 (Ky. Ct. App. May 6, 2016).

While the attorney might have continued to suffer some damage as a result of the lawsuit and/or legal opinion, the underlying tort was comprised of a single act, and thus the attorney’s abuse of process claim did not meet the definition of a continuing tort for statute of limitation purposes. Demoisey v. Ostermiller, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 71 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 876 (Ky. Ct. App. May 6, 2016).

Property owner’s claim for abuse of process was barred by the one-year statute of limitations because the statute of limitations began to run when the third-party complaint was filed by the attorneys, and the abuse of process claim was not filed until well outside the one-year statute of limitations. RLB Props., Ltd. v. Seiller Waterman, LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 179 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018), rev'd, in part, aff'd, 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Cause of action for an abuse of process claim accrues at the time the conduct complained of by the plaintiff occurred, not at the termination of the underlying litigation; the circuit court properly concluded that the company brought its abuse of process claim past the one-year limitations period, as the claim began to accrue in October 2014, the company did not file its original complaint until November 2016, and it did not amend its complaint to add the abuse of process claim until February 2017. Bardstown Capital Corp. v. Seiller Waterman, LLC, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 72 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2020 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 823 (Ky. Ct. App. June 12, 2020).

55.Negligence.

Employment relationship existed between the client and the law firm and the law firm missed the one-year statute of limitations in the client's negligence action; consequently, to prevail in the client's legal malpractice action, the client had to show that she would have succeeded in the underlying negligence claim, and as fact issues remained in this regard, summary judgment was improper. Kendall v. Godbey, 537 S.W.3d 326, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 788 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Cited in:

Shircliff v. Elliott, 384 F.2d 947, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4586 (6th Cir. 1967); Karagiannis v. Shaffer, 96 F. Supp. 211, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2416 (D.C. Pa. 1951); Wilt v. Smack, 147 F. Supp. 700, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4270 (D. Pa. 1957); Thompson v. North Carolina Theatres, Inc., 176 F. Supp. 73, 1959 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2761 (D.N.C. 1959); Walsh v. American Airlines, Inc., 264 F. Supp. 514, 1967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7289 (E.D. Ky. 1967 ); Employer’s Liab. Corp. v. Webb, 283 Ky. 115 , 140 S.W.2d 825, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 294 (1940); Coburn v. North American Refractories Co., 295 Ky. 566 , 174 S.W.2d 757, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1943 ); Johnson v. Holbrook, 302 S.W.2d 608, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 1957 ); Blankenship v. Majestic Collieries Co., 399 S.W.2d 699, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 474 ( Ky. 1966 ); Gross v. McDonald, 354 F. Supp. 378, 1973 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14901 (E.D. Pa. 1973); Harrison v. Piedmont Aviation, Inc., 432 F. Supp. 980, 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15658 (S.D. W. Va. 1977); Coy v. Hardin, 556 S.W.2d 447, 1977 Ky. LEXIS 521 ( Ky. 1977 ); Jackson v. General Refractories Co., 581 S.W.2d 10, 1979 Ky. LEXIS 254 ( Ky. 1979 ); Daugherty v. Runner, 581 S.W.2d 12, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 676 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978); In re Beverly Hills Fire Litigation, 695 F.2d 207, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17268 (6th Cir. 1982); Burden v. Evansville Materials, Inc., 550 F. Supp. 41, 1982 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9864 (W.D. Ky. 1982 ); Williams v. Fulmer, 695 S.W.2d 411, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 232 ( Ky. 1985 ); Goodin v. Overnight Transp. Co., 701 S.W.2d 131, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 295 ( Ky. 1985 ); Tabler v. Wallace, 704 S.W.2d 179, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 291 (Ky. 1985); Imes v. Touma, 784 F.2d 756, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22582 (6th Cir. 1986); Frisby v. Board of Education, 707 S.W.2d 359, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1097 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986); Moore v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 710 S.W.2d 225, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 268 ( Ky. 1986 ); Plaza Bottle Shop, Inc. v. Al Torstrick Ins. Agency, Inc., 712 S.W.2d 349, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1065 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986); Ashby v. Money, 717 S.W.2d 223, 1986 Ky. LEXIS 295 ( Ky. 1986 ); McMaster v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 824 F.2d 518, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 10020 (6th Cir. 1987); Massie v. Persson, 729 S.W.2d 448, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 444 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ), overruled in part, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ); Howard v. Hicks, 737 S.W.2d 711, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 582 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987); Kentucky Com. on Human Rights v. Owensboro, 750 S.W.2d 422, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 12 ( Ky. 1988 ); Holbert v. West, 730 F. Supp. 50, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1362 (E.D. Ky. 1990 ); Bell v. Cooper, 881 F.2d 257, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 10871 (6th Cir. 1989); Dennis v. Fiscal Court of Bullitt County, 784 S.W.2d 608, 1990 Ky. App. LEXIS 23 (Ky. Ct. App. 1990); Whittington v. Milby, 928 F.2d 188, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 4126 (6th Cir. 1991); Rigazio v. Archdiocese of Louisville, 853 S.W.2d 295, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 63 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993); Naegler v. Nissan Motor Co., 835 F. Supp. 1152, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15800 (W.D. Mo. 1993); Lynch v. McFarland, 893 F. Supp. 707, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11091 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ); Lynch v. McFarland, 893 F. Supp. 707, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11091 (W.D. Ky. 1995 ); Montgomery v. Milam, 910 S.W.2d 237, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 133 (Ky. 1995); Day v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 23737 (6th Cir. 1998); McLain v. Dana Corp., 16 S.W.3d 320, 1999 Ky. App. LEXIS 133 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999); Lewis v. Fayette County Detention Ctr., — F.3d —, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 8810 (6th Cir. 2000); Shepherd v. Wellman, 313 F.3d 963, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26449 (6th Cir. 2002); Ball v. Stalnaker, 517 F. Supp. 2d 946, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74800 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ); Long v. Regency Rehab & Nursing Ctr., — F. Supp. 2d —, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37984 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ); Steadman v. Gentry, 314 S.W.3d 760, 2010 Ky. App. LEXIS 101 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010); Demoisey v. Ostermiller, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 174 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018); Webster v. Pfeiffer Eng'g Co., 568 S.W.3d 371, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 296 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Injuries to Person.
2.—Diversity Cases.

Unpublished decision: Where plaintiff did not file a products liability action in federal court until almost five years after plaintiff was injured, the district court properly dismissed the complaint as barred by the one year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(a). Thornton v. Miles, 65 Fed. Appx. 997, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11843 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

3.Slander.

Unpublished decision: Slander claims were properly dismissed as time-barred under the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140(1)(d) as it began to run when the statements that were in issue were made, not when they were discovered, and it was not tolled pending a final determination of damages. Bielefeld v. Haines, 192 Fed. Appx. 516, 2006 FED App. 0610N, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21442 (6th Cir. Ky. 2006 ).

4.Malpractice.

Unpublished decision: District court erred in granting a physician summary judgment on the basis that plaintiff’s medical-negligence claim was time-barred; under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations did not begin to run when plaintiff’s decedent learned that his cancer had returned, but when he learned the negligent cause of its return. Runkle v. Fleming, 558 Fed. Appx. 628, 2014 FED App. 0199N, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 5005 (6th Cir. Ky. 2014 ).

5.Pleadings.
6.—Amendment.

Unpublished decision: In a customer’s negligence and product liability suit against a pharmacy, he did not preserve his argument as to his motion to amend to add new defendants, and in any event those claims were barred by the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 . Flint v. Target Corp., 362 Fed. Appx. 446, FED App. 0037N, U.S. App. LEXIS 1409 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 889, 131 S. Ct. 227, 178 L. Ed. 2d 135, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7051 (U.S. 2010).

Unpublished decision: Where an inmate amended his complaint to add individual capacity claims against prison guards, but failed to serve them within 120 days after filing his original claim, so as to take advantage of the relation back provision of Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(c) for purposes of KRS 413.140(1)(a), the inmate had good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) for failing to serve defendants within 120 days of filing his complaint because the district court did not finish screening the inmate’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e) and § 1915A(b) until well after the 120-day period, and summonses could not be issued until after screening; because defendants received notice of the suit within the period provided by Rule 4(m), the inmate satisfied Rule 15(c)(1)(C)’s notice requirement. Jackson v. Herrington, 393 Fed. Appx. 348, 2010 FED App. 0573N, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 18347 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ), cert. denied, 562 U.S. 1225, 131 S. Ct. 1479, 179 L. Ed. 2d 316, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 1312 (U.S. 2011).

Unpublished decision: In a tort action arising from a collision between a tractor trailer and a car driven by decedent, plaintiff's loss-of-consortium claim accrued on the day of her husband's accident and was barred by the one-year statute of limitations. She waited nearly three years before she sued two defendants and four years before she sued the third defendant. Richardson v. Rose Transp., Inc., 617 Fed. Appx. 480, 2015 FED App. 0484N, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11756 (6th Cir. Ky. 2015 ).

7.Civil Rights Action.

Unpublished decision: Parole officer, records clerk, and head records clerk were properly awarded summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) on a state prisoner’s claims of false imprisonment under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and various state law tort claims brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 because the prisoner’s action was time-barred by the one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(a) where the prisoner’s claims accrued, at the latest, when he filed his state petition for habeas relief challenging the amount of jail time credit given to him and the prisoner did not file his 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 until more than a year after filing the state habeas petition. Marsh v. Rich, 90 Fed. Appx. 889, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1812 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 )2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1812 (6th Cir. 2004).

Unpublished decision: For all 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 actions, federal courts apply the state personal injury statute of limitations. The appropriate statute of limitations for personal injury actions arising in Kentucky is one year from the date the cause of action accrues. KRS 413.140(1)(a); the limitations period begins to run when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action. Marsh v. Rich, 90 Fed. Appx. 889, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 1812 (6th Cir. Ky. 2004 ).

Unpublished decision: Developers’ claim under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 was barred by the one-year statute of limitations set forth in KRS 413.140 . Grand Cmtys., Ltd. v. Stepner, 170 S.W.3d 411, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 300 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

8.Malicious Prosecution.

Unpublished decision: Because Kentucky law made a civil-forfeiture action a separate, civil proceeding, a forfeiture action brought against an arrestee’s property was not part of the criminal proceedings against him. Consequently, his malicious-prosecution claim was properly dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(c) because his malicious-prosecution claim accrued on June 30, 2006, when the criminal proceedings against him were dismissed, not on March 5, 2007, when an ancillary civil-forfeiture action brought by the state to forfeit his property was dismissed. Jones v. Whittaker, 316 Fed. Appx. 463, 2009 FED App. 0198N, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 5239 (6th Cir. Ky. 2009 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

A proposed amendment to this section making the statute of limitations and discovery period for medical malpractice case applicable to minors, with the statute commencing to run no later than a minor’s seventh birthday, would be unconstitutional in contravention of Ky. Const., §§ 14, 54 and 241. OAG 75-633 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action for restitution of stolen property, KRS 431.200 .

“Cattle,” definition of, KRS 446.010 .

Claim against state agency for personal injury or property damage must be filed within one (1) year, KRS 44.110 .

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Scott, Title VII Discrimination Cases — Are They Taxable?, Vol. 56, No. 4, Fall 1992 Ky. Bench & B. 19.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Hawkins, Medical Malpractice Statute of Limitations — Adoption of the Discovery Rule, 59 Ky. L.J. 990 (1971).

Cooper, Uninsured Motorist Coverage — Charting the Kentucky Course, 62 Ky. L.J. 467 (1973-74).

Note, Kentucky No-Fault: An Analysis and Interpretation, 65 Ky. L.J. 466 (1976-77).

Comments, Informed Consent in Kentucky After the Medical Malpractice Insurance and Claims Act of 1976, 65 Ky. L.J. 524 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Kentucky Law Survey, Connelly, Torts, 68 Ky. L.J. 709 (1979-1980).

Kentucky Law Survey, Underwood, Insurance, 70 Ky. L.J. 255 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Mobley, Torts, 70 Ky. L.J. 527 (1981-82).

Johnston, Attorney Accountability in Kentucky — Liability to Client and Third Parties, 70 Ky. L.J. 747 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Grise, Torts, 71 Ky. L.J. 307 (1982-83).

Kentucky Law Survey, Vinson, Torts, 72 Ky. L.J. 457 (1983-84).

Kentucky Law Survey, Clay, Insurance, 73 Ky. L.J. 423 (1984-85).

Comments, Design for Challenge: The Kentucky Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property, 73 Ky. L.J. 1143 (1984-85).

Lewis, Jural Rights under Kentucky’s Constitution: Realities Grounded in Myth, 80 Ky. L.J. 953 (1992).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Notes, Attorneys — Malpractice — Driving Lawyers from the Citadel: Attorney's Liability to Third Parties for Malpractice After Hill v. Willmott, 6 N. Ky. L. Rev. 229 (1979).

Notes, Attorney and Client — Legal Malpractice — Collateral Claims — Attorney Not Responsible to Discover and Prosecute All Possible Collateral Claims of Client, 6 N. Ky. L. Rev. 415 (1979).

Notes, Torts — Products Liability — Should Contract or Tort Provide the Cause of Action When a Plaintiff Seeks Recovery Only for Damage to the Defective Product Itself — C & S Fuel, Inc. v. Clark Equip. Co.,10 N. Ky. L. Rev. 489 (1983).

Miller, The Kentucky Law of Products LiabilityIn A Nutshell, 12 N. Ky. L. Rev. 201 (1985).

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 605 (1993).

Busald and Tankersley, Survey of Kentucky Tort Law: 1991-92, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 687 (1993).

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

Calvert, Probate Law, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 367 (1994).

Jackson and Crase, A Survey of Kentucky Workers’ Compensation Law, 30 N. Ky. L. Rev. 31 (2003).

Kentucky Survey Issue: Article: “Murky?” 1 Maybe! A Survey of Cases Interpreting Kentucky’s Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations, 38 N. Ky. L. Rev. 333 (2011).

Treatises

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Assault and Battery, § 120.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Malicious Prosecution and Wrongful Use of Civil Proceedings, § 123.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Pleading Defense of Advice of Counsel and Other Defenses, Form 123.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Libel and Slander, § 129.09..

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Some Other Defenses, Form 129.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Hourly Fee Agreement, Form 1.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Invasion of Privacy Torts, § 128.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Medical Malpractice, § 136.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer to Malpractice Complaint Asserting Various Defenses, Form 136.10.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Products Liability, § 137.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses, Form 137.15.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Complaint for Attack by Animal, Form 140.04.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Wrongful Death Claim Based upon Dangerous Condition, Form 141.09.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Usury, § 197.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Seduction, § 262.00.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Railroads, § 335.00.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Actions, § 17.8; 1991 Supp., § 17.13.

Petrilli, Kentucky Family Law, Forms, Marriage, Form 1.4.

Collateral References.

ALR

What constitutes “publication” of libel in order to start running of period of limitations. 42 A.L.R.3d 807.

413.150. Actions by the Commonwealth.

The limitations prescribed in this chapter shall apply to actions brought by or in the name of the Commonwealth the same as to actions by private persons, except where a different time is prescribed by statute.

History. 2523.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

Limitations may be pleaded in an action brought by the Commonwealth. Central State Hospital v. Foley, 171 Ky. 616 , 188 S.W. 752, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 406 ( Ky. 1916 ). See Ritcher v. Commonwealth, 180 Ky. 4 , 201 S.W. 456, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1918 ); Tincher v. Commonwealth, 208 Ky. 661 , 271 S.W. 1066, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1925 ).

County in action by state may plead and rely on statute of limitations. Tincher v. Commonwealth, 208 Ky. 661 , 271 S.W. 1066, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1925 ).

2.Application.

Statutes of limitation apply to the Commonwealth as they do to individuals. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Smith, 125 Ky. 336 , 101 S.W. 317, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The five (5) year statute of limitations applies to assessments of property when the property has been omitted from assessment for any year but it does not apply to the political act of levying a tax. Commonwealth Use Keown v. Chesapeake, O. & S. R. Co., 141 Ky. 633 , 133 S.W. 559, Ky. LEXIS 56 (Ky.), modified, Commonwealth use of Ohio County, v. Chesapeake, O. & S. W. R. Co., 143 Ky. 472 , 136 S.W. 895, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 434 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Filing of a collection suit in a court of law by the Cabinet of Health and Human Services against a long-term care facility operator to recoup alleged Medicaid overpayments for the cost year 1996 would have been an “action” contemplated by KRS 413.150 , but the operator’s payment of the disputed sum to the Cabinet within the five-year period made such an action unnecessary. Commonwealth v. EPI Corp., 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 114 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2006), aff'd, 2008 Ky. Unpub. LEXIS 33 (Ky. Dec. 18, 2008).

3.Running of Limitations.

The Commonwealth was not suable until it adopted the resolution consenting to be sued and the statute of limitations ran from that time so that action against Commonwealth on accounts for supplies was not barred. Commonwealth v. Haly, 106 Ky. 716 , 51 S.W. 430, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 666 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 93 ( Ky. 1899 ), limited, Carr v. Jefferson County, 275 Ky. 685 , 122 S.W.2d 482, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 475 ( Ky. 1938 ), limited, Wright's Adm'r v. Carroll County, 275 Ky. 690 , 122 S.W.2d 485, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 476 ( Ky. 1938 ).

4.Claims Against County.

State institution’s claims against counties were barred by limitations. Tincher v. Commonwealth, 208 Ky. 661 , 271 S.W. 1066, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 362 ( Ky. 1925 ).

5.Adverse Possession.

Since the time when this section was enacted, limitation may run against the Commonwealth and it is possible for the statute to have tolled the title of the state before patent was issued. Richie v. Owsley, 137 Ky. 63 , 121 S.W. 1015, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 476 ( Ky. 1 909 ), modified, 143 Ky. 1 , 135 S.W. 439, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1911 ).

The statute of limitations runs against the Commonwealth for adverse possession and, if adverse possessor took possession of land and it continued for 15 years before the Commonwealth issued a patent, it would defeat the patent title. Whitley County Land Co. v. Powers's Heirs, 146 Ky. 801 , 144 S.W. 2, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1912 ).

6.City License Fees.

Under this section, the five (5) year statute of limitations prescribed by KRS 413.120 is applicable to an action by a city to recover license fees for the use of the streets by a telegraph company. Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. Newport, 160 Ky. 244 , 169 S.W. 700, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 430 ( Ky. 1914 ), rev’d, 247 U.S. 464, 38 S. Ct. 566, 62 L. Ed. 1215, 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1868 (1918), judgment reversed Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. Newport, 247 U.S. 464, 38 S. Ct. 566, 62 L. Ed. 1215, 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1868 (1918), insofar as city implied a contract. (See subsection (1) of KRS 134.380 .).

Cited:

Meade v. Sturgill, 467 S.W.2d 363, 1971 Ky. LEXIS 376 ( Ky. 1971 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Inheritance taxes, limitation on action to collect, KRS 140.160 .

Prosecutions for felony, time limitations, KRS 500.050 .

413.160. Actions upon written contract or not provided for by statute — Ten-year limitation.

An action upon a written contract executed after July 15, 2014, unless otherwise provided by statute, and an action for relief not provided for by statute can only be commenced within ten (10) years after the cause of action accrued.

History. 2522: amend. 2014, ch. 142, § 1, effective July 15, 2014.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The statute of limitations is one of repose and enacted for the purpose of fixing some definite time when every action shall be either brought or barred. Wren's Ex'r v. Wren's Ex'x, 126 Ky. 704 , 104 S.W. 737, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1096 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 90 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The purpose of statute of limitations is to bar actions, rather than to suppress defenses, and is intended to close the door of the courts to the bringing of suits on stale claims whether asserted by plaintiffs in regular causes of action or by defendants in counterclaims. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

2.Application.

In Kentucky the statutes of limitation apply to all actions, whether they are based on equitable or legal rights. Wren's Ex'r v. Wren's Ex'x, 126 Ky. 704 , 104 S.W. 737, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1096 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 90 ( Ky. 1907 ).

The general rule is that statutes of limitation are not applicable to defenses. Liter v. Hoagland, 305 Ky. 329 , 204 S.W.2d 219, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 809 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Statutes of limitation apply only to rights of action. Potter-Matlock Trust Co. v. Myers, 239 S.W.2d 949, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 1107 ( Ky. 1950 ).

This section does not apply to an action by state highway department to recover the cost of repairs of a bridge damaged by a truck on the theory that subsection (4) of KRS 413.120 applies only to a technical trespass and not to damages to real property resulting from negligence. Commonwealth, Dep't of Highways v. Ratliff, 392 S.W.2d 913, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where damages were sought for disruption of business resulting in the loss of contracts for the mining and sale of coal, the five-year limitation of subsection (7) (now (6)) of KRS 413.120 was applicable and not this section, as the action sounded in tort and could not be characterized as a contract action merely because the damages were related to contract. Norton Coal Corp. v. Austin, 508 S.W.2d 584, 1974 Ky. LEXIS 621 ( Ky. 1974 ).

Although the testator’s will was lodged in the county clerk’s office in October, 1972, and the action to quiet title was commenced in May, 1983, this section was not applicable where the beneficiary of the will was incompetent, and the action was brought one month after the testator’s wife, who had a life estate, died and the bequest took effect. Hall v. Arnett, 709 S.W.2d 850, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1126 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

3.Bonds.

An action to enforce a title bond is not an action for relief not provided for in the statute to which the ten (10) year statute of limitations under this section would apply but an action on a written obligation for performance of an undertaking signed by the parties to which the 15 year statute of limitations under KRS 413.090 applies. Eversole v. Huff, 205 Ky. 314 , 265 S.W. 797, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1924 ).

Known bondholders could not plead the statute of limitations against unknown bondholders so as to claim their liquidation dividends in an action for a declaration of rights concerning money in the hands of trustee for the bondholders. Potter-Matlock Trust Co. v. Myers, 239 S.W.2d 949, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 1107 ( Ky. 1950 ).

4.Judgments.

An action to attack a void judgment is not barred by any period of limitation, since a void judgment is a nullity. Miller v. Hill, 293 Ky. 242 , 168 S.W.2d 769, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 600 ( Ky. 1943 ).

5.Running of Limitation.

This section does not begin to run against the right to recover land conveyed in consideration of marriage under KRS 403.065 (now repealed) until the judgment of divorce is entered. Anheier v. De Long, 164 Ky. 694 , 176 S.W. 195, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 448 ( Ky. 1915 ).

Statutes of limitation did not run against remainderman’s right to prevent waste by life tenants who were also cotenants until such waste was committed or threatened. Salyer's Guardian v. Keeton, 214 Ky. 643 , 283 S.W. 1015, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 397 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Plaintiff’s claim for inheritance against his putative father’s estate was not barred by five (5) years or ten (10) years statute of limitations after he reached the age of majority, because at those times his putative father was still living, he was an adult and could not bring action for support, and illegitimate children were absolutely prohibited from inheriting from putative fathers. Ellis v. Ellis, 752 S.W.2d 781, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 47 ( Ky. 1988 ).

6.Pleading.

The statute of limitations cannot avail on demurrer but must be pleaded, thus allowing the plaintiff to plead any matter that he can to avoid the effect of it. Hackett v. State Bank & Trust Co., 155 Ky. 392 , 159 S.W. 952, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 265 ( Ky. 1913 ).

7.Acknowledgement of Preexisting Debt.

An acknowledgment of preexisting debt barred by limitations may support a new promise to pay it, but it must be made to the debtor or someone acting in his behalf. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Where, in order to withdraw from the hands of trustee certain funds, a petitioner made a statement to the court that, among certain other obligations, he owed a certain debt, the statement was not such an acknowledgment of the debt to remove the bar of limitations. Mellema's Adm'r v. Whipple, 312 Ky. 13 , 226 S.W.2d 318, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 572 ( Ky. 1950 ).

8.Probating Will.

The ten (10) year statute of limitations provided by this section covers probating of a will. Allen v. Froman, 96 Ky. 313 , 28 S.W. 497, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 634 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 115 ( Ky. 1894 ). See Cleveland Orphan Institution v. Helm, 74 S.W. 274, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2485 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 310 (Ky. Ct. App. 1903); Thompson v. Penn, 149 Ky. 158 , 148 S.W. 33, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The ten (10) year statute of limitations provided by this section applies to the probating of a will of a person domiciled in this state or domiciled in another state, when the will has not been probated there, and does not apply to the will of a nonresident when the will is recorded at the late domicile of the testator. Foster v. Jordan, 130 Ky. 445 , 113 S.W. 490, 1908 Ky. LEXIS 290 ( Ky. 1908 ).

Under this section and KRS 413.170 , right of remainderman, who had been an infant at testator’s death, to probate the will was not barred for ten (10) years after he reached his majority. Combs v. Jent, 164 Ky. 536 , 175 S.W. 1031, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 413 ( Ky. 1915 ).

An action to probate a lost or destroyed will must be brought within ten (10) years after decedent’s death, since such actions are governed by this section. Allen v. Lovell's Adm'x, 303 Ky. 238 , 197 S.W.2d 424, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 833 ( Ky. 1946 ).

The right to probate a will, whether it be of a resident or nonresident of the state, is barred by the ten (10) year statute of limitations when it is interposed. Hoagland v. Fish, 238 S.W.2d 133, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 799 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Under this section a proceeding to probate a will ordinarily is barred by the lapse of ten (10) years from the time the right to probate accrued. Second Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. First Sec. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 398 S.W.2d 50, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where a will devising land was admitted to probate, even if it could be collaterally attacked in a subsequent action to determine the intestate succession under one of the devisees, such attack would be barred by the statute of limitations. Morris v. Sparrow, 459 S.W.2d 768, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 151 ( Ky. 1970 ), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 939, 91 S. Ct. 2254, 29 L. Ed. 2d 718, 1971 U.S. LEXIS 1611 (U.S. 1971), cert. denied, 411 U.S. 985, 93 S. Ct. 2283, 36 L. Ed. 2d 963, 1973 U.S. LEXIS 2466 (U.S. 1973); Morris v. Sparrow, 411 U.S. 985, 93 S. Ct. 2283, 36 L. Ed. 2d 963, 1973 U.S. LEXIS 2466 (U.S. 1973).

9.Enjoining Use of Trademark.

An action to enjoin the illegal appropriation and use of a trademark is not excepted from, but according to manifest legislative policy, subject to operation of the statute of limitations and is controlled by this section. Northcutt v. Turney, 101 Ky. 314 , 41 S.W. 21, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 483 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 196 ( Ky. 1897 ).

10.Setting Aside Deed.
11.— Infancy.

This section applies to action to set aside conveyance of land brought by infant more than ten (10) years after reaching majority, for while an infant may, before the expiration of the period, by act, bind himself to a confirmation, he cannot, after ten (10) years from his arrival at full age, maintain an action to avoid and set aside a deed made while an infant. Hoffert v. Miller, 86 Ky. 572 , 6 S.W. 447, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 732 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1888 ).

The limitation period to set aside a deed on the ground of infancy is ten (10) years under this section. Henson v. Culp, 157 Ky. 442 , 163 S.W. 455, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 307 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Where infant’s land is sold without authority and, after reaching majority, he accepts the proceeds, he is barred after ten (10) years under this section from recovering the land, though he had no knowledge of the facts. Schlickman v. Dusing, 180 Ky. 506 , 203 S.W. 295, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 100 ( Ky. 1918 ).

12.Reissuing Lost Bond.

Under this section, an action for the issuance of a new bond, brought 19 years after a discovery of loss, was barred. Pensacola & A. R. Co. v. Hilton's Trustee, 147 Ky. 553 , 144 S.W. 1077, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 305 ( Ky. 1912 ).

13.Partnership Settlement.

This section applies to an action by a surviving partner for a settlement of partnership matters. Johnson v. Fetter, 224 Ky. 788 , 7 S.W.2d 241, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 685 ( Ky. 1928 ).

14.Creditor’s Action.

An action by a creditor to subject to a debt of bankrupt a tract of land to which purchaser at sale in bankruptcy had absolute title and held as his own on the ground that there was a verbal agreement between the purchaser and the bankrupt that bankrupt could redeem the property, whether regarded as an action covered by the five (5) year statute embracing parol contracts or by the ten (10) year statute embracing all cases not otherwise provided for, was clearly barred when suit was filed, since there was no continuing or subsisting trust and the action was not an action to recover real estate under the 15 year statute of limitations. Buckler's Adm'x v. Rogers, 53 S.W. 529, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 552 (Ky. Ct. App. 1899).

15.Counterclaims.

In an administrator’s action against widow, her counterclaim was barred by this section where she was aware of her claim for fraud 20 years before the counterclaim was filed. Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ).

16.Inheritance of Personalty.

The statute of limitations for the inheritance of personalty begins to run upon the death of the decedent and the “catch all” ten-year limitation period of this section applies to that claim. Wood v. Wingfield, 816 S.W.2d 899, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 70 ( Ky. 1991 ), modified, 1991 Ky. LEXIS 147 (Ky. Sept. 26, 1991).

Cited:

Walter Bledsoe & Co. v. Elkhorn Land Co., 219 F.2d 556, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4857 (6th Cir. 1955); Philpot’s Ex’x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ); Forsyth v. Wellman, 302 Ky. 21 , 193 S.W.2d 402, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 566 ( Ky. 1946 ); Snyder v. Snyder, 297 S.W.2d 758, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1956 ); Watkins v. Oldham, 731 S.W.2d 829, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987); National Gypsum Co. v. Corns, 736 S.W.2d 325, 1987 Ky. LEXIS 244 ( Ky. 1987 ); Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

KRS 413.120 and not this section applies to the collection of license fees required under a city ordinance requiring occupational licenses. OAG 71-135 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action to challenge validity of ordinance, resolution or election with respect to municipal electric plant, 60-day limitation, KRS 96.670 .

Action to enforce lien on railroads, public improvements, limitation, KRS 376.190 .

Application to refund taxes, KRS 134.590 .

Blue sky law, limitation of remedies, KRS 292.480 .

Corporation, limitation of action against, after dissolution, KRS 273.357 .

Foreign corporation, limitation of action against, after withdrawal from state, KRS 271B.15-200 .

Inheritance taxes, limitation on action to collect, KRS 140.160 .

Liens on gas and oil to be filed in six months, action on in 12 months, KRS 376.140 .

Limitation of prosecution of felonies, KRS 500.050 .

Mechanics’ liens:

Filing in six months, KRS 376.080 .

Action on in 12 months, KRS 376.090 .

Paternity actions, KRS 406.011 through 406.180 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

413.170. Limitations of actions in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 do not run until removal of disability or death.

  1. If a person entitled to bring any action mentioned in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 , except for a penalty or forfeiture, was, at the time the cause of action accrued, an infant or of unsound mind, the action may be brought within the same number of years after the removal of the disability or death of the person, whichever happens first, allowed to a person without the disability to bring the action after the right accrued.
  2. The right of action upon the official bond of a guardian, personal representative, curator, of the sheriff, or the officer acting as personal representative, or of any other person receiving and holding money to be distributed to a ward, distributee or devisee, under the order of court or by authority of law, of a ward, distributee, devisee or other person entitled, who was an infant when the bond was executed, shall not be deemed to have accrued, unless otherwise expressed in the bond, before the plaintiff attained the age of twenty-one (21) years. Where there are several wards, or several distributees or devisees or other beneficiaries secured by the same bond, who, or some of whom, were infants when the bond was given, the right of action of each one (1) of such infants shall not be deemed to have accrued before he attained the age of twenty-one (21) years.

History. 2521, 2525.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Purpose.

The purpose of this section was to extend the periods of limitation in which an action could be instituted under KRS 413.090 to 413.160 in favor of persons under disabilities. Anderson v. Layton, 66 Ky. 87 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1867 ) (decided under prior law).

2.Construction.

Any devisee in a will may maintain a proceeding to have it probated, so long as it is not barred by limitations, although other devisees may be barred by limitations. Thompson v. Penn, 149 Ky. 158 , 148 S.W. 33, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The rule that in a joint demise by several, all must have a right of entry which is not barred by the statute of limitations or none can recover is not applicable to coparceners or others who might maintain a several action. Thompson v. Penn, 149 Ky. 158 , 148 S.W. 33, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section only stops the running of the statute of limitations when the person entitled to bring the action was at the time the cause of action accrued laboring under a disability mentioned in the section. When the statute begins to run, a subsequent disability does not stop it. Fox v. Hudson's Ex'x, 150 Ky. 115 , 150 S.W. 49, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 860 ( Ky. 1912 ).

It is a generally accepted rule that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until there is a person in being capable of bringing suit. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Suspension, because of infancy, of limitation of time in which an action may be brought is one of statutory origin and is an exception to the statute of limitations. Galloway v. Winchester, 299 Ky. 87 , 184 S.W.2d 890, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 388 ( Ky. 1945 ).

3.Application.

This section had no application to an action for the death of a person from an injury inflicted by negligence since the cause of action is vested in the personal representative and the infancy of the widow or an infant child who was not entitled to bring the action could have no effect upon the running of the statute. Van Vactor's Adm'x v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 112 Ky. 445 , 66 S.W. 4, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1743 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 180 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Statutes of limitation apply to all actions whether they are based upon equitable or legal rights and the court has no discretion but must apply them when properly pleaded, although the action is based upon a purely equitable right. Wren's Ex'r v. Wren's Ex'x, 126 Ky. 704 , 104 S.W. 737, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1096 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 90 ( Ky. 1907 ).

An action based upon the breach of a covenant in which the recovery of real property is not sought by one laboring under disability at the time the breach occurred is governed by this section and not by KRS 413.020 which applies to an action for the recovery of real property. National Finance Corp. v. Robinson, 193 Ky. 649 , 237 S.W. 418, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1922 ).

State statute of limitations had no application to an action under federal employer’s liability act. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Miles, 249 S.W.2d 160, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 811 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Representations did not constitute grounds of estoppel and did not toll the statute of limitations under this section because plaintiff was presumed to know that her action for injuries occurring while a guest in assured’s automobile would be barred in one (1) year by statute of limitations and that insurance adjuster was her adversary and she had no right to rely upon his representations that his company had assumed and recognized its liability to her, that a settlement would be made with her when the bills were all in and when she had fully recovered and that she would be fully compensated if she did not consult or employ an attorney. Pospisil v. Miller, 343 S.W.2d 392, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 418 ( Ky. 1961 ).

With respect to the application of the statute of limitations to a transaction involving a minor, while there is a statutory provision (this section) permitting a minor to bring suit within the same number of years after the minor reaches majority, this statute expressly applies only to the actions mentioned in KRS 413.090 to KRS 413.160 , and there is no such saving statute in the Blue Sky Act. Hutto v. Bockweg, 579 S.W.2d 382, 1979 Ky. App. LEXIS 389 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979).

Tolling provision in KRS 413.170(1) did not apply only where the inmate, who was beaten into a near-vegetative state by other inmates while the prison guards allegedly stood by and did nothing, was of unsound mind before the beating—i.e., the incident supporting the litigation. Thus, the tolling provision applied since it was established that the inmate had been of unsound mind since the attack at the jail forming the basis of the action. Green v. Floyd County, 803 F. Supp. 2d 652, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27760 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

4.Disability.

Where husband became obligated to wife on an implied contract in 1929, an action by her administrator after her death subsequent to 1950 to recover on the contract was barred by the statute of limitations, because the disability of a married woman ceased in 1937 even as to previously accrued causes of action. Hays v. Hays' Adm'r, 290 S.W.2d 795, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 343 ( Ky. 1956 ), overruled, Saylor v. Saylor, 389 S.W.2d 904, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 392 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The statute of limitations in KRS 304.39-230 (6) modifies only that language contained in KRS 413.140 and does not abolish the entire statute of limitations for those torts arising from motor vehicle accidents; consequently this section tolls the two-year statute of limitations under the no-fault statute in cases of minors and persons under disability. Lemmons v. Ransom, 670 S.W.2d 478, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1984 ).

5.—Infants.

Plaintiff who, within a year after his arrival of age, brought his action to recover damages suffered by reason of county court judge’s failure to take sufficient surety of his guardian was within the saving of the statute. Commonwealth use of Morris v. Netherland's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 195 , 8 S.W. 272, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 123 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 68 ( Ky. 1888 ).

The amendment of a city charter to provide that actions against the city for injuries to persons must be brought within six (6) months did not repeal, as against the city, subsection (1) of this section saving the rights of infants as to actions brought under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of KRS 413.140 provided that at the time the action accrued, the person entitled to sue was an infant. Louisville v. Garr, 97 Ky. 583 , 31 S.W. 281, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 640 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 224 ( Ky. 1895 ).

The children of decedent’s first wife could not bring an action to determine their rights so as to exclude children of decedent’s second wife to the proceeds of an insurance policy in which decedent’s first wife was named beneficiary, if living, and if not decedent’s children, on the ground of mistake more than 13 years after their mother died, although it was less than ten (10) years after they reached their majority. Webb v. Webb, 64 S.W. 839, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1057 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 578 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

Where a mother surrendered her child to a third person pursuant to his parol agreement to pay him a certain sum at his majority, an action by him on the contract within five (5) years after attaining majority was not barred by limitations. Jones v. Comer, 76 S.W. 392, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 773 (1903).

An infant had the same length of time after becoming of age, or, under the provisions of KRS 413.120 five (5) years, on a contract not signed by the party, to bring a suit and enforce a lien on land for failure to furnish her support until she reached the age of 15 as provided by a will as she would have if she had been of age when her cause of action accrued which was when the devisee first failed to furnish her support. Low v. Ramsey, 135 Ky. 333 , 122 S.W. 167, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 292 ( Ky. 1909 ).

If infancy existed and is intended to be relied on as a bar to the running of the statute of limitations, it must be pleaded. Adams v. Bates, 191 Ky. 710 , 231 S.W. 238, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 376 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Limitations did not run against the right of an infant child to set aside the deed of a lunatic father, nor was the cause barred by laches, even though suit was not instituted until 21 years after the father made the deed. Hopson v. Daniel's Guardian, 218 Ky. 321 , 291 S.W. 379, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 153 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Action against executor was not barred by limitations because plaintiff was a minor at the time the estate of decedent’s wife was settled, decedent died before five (5) years had elapsed from the date she became of age and the action was brought within the year after decedent’s death. Tapp v. Reynolds, 383 S.W.2d 334, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 25 ( Ky. 1964 ).

Where a party died after commencing suit for her own personal injuries, the party’s daughter did not have a right to bring suit for those injuries and, therefore, the disability of the daughter did not affect the period of limitations for revival of the suit. New Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Thomas, 411 S.W.2d 672, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Where defendant was injured when he was 151/2 years old in a school bus accident and action for damages was not filed until he was more than 22 years old, as the time for filing was more than one (1) year after the cause of action accrued and more than one (1) year after the removal of the disability of infancy, such action was barred by the statute of limitations. Caudill v. Arnett, 481 S.W.2d 668, 1972 Ky. LEXIS 264 ( Ky. 1972 ).

Where a young woman, who was blinded in infancy as a result of possible negligence by her physician, first knew the cause of her injury when she was 15 or 16 years old, but did not commence a malpractice action until some time after her twenty-first birthday, such action was barred under this section and KRS 413.140 . Ferguson v. Cunningham, 556 S.W.2d 164, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 810 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

An infant or a person under disability who has a cause of action arising from injuries received in an automobile accident has two (2) years after the attainment of majority or release from disability in which to bring a tort liability action. Lemmons v. Ransom, 670 S.W.2d 478, 1984 Ky. LEXIS 240 ( Ky. 1984 ).

The five-year time limit of subdivision (2) of KRS 413.120 does not run during the minority of any person entitled to bring an action pursuant to subsection (1) of KRS 406.021 . Alexander v. Commonwealth, 708 S.W.2d 102, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1111 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

Child was five (5) years of age at the time his father died in an automobile accident. One (1) year, five (5) months and eleven (11) days later, a survivor’s claim was filed on the infant’s behalf seeking benefits. The limitation section relating to minors and other legally disabled persons does not start the period for bringing no-fault claims running anew when the disability is removed. With the no-fault enactment, the period of disability is included in the time provided for the commencement of the action. Jackson v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co., 837 S.W.2d 496, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Since decedent’s son was a minor at the time of the formation of a settlement agreement between his mother and the decedent, KRS 413.170 applied to the son’s action against the decedent’s wife, which sought to impose a constructive trust on the decedent’s life insurance proceeds, and the statute of limitations did not bar the son from bringing the action. Downs v. Downs, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 214 (Ky. Ct. App. July 11, 2008), review denied, ordered not published, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 294 (Ky. Apr. 15, 2009).

Although plaintiff’s action against defendants as to the shooting death of plaintiff’s parent was not commenced within the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1), the statute of limitations was tolled until one year after plaintiff reached the age of majority under KRS 413.170(1) because plaintiff was a minor; although plaintiff initiated litigation through plaintiff’s other parent as next friend, KRS 413.170(1)’s savings provision, unlike KRS 342.210 , had no exceptions for a committee, guardian, or next friend. Bradford v. Bracken County, 767 F. Supp. 2d 740, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3894 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

District court erred by granting summary judgment in a professional negligence suit brought against defendant attorney who filed a wrongful death action on behalf of an estate; because the real parties in interest were plaintiffs, decedent’s children, all applicable statutes would have been tolled during the period of their infancy in accordance with KRS 413.170 . Anderson v. Pete, 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 989 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2011), aff'd, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

In a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 case in which county employees filed a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, following the logic of the Bradford decision, the Martin decision, and the T.S. decision, neither the § 1983 claim nor the state law claims asserted on behalf of the children were time- barred by the statute of limitations. Newton v. Dennison, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104594 (W.D. Ky. July 30, 2014).

Claim against school staff members concerning the members’ alleged failure to prevent or report alleged sexual abuse of a student by a special education teacher was time-barred because it was not filed within one year of the student’s eighteenth birthday, and the extended limitations period did not apply to claims against non-perpetrator third parties. Doe v. Logan, 602 S.W.3d 177, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

6.— — Married.

The running of the statutes of limitation against a cause of action in favor of an infant married woman is not suspended during her infancy, because she occupies the same status as an adult. Hicks v. Steele, 309 Ky. 833 , 219 S.W.2d 35, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 817 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where infant married woman failed to institute action based on defendant’s negligence within one (1) year from date of injury, action was barred by one (1) year statute of limitations. Williamson v. Carr-Consolidated Biscuit Co., 313 Ky. 235 , 230 S.W.2d 917, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 856 ( Ky. 1950 ).

Fourteen-year-old girl was injured in 1955 and was later married at the age of 19 in 1960. Action brought in 1962 and within one (1) year after she attained the age of 21 was barred by the statute of limitations since infant does not include a married infant. Wenneker v. Bailey, 392 S.W.2d 453, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The statute of limitations is not tolled for married infants by virtue of their minority, and married infants must bring actions within the limitations period from the date of the marriage. Holbert v. West, 730 F. Supp. 50, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1362 (E.D. Ky. 1990 ).

7.— —Remaindermen.

Where the trustees under the will held the legal title to the estate, the statute of limitations ran against them from the time the adverse possession began, and when the trustees as legal owners were barred, all equitable estates dependent upon the legal estate were also barred even though the cestui que trust was an infant and whether the estate was life or remainder. Watkins v. Pfeiffer, 92 S.W. 562, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 97 (1906).

Under this section children of a devisee taking a remainder were entitled to ten (10) years from the time they arrived at age to have the will probated in this state. Thompson v. Penn, 149 Ky. 158 , 148 S.W. 33, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 602 ( Ky. 1912 ).

Though she was a remainderman, an infant’s cause of action to set aside a deed on the ground of infancy accrued when she attained her majority. Henson v. Culp, 157 Ky. 442 , 163 S.W. 455, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 307 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Under KRS 413.160 and this section, right of remainderman, who had been an infant at testator’s death, to probate the will was not barred for ten (10) years after he reached his majority. Combs v. Jent, 164 Ky. 536 , 175 S.W. 1031, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 413 ( Ky. 1915 ).

8.— —Surcharging Settlement.

An action under subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 to surcharge a guardian’s settlement for fraud or mistake must under this section be brought, in any event, within ten (10) years after the ward arrived at age. Blake v. Wolfe, 105 Ky. 380 , 49 S.W. 19, 50 S.W. 2, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1212 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1899 ).

A ward’s cause of action to surcharge his guardian’s settlement for fraud accrues when the final settlement is filed, and limitations begin to run from the date the minor came of age and, where minor knew of fraud when he came of age, the five (5) year limitation applied. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

9.—Unsound Mind.

Where ward’s mental condition was congenital and there had been no change in her mental condition since the conveyance was made, the statute of limitations under KRS 413.020 and this section did not bar the right of her committee to recover several tracts of land conveyed by the ward. Collins v. Lawson's Committee, 140 Ky. 510 , 131 S.W. 262, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 1910 ).

A person may be of unsound mind when, on account of any infirmity or weight of years, he has become so imbecilic as to render him incompetent to manage his estate, or to understand the subject of a contract, its nature and probable consequences and as long as such unsoundness exists, the statute does not run against him. Stair v. Gilbert, 209 Ky. 243 , 272 S.W. 732, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Running of statute of limitations, having started, was not stopped by subsequent insanity adjudication. Kingman's Committee v. First Nat'l Bank, 246 Ky. 404 , 55 S.W.2d 39, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 770 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Where veteran was incompetent from time of conveyance by his committee of land owned by him individually to himself as committee until action was instituted by his successor committee to cancel the conveyance and recover the purchase price, the action was not barred by the statute of limitations. First State Bank v. Catron, 268 Ky. 513 , 105 S.W.2d 162, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The fact that a person of unsound mind may have a committee or may sue by a next friend does not alter the provisions of this section suspending the running of limitations during disability. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

This section applies to actions against sureties on the bond of the committee for a person of unsound mind, and limitations in favor of the surety do not commence to run until the disability is removed. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where the mentally incompetent’s petition stated sufficient facts to support an action to set aside a judgment on the ground of fraud of the successful party, the defendant could not rely upon the statute of limitations which fixes a five (5) year limitation on actions for relief on the ground of fraud, since under KRS 413.170 , the limitation does not run during mental disability, and the existence of mental disability, under the statute, is a question of fact and does not depend upon a legal adjudication following a sanity inquest. Carter v. Huffman, 262 S.W.2d 690, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 1122 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In order to create a legal trust, legal title to the res must be transferred to the trustee so where testatrix devised her property to her children, title passed to them upon her death, and subsequent provisions in will, directing and restricting executor in his disposition and control of the property, were ineffective to impose a trust upon it. Hence, as the incompetent son had title to property in controversy, his cause was not barred by statute of limitations. Strode v. Spoden, 284 S.W.2d 663, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1955 ).

A diagnosis of hysteria and secondary affective disorder with depressive syndrome with dysphoric mood and accompanying loss of interest in usual interests, feelings of hopelessness and weight loss did not constitute proof that the plaintiff was of unsound mind which would toll the statute of limitations for a wrongful death action alleging medical malpractice. Southeastern Kentucky Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. Gaylor, 756 S.W.2d 467, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1988 ).

Where at the time the acts of child abuse occurred, victim’s cause of action accrued and he was then well aware of the abuse and where his memory of the abuse became suppressed only after he was older and in high school, he was not suffering from post-traumatic memory loss when the cause of action accrued as required by subsection (1) of this section to toll the statute of limitations due to an “unsound mind.” Rigazio v. Archdiocese of Louisville, 853 S.W.2d 295, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 63 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

District court erred when it rejected the individual’s argument that the statute of limitations should have been tolled because she was of unsound mind because if the individual could have proved that she was immediately rendered mentally unsound by the blow to her head, which was the very injury that gave rise to the individual’s lawsuit, then the individual’s action would have been within the purview of KRS 413.170(1), and the individual would have therefore complied with Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations, KRS 413.140(1)(a). Powell v. Jacor Communs. Corporate, 320 F.3d 599, 2003 FED App. 0063P, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 3435 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Where defendant offered a memorandum which supported his contention that the statute of limitations under RCr 11.42(10) should have been tolled due to his alleged mental incompetency at the time of his guilty plea, making said plea not knowing and voluntary, he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing. Stacey v. Commonwealth, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 150 (Ky. Ct. App. Apr. 2, 2004), rev'd, 177 S.W.3d 813, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 2005 ).

Summary judgment was granted in favor of the owner and operator of a plane that crashed into a residence because the action was barred by the one-year statute of limitations in KRS 413.140 ; the doctrine of unsound mind did not toll the limitations period because an injured party was capable of managing her affairs since she missed only a limited amount of work, she was able to complete an inventory of her home, and she engaged in negotiations to purchase another home. Osborne v. Quesenberry, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27018 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 8, 2005).

9.Unsound Mind.

Guardianship of the inmate who was alleged to be of “unsound mind” did not stop tolling of statute of limitations by KRS 413.170(1). Green v. Floyd County, 803 F. Supp. 2d 652, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27760 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

10.Bonds.
11.—Guardian’s.

KRS 413.340 , excepting continuing and subsisting trusts from the operation of KRS Ch. 413 on limitations, has no application to an action on a guardian’s bond and a guardian’s bond is barred under subsection (2) of this section 15 years from the time the ward becomes of age. Blake v. Wolfe, 105 Ky. 380 , 49 S.W. 19, 50 S.W. 2, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1212 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 189 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Sureties on a guardian’s bond were discharged from liability under the provisions of KRS 413.230 where suit was not brought against them on the bond for the guardian’s defalcation within five (5) years after the ward became of age. Bybee's Ex'r v. Poynter, 117 Ky. 109 , 77 S.W. 698, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1251 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1903 ).

In a suit on a guardian’s bond, the 15 year statute of limitations applies at the time the ward becomes of age if no final settlement has been filed. Philpot's Ex'x v. Boyd, 275 Ky. 39 , 120 S.W.2d 747, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 363 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The statute of limitations does not begin to run on a guardian’s bond until the ward has arrived of age. Poynter v. Smith, 290 Ky. 169 , 160 S.W.2d 380, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 358 ( Ky. 1942 ).

12.—Executor’s.

Nonresident infants had five (5) years, under the provisions of KRS 413.230 , after their arrival at the age of 21 years in which to institute their actions for distribution upon the bond of an executor. Smith v. Hardesty, 83 S.W. 646, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 1266 (1904).

Cited in:

Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ); Hall v. Arnett, 709 S.W.2d 850, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1126 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986); Hazel v. General Motors Corp., 863 F. Supp. 435, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14185 (W.D. Ky. 1994 ); Commonwealth of Ky. Univ. of Ky. Hosp. v. Douglas, — S.W.3d —, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008); Anderson v. Bd. of Educ., 616 F. Supp. 2d 662, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37476 (E.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Disability.
2.—Infants.

Unpublished decision: In plaintiffs’ proposed 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 class action against a county government and former officials for failing to report the sexual abuse of plaintiffs, the district court properly held that the claims were time-barred because the statute of limitations began to run at the time the individuals were abused or, if they were minors, when they turned eighteen pursuant to KRS 413.170 , and a finding of fraudulent concealment under KRS 413.190(2) would not preserve the claims based on the time published newspaper articles put plaintiffs on notice; class certification was properly denied under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 because the class failed on numerosity grounds under Rule 23(a) since only four class members’ claims were not time-barred with regard to the government and only three were not time-barred with regard to the officials. Guy v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Gov't, 488 Fed. Appx. 9, 2012 FED App. 0472N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9364 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ), cert. denied, 568 U.S. 980, 133 S. Ct. 547, 184 L. Ed. 2d 343, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 8427 (U.S. 2012).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Baker and Baker, Title Examination in Kentucky, 48 Ky. Bench & B. 12 (1984).

Davies, Children Born Out of Wedlock: Their Time Has Come, Volume 49, No. 2, April 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 10.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Note, Kentucky No-Fault: An Analysis and Interpretation, 65 Ky. L.J. 466 (1976-77).

Kentucky Law Survey, Clay, Insurance, 73 Ky. L.J. 423 (1984-85).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

413.180. Action by or against personal representative under KRS 413.090 to 413.160.

  1. If a person entitled to bring any action mentioned in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 dies before the expiration of the time limited for its commencement and the cause of action survives, the action may be brought by his personal representative after the expiration of that time, if commenced within one (1) year after the qualification of the representative.
  2. If a person dies before the time at which the right to bring any action mentioned in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 would have accrued to him if he had continued alive, and there is an interval of more than one (1) year between his death and the qualification of his personal representative, that representative, for purposes of this chapter, shall be deemed to have qualified on the last day of the one-year period.

History. 2526 to 2528: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 299, § 4; 1988, ch. 90, § 27, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

By this section, it was the evident purpose of the Legislature to provide against the contingency of one’s claim becoming barred by limitation when for some part of the statutory period there was no person in existence whom he had the legal right to sue, so, if four (4) years and six (6) months had passed at the time of the debtor’s death since the right to sue had accrued, and the law forbade a suit against his personal representative during the first six (6) months after his qualification, it must be manifest that the creditor would lose six (6) months of the five (5) years allotted to him by statute if he were not relieved by this section. Southern Contract Co.'s Assignee v. Newhouse, 119 Ky. 704 , 66 S.W. 730, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2141 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1902 ). But see Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

This section does not make the ancestor’s debt the heir’s but merely imposes on the property descended or devised the ancestor’s liabilities; therefore, when a debtor died, the statutory bar of five (5) years applied to his implied contract to pay back money prematurely distributed as dividends and no administrator was appointed for one (1) month after his death, and no action could, under the statute, be brought against the administrator for six (6) months after his appointment, the period of limitation was extended seven (7) months beyond the five (5) years. Southern Contract Co.'s Assignee v. Newhouse, 119 Ky. 704 , 66 S.W. 730, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2141 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1902 ).

2.Construction.

Where decedent was entitled to bring action and he died before bringing the action and his personal representative qualified at least five (5) years before the expiration of the time limited for the commencement of the action, death of decedent did not suspend the running of the statute for a moment since the words in this section mean that if the personal representative does not bring his suit within the time allowed by the statute — in this case 15 years — he must bring it within one (1) year after he qualifies. Halcomb v. Cornett, 146 Ky. 339 , 142 S.W. 686, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 69 ( Ky. 1912 ).

This section extends the statute of limitations only where the qualification of the personal representative was within one (1) year of the expiration of the statutory period and was clearly never intended to authorize parties by their own voluntary acts and conduct to suspend or interrupt the running; therefore, an action by a personal representative who did not qualify until 11 years after his decedent’s death and after statute of limitations had run on the note could not enforce payment of the note. Fix's Ex'r v. Cook, 192 Ky. 731 , 234 S.W. 453, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1921 ).

3.Application.

Considering KRS 413.120 , this section, and KRS 395.270 together, in all causes of action falling under KRS 413.120 , where the cause of action accrues during the life of the debtor and the debtor dies and an administrator is appointed for his estate more than one (1) year before the expiration of the time limit within which an action might be brought, this section has no application and does not stop the running of the statute during the first six (6) months after the administrator is appointed for the evident reason that as the creditor still has at least six (6) months in which to sue before the expiration of the time limit, the necessity for the passage of any remedial statute or enabling act is wanting. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

If the debtor dies, and administration is granted on his estate less than one (1) year before the expiration of the time limit within which the suit must be brought, this section applies, provided the suit is commenced within one (1) year after administration is granted. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

It is apparent that the Legislature only intended this section to apply to that class of cases where the debtor died and the administrator was appointed one (1) year or less before expiration of the time limit within which suit might be brought and there is good reason for such a rule, for, conceding that the creditor may not proceed against the administrator during the first six (6) months after his qualification, he would still have six (6) full months within which to sue. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

This section does not apply in any case where the death of the debtor occurs more than two (2) years before the expiration of the time limit. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Where no administration is granted, this section applies in all cases where the death of the debtor occurs less than two (2) years before the expiration of the time limit, provided suit is commenced within two (2) years from the death of the debtor. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

The extension of time given by this section to an administrator applies only to actions which existed in favor of the intestate and survived to the administrator and an action for the death from negligence of his intestate is not such a cause of action, since it never existed in the decedent and does not survive to his administrator but is conferred originally upon the administrator by KRS 411.130 . Faulkner's Adm'r v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 184 Ky. 533 , 212 S.W. 130, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1919 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

An action for wrongful death is barred one (1) year after the date of injury by the provision of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of KRS 413.140 and is not within the provisions of subsection (1) of this section and an amendment asking for damages for pain and suffering does not relate back to original complaint for wrongful death. Totten v. Loventhal, 373 S.W.2d 421, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1963 ), overruled, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled in part, Perkins v. Read, 616 S.W.2d 495, 1981 Ky. LEXIS 248 ( Ky. 1981 ), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ), overruled in part, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ). (See KRS 411.133 .).

Where a suit for personal injuries has been brought by the injured party, revival of the suit after his death is governed by KRS 395.277 (now repealed) and not by this section. New Farmers Nat'l Bank v. Thomas, 411 S.W.2d 672, 1967 Ky. LEXIS 480 ( Ky. 1967 ).

Subsection (1) of this section is not applicable where the action is one for a death occurring simultaneously with the injury. Massie v. Persson, 729 S.W.2d 448, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 444 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987), overruled, Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

One or two-year limitation periods for personal injury actions, and not the five-year period for a cause of action created by statute, applied to a suit against a health care facility alleging personal injury and violation of a resident’s rights; accordingly, the suit, filed over three years after the resident died, was untimely. Kindred Nursing Ctrs. Ltd. P'ship v. Overstreet, 2013 Ky. App. LEXIS 124 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2013), aff'd, 479 S.W.3d 69, 2015 Ky. LEXIS 1754 ( Ky. 2015 ).

4.Actions.
5.— By Personal Representative.

Under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules, administrator could amend complaint in federal court for recovery for wrongful death occurring on navigable waters to show valid appointment of administrator obtained after state statute of limitations had run. Levinson v. Deupree, 345 U.S. 648, 73 S. Ct. 914, 97 L. Ed. 1319, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 2548 (U.S. 1953).

Where more than a year had expired between the day of death and the qualification of decedent’s administrator and the institution of action for personal injury received by the decedent in a railroad collision, the cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations. Wilson's Adm'r v. Illinois C. R. Co., 92 S.W. 572, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 148 (1906).

Under this section a personal representative who does not qualify before the action is barred may not bring the action. Boughner v. Sharp, 144 Ky. 320 , 138 S.W. 375, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 636 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Action on demand note was barred by 15 year statute where administrator of deceased payee did not sue within one (1) year after qualification. Hodges' Adm'r v. Asher, 224 Ky. 431 , 6 S.W.2d 451, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1928 ).

Where one who is injured by the negligence of another lives for a while and then dies, two (2) causes of action arise: one for pain and suffering prior to death, and the other for death, and the administrator will be required to elect which cause of action he will prosecute and, since a cause of action for wrongful death is barred in one (1) year from the death while an action for pain and suffering is not barred until one (1) year after the qualification of the personal representative, providing he qualifies within one (1) year from the time of the injury, if he elects to prosecute cause of action for wrongful death which is barred, he cannot amend to prosecute for pain and suffering. Lutes' Adm'r v. Gray-Von Allmen Sanitary Milk Co., 254 Ky. 750 , 72 S.W.2d 720, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 167 ( Ky. 1934 ). (See KRS 411.133 .).

J died leaving property to his infant daughter. The property was sold to D who executed sale bond in favor of the daughter who died while still an infant. Mother was appointed administratrix of daughter’s estate. No administrator was appointed for J’s estate until shortly before suit. J’s heirs sued D on bond 16 years after daughter’s death, claiming proceeds under KRS 391.020 . The court held that (1) statute of limitations was not extended by this section by reason of failure of personal representative of J’s estate to qualify, since right to collect bond was in personal representative of daughter and not personal representative of J, and (2) action was barred by KRS 413.090 . Jameson v. Jameson, 280 Ky. 554 , 133 S.W.2d 923, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 172 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The purpose of this section is to allow time for the appointment of a personal representative and then to give that personal representative time to evaluate claims and determine whether to pursue those claims. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Where widow, who was not properly acting in the status of the personal representative of her husband’s estate, did not fulfill the requirements of one who is authorized to bring a wrongful death action nor did she take necessary steps to remedy the deficiency, the trial court had no alternative but to direct a verdict against widow. Everley v. Wright, 872 S.W.2d 95, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

Pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, if a personal representative is appointed to represent an estate before the statute of limitations expires on a cause of action, the personal representative may bring the cause of action within one (1) year after his or her appointment. Ford v. Hill, 874 F. Supp. 149, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 596 (E.D. Ky. 1995 ).

KRS 413.180 established that no covered action may have been brought more than two (2) years from the date of the decedent’s death, which precisely mirrored the two-year maximum contemplated in KRS 44.110(3); wrongful death actions against the Commonwealth were allowed to have been pursued before the Kentucky Board of Claims by a personal representative up to one (1) year from the date of the qualification of the personal representative, with a maximum limitation of two (2) years from the date of the death, and Gray v. Commonwealth, Transp. Cab., Dept. of Highways, 973 S.W.2d 61, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 115 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997), was overruled. Gaither v. Bd. of Claims, 161 S.W.3d 345, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 281 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

6.— Against Personal Representative.

Where debtor died after four (4) years and six (6) months of the five (5) year statute of limitations had passed, the time within which plaintiff could sue was extended, under this section, beyond the usual limit of five (5) years, by seven (7) months, one (1) month being allowed during which there was no administrator or executor and six (6) months when suit could not have been filed against the personal representative. Southern Contract Co.'s Assignee v. Newhouse, 119 Ky. 704 , 66 S.W. 730, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2141 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1902 ). But see Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

KRS 395.270 , providing no suit shall be brought against an administrator during the next six (6) months after his qualification, did not extend the time for bringing an action under KRS 413.120 where administrator was appointed more than a year before the time expired for bringing the action since KRS 395.270 does not deal with limitations but was enacted for the purpose of giving the administrator a reasonable time to settle claims against his decedent’s estate without being harassed with lawsuits and put to the cost and expense which litigation would necessarily entail. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

Action on note of decedent, the last credit on which was made June 24, 1893, the maker’s administrator having been appointed in June 1907, and suit having been brought July 21, 1908, was barred by limitation. Johnson v. Hogg, 165 Ky. 1 , 176 S.W. 350, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 469 ( Ky. 1 915).

Where trustee under will died before five (5) years had elapsed after the beneficiary became of age and the action was brought within one (1) year after the trustee’s death, recovery from his estate of the amount of the trust was not barred. Tapp v. Reynolds, 383 S.W.2d 334, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 25 ( Ky. 1964 ).

7.— Against Heirs.

An action brought against heirs seeking a sale of land to pay note was not barred by the statute of limitations when brought after the expiration of 15 years but within two (2) years of decedent’s death where the decedent died within 15 years after the accrual of the cause of action and no personal representative was appointed. Farris v. Hoskins, 63 S.W. 577, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 596 (1901).

8.— Civil Rights.

Actions under 42 USCS § 1983 are governed by the one-year statute of limitations contained in KRS 413.140 and accordingly, the applicable tolling provisions contained in this section. Ford v. Hill, 874 F. Supp. 149, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 596 (E.D. Ky. 1995 ).

9.Running of Limitations.

An action for an injury to the person of the plaintiff under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of KRS 413.140 accrues to the injured person in his lifetime and his death does not stop the running of the statute so, unless a personal representative qualifies within one (1) year from the injury, the action is barred but if he does so qualify, he is given another year within which to bring the action. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Brantley's Adm'r, 106 Ky. 849 , 51 S.W. 585, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 473 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1899 ).

A cause of action having accrued, and the statute of limitations having commenced to run, it is not suspended by the death of the debtor except by special statutory enactment. Johnson v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc., 137 Ky. 437 , 125 S.W. 1074, 1910 Ky. LEXIS 587 ( Ky. 1910 ).

In the absence of a statutory provision to the contrary, the running of the statute of limitations is not suspended by the death of the person against whom it began to run. Boughner v. Sharp, 144 Ky. 320 , 138 S.W. 375, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 636 ( Ky. 1911 ). See Fix's Ex'r v. Cook, 192 Ky. 731 , 234 S.W. 453, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 156 ( Ky. 1921 ).

Cause of action upon assigned judgment which accrued during lifetime of judgment debtor and on which no execution was issued continued to run after his death and was barred by the statute of limitations before action was brought. Pool v. Pool, 214 Ky. 267 , 283 S.W. 111, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 333 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Limitation against action on demand note which began to run during payee’s lifetime was not suspended by his death or during time there was no administrator. Hodges' Adm'r v. Asher, 224 Ky. 431 , 6 S.W.2d 451, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 601 ( Ky. 1928 ).

The filing of a claim with a personal representative does not toll the running of the statute of limitations. Kentucky-Virginia Stone Co. v. Ball, 426 S.W.2d 455, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 650 ( Ky. 1968 ).

If no valid personal representative is appointed within one (1) year of the date of death, any action for wrongful death dies. However, if a personal representative is appointed within one (1) year of the date of death, he then is granted one (1) year from the date of his appointment to file suit. Drake v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 782 F.2d 638, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 21993 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

Kentucky Const., § 241 and KRS 411.130 mandate that all actions for wrongful death be maintained by the personal representative of the deceased. Where there had never been a valid personal representative of the deceased, the district court did not err in finding the wrongful death actions barred by the statute of limitations. Drake v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 782 F.2d 638, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 21993 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

Subsection (2) of this section provides that if the personal representative is not appointed within a year after death but is appointed after that time, the one (1) year anniversary of death is considered the date of appointment, and the personal representative has one (1) year from the one (1) year anniversary of death to commence a cause of action. The net effect of this section in that case is to provide two (2) years from the date of death to appoint a personal representative and commence a cause of action for wrongful death. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The General Assembly has reenacted the inclusive reference to KRS 413.140 which the courts have stated expresses the wrongful death limitation but restricted the extension in subsection (2) of this section to one (1) year so that the effect of including the wrongful death limitation in KRS 413.140 (1) within the reach of subsection (2) of this section is a reasonable extension to two (2) years from date of death. Conner v. George W. Whitesides Co., 834 S.W.2d 652, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 95 ( Ky. 1992 ).

Where loss of consortium claim was filed within a year of the decedent’s death, but over a year after the date of his injury, this section did not provide the opportunity to extend the statute of limitations. Clark v. Hauck Mfg. Co., 910 S.W.2d 247, 1995 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1995 ), overruled in part, Martin v. Ohio County Hosp. Corp., 295 S.W.3d 104, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 234 ( Ky. 2009 ).

Wrongful death claim filed with the Board of Claims accrued at the time of death, not at the time administratrix was appointed to decedent’s estate; KRS 413.180 would not apply to extend the limitation on such claims to the appointment of a representative, since the cause of action could not have accrued to decedent. Gray v. Transportation Cabinet, Dep't of Highways, 973 S.W.2d 61, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 115 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997), overruled, Gaither v. Bd. of Claims, 161 S.W.3d 345, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 281 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

KRS 413.180(1) does not require any action to be filed within one (1) year of a person’s appointment as an executor and is not a statute of limitations but simply extends the statute of limitations where it has expired after the date of death to one (1) year after the qualification of the personal representative. Ingram v. Cates, 74 S.W.3d 783, 2002 Ky. App. LEXIS 769 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).

Wrongful death action which an ancillary administrator filed in Kentucky, alleging that three (3) corporations that owned and operated a casino were liable for a decedent’s death because they served alcohol to a customer who caused the decedent’s death, was time-barred under KRS 413.180 because the action was filed more than one (1) year after an Indiana court appointed the decedent’s son to serve as the personal representative of the decedent’s estate. Although the ancillary administrator was appointed by a Kentucky court less than one (1) year before he filed a wrongful death action in Kentucky, the statute of limitations began to run when the decedent’s son was appointed by the Indiana court because he could have obtained permission to file the same wrongful death action the ancillary administrator filed. Ford v. RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, LLC, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97658 (W.D. Ky. Dec. 2, 2008), aff'd, 328 Fed. Appx. 1000, 2009 FED App. 0500N, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 15876 (6th Cir. Ky. 2009 ).

Trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to dismiss an estate's wrongful death claim where the cause of action had accrued no later than the date of defendant's indictment for murder and related charges, under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.180 , the estate had two years from that date to bring the complaint, but the complaint was not brought within that time. Flick v. Estate of Wittich, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 12 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2015 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 859 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015).

Under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 413.180 and 413.190 , the statute of limitations did not accrue until the estate knew or had reason to know of both the victim's death and that it may have been caused by defendant's conduct, which in this case was when the grand jury returned the indictment. Flick v. Estate of Wittich, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 12 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2015 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 859 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015).

Wrongful death claim based on a murder was time-barred because (1) the claim was not filed within one year of the murderer's public indictment, and (2) the statute of limitations was not tolled, as nothing showed the murderer absconded or otherwise obstructed prosecution of the claim. Estate of Wittich v. Flick, 519 S.W.3d 774, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 2017 ).

10.Foreign Personal Representative.

Under Kentucky law a foreign administrator is not permitted to maintain an action for wrongful death and, where executors alleged to reside in New York and Ohio instituted an action for wrongful death growing out of an accident occurring in Kentucky against a citizen of Kentucky and, after the statute of limitations had run, filed a motion to amend the complaint by joining a citizen of Kentucky as ancillary administrator, the motion was properly overruled and the case dismissed since the action was barred by the statute of limitations and the diversity of citizenship, if any, had been destroyed. Seymour v. Johnson, 235 F.2d 181, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 3841 (6th Cir. Ky. 1956 ).

The appointment of a foreign personal representative does not begin the period of limitations contained in subsection (3) of this section so that an action against a decedent driver by his guest, both of whom were residents of Indiana, for injuries sustained by the guest while a passenger in decedent’s car and based on an accident occurring in Crittenden County, Kentucky, was not barred one (1) year after the appointment of his personal representative in Indiana and could be maintained for two (2) years after his death. Witherspoon v. Salm, 346 S.W.2d 48, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Cited in:

Stewart v. Raikes, 627 S.W.2d 586, 1982 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1982 ); Shepherd v. Wellman, 313 F.3d 963, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 26449 (6th Cir. 2002), rehearing denied, — F.3d —, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 4286 (6th Cir. 2003); DiGiuro v. Ragland, — S.W.3d —, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 188 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004); Long v. Regency Rehab & Nursing Ctr., — F. Supp. 2d —, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37984 (W.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Actions that survive, KRS ch. 411.

Claims against decedents’ estates, limitations, KRS 396.011 , 396.045 and 396.205 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 605 (1993).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer Asserting Various Defenses to Wrongful Death Claim Based upon Dangerous Condition, Form 141.09.

413.190. Result of absence from the state or obstruction of action under KRS 413.090 to 413.160.

  1. If, at the time any cause of action mentioned in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 accrues against a resident of this state, he is absent from it, the period limited for the commencement of the action against him shall be computed from the time of his return to this state.
  2. When a cause of action mentioned in KRS 413.090 to 413.160 accrues against a resident of this state, and he by absconding or concealing himself or by any other indirect means obstructs the prosecution of the action, the time of the continuance of the absence from the state or obstruction shall not be computed as any part of the period within which the action shall be commenced. But this saving shall not prevent the limitation from operating in favor of any other person not so acting, whether he is a necessary party to the action or not.

History. 2531, 2532.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Construction.

KRS 413.290 providing limitations shall not begin to run in favor of persons coming temporarily into this state but shall attach only in favor of actual residents in good faith after notice, has little significance when read out of context of the general statutory provisions on the limitations of actions but it must be considered in connection with and as a clarification of this section which is a related statute. Boughton v. Shoulders, 116 F. Supp. 391, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2231 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

2.Application.

That defendant was at the time the action accrued and had ever since been a nonresident of the state of Kentucky could not relieve the running of the statute of limitations, if it began to run at all, for this section applies only as “against residents of the state.” O'Bannon's Adm'r v. O'Bannon, 76 Ky. 583 , 1878 Ky. LEXIS 1 ( Ky. 1878 ). (See KRS 413.290 .).

While defendant’s claim against nonresident plaintiff might have been properly a counterclaim in a suit on notes it was a defense, and this section does not apply to nonresidents or defenses. Aultman & Taylor Co. v. Meade, 121 Ky. 241 , 89 S.W. 137, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 208 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1905 ).

Subsection (1) of this section applies only where the defendant was a resident of this state at the time the cause of action accrued, but was temporarily absent. It does not apply where the defendant was a nonresident. Sword v. Scott, 293 Ky. 630 , 169 S.W.2d 825, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 676 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where firefighters challenged a city’s calculations of their overtime pay, the five-year limitations period of KRS 413.120 was not equitably tolled by operation of KRS 413.190(2), as there was no evidence the city concealed its overtime pay calculations or obstructed the prosecution of firefighters’ claims regarding overtime pay. Commonwealth v. Hasken, 265 S.W.3d 215, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 244 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Prison guard’s threat to plaintiff inmate’s parole if she reported his misconduct did not meet the requirements for tolling under KRS 413.190(2) because there was no allegation that the threat was misleading or deceiving. Dishman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86169 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 20, 2010).

Even if the prisoner guard’s threat to plaintiff inmate’s parole if she reported his misconduct had tolled the statute of limitations under KRS 413.190(2), his threat would not have tolled with respect to defendant correctional center or the warden because the inmate had not alleged that they knew of, or actively concealed, the guard’s specific misconduct or his threat regarding her parole. Dishman v. Corr. Corp. of Am., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86169 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 20, 2010).

Wrongful death claim based on a murder was time-barred because (1) the claim was not filed within one year of the murderer's public indictment, and (2) the statute of limitations was not tolled, as nothing showed the murderer absconded or otherwise obstructed prosecution of the claim. Estate of Wittich v. Flick, 519 S.W.3d 774, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 2017 ).

Kentucky law excused plaintiffs' failure to discover defendants' wrongful conduct because the parties' family dynamics were such that plaintiffs trusted their brothers implicitly, and generally deferred to their business judgment. Moreover, defendant brothers reacted aggressively and disparagingly whenever plaintiffs tried to inquire into defendants' management of the family business and their parents' assets. Osborn v. Griffin, 865 F.3d 417, 2017 FED App. 0168P, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13721 (6th Cir. Ky. 2017 ).

3.Absence from State.

Where maker of note was employed by a corporation doing business in the city of his residence but was out of the city with his family for the next five (5) years except when he returned for three (3) or four (4) days every three (3) or four (4) months, an instruction to a jury that if they believed the maker of the note was absent from the state, and payees were by reason thereof prevented from suing in the state within the five (5) years then the action was not barred, but, if he changed his residence and was often in the city and payee knew or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known it then the suit was barred, were not inconsistent. Nunez v. Taylor, 91 Ky. 461 , 16 S.W. 128, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 22 , 1891 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1891 ).

The removal of a husband and wife from the state and their continuous residence out of state until the bringing of suit to subject the improvements made by the husband on his wife’s land to the payment of his debt, suspended any statute of limitations and constituted no bar even though plaintiff might have proceeded by attachment and constructive service against the land. Craig's Ex'r v. Anderson, 96 Ky. 425 , 29 S.W. 311, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 603 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1895 ).

This section, suspending statute of limitations during debtor’s absence from state, applies only to resident debtors. Clarke v. Seay, 51 S.W. 589, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 394 (1899).

The nonresidency and absence of devisees from the state stopped the running of the five (5) year statute of limitations, during the time they were so absent, as to an unwritten claim against the estate for which the devised land was liable. Withers' Adm'r v. Withers' Heirs, 100 S.W. 253, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 1099 (1907).

4.Obstruction.

A mere voluntary statement by the president of employer that injured employee would be kept on the payroll without the exacting of plaintiff any character of promise whatsoever and without any consideration at all, and where it was soon discovered by the plaintiff that the defendant did not regard it as a contract or binding promise, was not an agreement constituting an obstruction excepted by this section. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

The obstruction created by promise to continue payment to employee sustaining a personal injury must be such as would enable employee to maintain suit upon it if violated. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Under this section indirect obstruction must amount to some conduct misleading plaintiff so as to prevent him from suing when he desires to do so, and words “defeat or obstruct” imply some act preventing suit which plaintiff cannot with reasonable diligence overcome. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Promise to pay injured brakeman’s hospital and doctor bills and wages, if he would defer suit, avoids plea of limitation. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Carter, 226 Ky. 561 , 10 S.W.2d 1064, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 843 ( Ky. 1927 ).

Allegations in plaintiff’s reply that false representations were made more than five (5) years before note became due and suit was filed, and that false statements of the financial condition of the corporation were entered upon its books by the order of defendants acting as its directors but without an allegation that plaintiff had no knowledge of these entries, did not constitute an obstruction within the meaning of this section in a suit against directors for declaring dividends during insolvency in violation of statute. McGill's Adm'x v. Phillips, 243 Ky. 768 , 49 S.W.2d 1025, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 192 ( Ky. 1932 ).

Representations of officers of employer to injured employee that they would pay him and were going to settle for injuries if he would not sue together with employee’s reliance thereon were sufficient to obstruct the running of the statute of limitations. Clover Splint Coal Co. v. Lorenz, 270 Ky. 676 , 110 S.W.2d 457, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 141 ( Ky. 1937 ).

An action for relief or damages for fraud or mistake must be brought within ten (10) years from the time the fraud or mistake occurred even though the conditions contemplated by this section exist. Sword v. Scott, 293 Ky. 630 , 169 S.W.2d 825, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 676 ( Ky. 1943 ).

“Other indirect means” of obstruction in this section must consist of some act or conduct which in point of facts misleads or deceives plaintiff and obstructs or prevents him from instituting his suit while he might do so. Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Negotiations of settlement for injuries received in an automobile accident which were conducted between the claimant and the driver’s attorney during which there was no firm offer by either party to settle for a specified amount, no promise of payment for an agreement not to sue, no concealment of facts which prevented the institution of suit, and in which there was no fiducial or trust relationship between the parties, none estopped the potential defendant from asserting the limitations of KRS 413.140 nor extended the period of limitations pursuant to the provisions of subsection (2) of this section. Burke v. Blair, 349 S.W.2d 836, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Teacher’s action in instructing child abuse victim not to tell anyone did not amount to an obstruction sufficient to toll the statute of limitations. Rigazio v. Archdiocese of Louisville, 853 S.W.2d 295, 1993 Ky. App. LEXIS 63 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993).

Mere statements by a supplier of durable medical equipment that it would fix a problem with a wheelchair did not rise to the level of obstruction. Davis v. All Care Med., Inc., 986 S.W.2d 902, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1999 ).

5.—Absconding.

The statute of limitations does not run against the judgment or the right to have execution issued upon the judgment during the time the judgment debtor has removed himself from the state. Brittain v. Lankford, 110 Ky. 484 , 61 S.W. 1000, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1899 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1901 ).

Under the express provisions of this section where a debtor obstructs the bringing of an action by absenting himself from the state, the period of his absence is not to be computed as a part of the period of limitation. Southern Contract Co.'s Assignee v. Newhouse, 119 Ky. 704 , 66 S.W. 730, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2141 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1902 ).

If defendant in action for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident absconded from the state after the accident, the statute of limitations did not run during the period of the absence. Sweeney v. Schadler, 259 S.W.2d 680, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1158 ( Ky. 1952 ).

6.—Concealment.

Lessor’s action for royalties and rentals was tolled under this section during the period of time purchaser of mining lease worked and mined coal under the surface without disclosure to lessor or recording deed. Walter Bledsoe & Co. v. Elkhorn Land Co., 219 F.2d 556, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4857 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

Where defendant obstructs prosecution of action, such as by concealing plaintiff’s cause of action in such a way that it cannot be discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence, period of obstruction is not computed as any part of the period within which action must be commenced. Walter Bledsoe & Co. v. Elkhorn Land Co., 219 F.2d 556, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 4857 (6th Cir. Ky. 1955 ).

Mere ignorance of facts constituting cause of action resulting from want of diligence is not an obstruction, but concealment of facts on which cause of action arises by one under duty to disclose it is fraudulent obstruction. Reuff-Griffin Decorating Co. v. Wilkes, 173 Ky. 566 , 191 S.W. 443, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Generally, where inquiry by the injured party would have revealed the misdeed, the period of limitation against a cause of action arising under subsection (12) of KRS 413.120 begins running on the perpetration of the fraud, but where a fiduciary relationship exists, such as that between guardian-uncle and ward-niece, the wrongdoer has a duty to reveal his action to the injured party, and failure to do so constitutes an “indirect means of obstructing the prosecution of the action” within the meaning of this section, and even though the injured party made no inquiry, the period of limitation does not begin to run until the fraud is revealed or discovered. Security Trust Co. v. Wilson, 307 Ky. 152 , 210 S.W.2d 336, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 701 ( Ky. 1948 ).

Where the defendant conceals plaintiff’s cause of action in such a way that it cannot be discovered by the exercise of ordinary diligence on the latter’s part, the right of action does not accrue until discovery is made. St. Clair v. Bardstown Transfer Line, Inc., 310 Ky. 776 , 221 S.W.2d 679, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1274 ( Ky. 1949 ).

The statute of limitations on malpractice action is tolled where physician by concealing facts of liability, delayed or prevented suit, and statute of limitations begins to run only when fraud or concealment is revealed or facts discovered or should have been discovered by exercise of reasonable diligence by the injured patient. Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ).

The personal representative of a deceased person had the duty to disclose a will only if he knew one existed and where to find it, and that duty would not arise from the fact alone that he was administrator of the estate, but primarily from the fact that he had actual knowledge of the existence of a will. Second Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. First Sec. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 398 S.W.2d 50, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 38 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where, in a wrongful death action based on allegations of medical malpractice, the evidence established that the defendants had not concealed facts or misled the plaintiff, this statute did not toll the statute of limitations, and the cause of action expired when no personal representative qualified within one (1) year from the injury. Southeastern Kentucky Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. Gaylor, 756 S.W.2d 467, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1988 ).

There existed no justification to invoke this tolling statute in cause of action against architect for water penetration problems of a building where no evidence was provided that architect made any false representations, fraudulently concealed his alleged negligence, or made any promises in exchange for building owner’s forbearance in filing a claim. Old Mason's Home v. Mitchell, 892 S.W.2d 304, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 15 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Diocese had duty to take action against teacher when it discovered he was sexually abusing students, and failure to do so constituted concealment and obstruction under this section. Roman Catholic Diocese v. Secter, 966 S.W.2d 286, 1998 Ky. App. LEXIS 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).

Restaurant customer’s negligence claim against a restaurant after he contracted hepatitis A after dining there was not time barred even though it was not filed within one year of the customer’s illness because the restaurant engaged in active concealment, and the record reflected that the restaurant manager, in responding to a health department investigation, suppressed the fact that an employee had a hepatitis A infection and poor hygiene and work habits. Although the customer’s suit was filed nearly three years after he fell ill, the statute of limitations was tolled for the entire period of concealment; because the customer filed suit three months after learning of the source of his illness, his suit was timely filed. Emberton v. GMRI, Inc., 299 S.W.3d 565, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 2009 ).

Under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 413.180 and 413.190 , the statute of limitations did not accrue until the estate knew or had reason to know of both the victim's death and that it may have been caused by defendant's conduct, which in the instant case was when the grand jury returned the indictment. Flick v. Estate of Wittich, 2015 Ky. App. LEXIS 12 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2015 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 859 (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2015).

While a workers’ compensation claimant argued Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.190(2) tolled the statute of limitations based on the assertion that a subsidiary owned the plant at the time, he failed to show that another entity affirmatively concealed its ownership of the plant when its ownership was a matter of public record. Cabrera v. JBS USA, LLC, 568 S.W.3d 865, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 17 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

7.Estoppel.

A railroad company was estopped from pleading the statute of limitations where its superintendent had represented to an injured employee that if he would not sue they would pay him until he recovered, pay him for his injuries, and he would have a permanent job as long as he lived or as long as the superintendent remained on the road, but after the one (1) year statute of limitations had run they discharged him and refused to pay anything further. Chesapeake & N. Ry. v. Speakman, 114 Ky. 628 , 71 S.W. 633, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1449 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1903 ).

This section is recognition in law of equitable estoppel or estoppel in pais to prevent fraudulent or inequitable resort to plea of limitations. Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Under either statutory or equitable estoppel the representation, or act, intentional or otherwise, must have been calculated to mislead or deceive and to induce inaction by the injured party, and on the other hand, the representation or conduct must have been relied upon reasonably and in good faith and have resulted in prejudice from having refrained from commencing his action within the limitation period. Adams v. Ison, 249 S.W.2d 791, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 868 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Where a confidential relationship exists and there has been fraud in the inception of the contract, constructive notice by way of recordation may not be construed to mean actual discovery of the fraud or mistake and defendants are estopped from pleading the running of the statute of limitations. Lemaster v. Caudill, 328 S.W.2d 276, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 103 ( Ky. 1959 ); Jennings v. Fain, 226 Ky. 290 , 10 S.W.2d 1101, 1928 Ky. LEXIS 94 ( Ky. 1928 ); Hollifield v. Blackburn, 294 Ky. 74 , 170 S.W.2d 910, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 380 ( Ky. 1943 ); McCoy v. Arena, 295 Ky. 403 , 174 S.W.2d 726, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 266 ( Ky. 1943 ); Morgan v. Hughett, 301 Ky. 409 , 192 S.W.2d 197, 1946 Ky. LEXIS 496 ( Ky. 1946 ); Stepp v. Stepp, 288 S.W.2d 337, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 250 ( Ky. 1956 ).

Where there was no firm offer by either party to settle the claim for a specified amount, no fiducial or trust relationship between the parties, no promise of payment for an agreement not to sue, nor any concealment of facts which prevented the institution of suit, the mere negotiations by defendant’s attorney looking toward an amicable settlement do not afford a basis for estoppel to plead limitations. Burke v. Blair, 349 S.W.2d 836, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Five-year statute of limitations applied to the unjust enrichment claim by the holder of oil and gas interests against a property owner when the holder alleged that it made overpayments of royalty payments to the owner. Furthermore, the discovery rule did not toll the statute of limitations as the holder failed to discover its alleged overpayments to the owner due to a lack of reasonable diligence on the holder’s part. EQT Prod. Co. v. Big Sandy Co., L.P., 590 S.W.3d 275, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 200 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

8.Nonresidents.

Action for personal injuries was barred under the New York or the Kentucky statutes of limitation where action arose out of an automobile accident which occurred in Kentucky, March 8, 1953, while plaintiff was passenger in an automobile owned and operated by defendant who was a New York resident and on March 6, 1954, plaintiff brought an action in federal court but asked the clerk’s office to retain the complaint and not issue a summons since whereabouts of defendant was unknown and a summons was issued on March 12, 1957, and served, together with the complaint, on March 13, 1957, upon the clerk of the surrogate’s court in New York where the period of limitations was three (3) years. Decker v. Boyle, 162 F. Supp. 164, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2699 (D.N.Y. 1957).

The fact defendant had once been a resident of this state and had long prior to the accrual of plaintiff’s cause of action moved therefrom did not prevent the running of the statute of limitations in his favor where he was a bona fide nonresident when plaintiff’s cause of action accrued. Bybee's Ex'r v. Poynter, 117 Ky. 109 , 77 S.W. 698, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1251 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1903 ).

The limitation statutes do not stop running as to a resident’s cause of action against a nonresident who is such when it accrues, but even if defendant was a resident of the state evidence failed to show such absence of defendant from state as that contemplated by this section. Daly v. Power, 248 Ky. 533 , 59 S.W.2d 10, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 274 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Since the provisions of this section do not apply to nonresident debtors, where appellee’s absence was of such nature and sufficiency as to qualify him a nonresident at time of original action, he was entitled to benefits of statute of limitations. Skaggs v. Fyffe, 299 Ky. 751 , 187 S.W.2d 281, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 799 ( Ky. 1945 ).

KRS 413.290 providing that limitations shall not begin to run in favor of persons temporarily in this state but shall attach only in favor of actual residents and in good faith after notice, was designed merely to implement and clarify subsection (2) of this section and did not suspend the running of the one (1) year statute of limitations as to defendants who were nonresidents of Kentucky at the time the cause of action arose for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident in Kentucky. Rockwood v. Huey, 348 S.W.2d 915, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Kentucky statute of limitations for personal injury claims applied to a parent's claims under 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.290 did not provide that the personal-injury statute of limitations was inapplicable to non-residents, but was designed only to effectuate this section. Brown v. Univ. of Ky. Comprehensive Assessment & Training Servs., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 25049 (6th Cir. Ky. June 19, 2014).

9.Assumed Name.

Medical negligence action was brought against diagnostic laboratory which was partnership doing business under assumed name. Failure of partners doing business under assumed name to comply with statute requiring filing certificate of assumed name was sufficient to create estoppel under tolling statute, thereby tolling statute of limitations during period of noncompliance. Munday v. Mayfair Diagnostic Laboratory, 831 S.W.2d 912, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The purpose of the assumed name statute is to inform members of the public, of the identity of persons doing business under an assumed name. Munday v. Mayfair Diagnostic Laboratory, 831 S.W.2d 912, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1992 ).

10.Failure to Disclose.

While concealment ordinarily requires an affirmative act, where the law imposes a duty of disclosure, a failure of disclosure may constitute concealment under subsection (2) of this section, or at least amount to misleading or obstructive conduct. Munday v. Mayfair Diagnostic Laboratory, 831 S.W.2d 912, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1992 ).

In a dispute between plaintiffs (four sisters) and defendants (their brothers, who were fiduciaries of their parents' estates), because the record was replete with material factual disputes about whether defendants made adequate and truthful disclosures to plaintiffs regarding the parents' estate plans, settlement of a lawsuit, and disputed transfers of stock and real property, and accepting plaintiffs' testimony as to their actual discovery of the fiduciary breaches and fraud alleged, the court could not say as a matter of law that the claims were time barred under Kentucky law. Osborn v. Griffin, 50 F. Supp. 3d 772, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139915 (E.D. Ky. 2014 ).

Statute of limitations was not tolled based on the concealment of the patient’s medical records as she was well aware of her cause of action prior to the running of the statute of limitations even without receiving her medical records. Sneed v. Univ. of Louisville Hosp., 600 S.W.3d 221, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 131 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Cited in:

Lashlee v. Sumner, 570 F.2d 107, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12711 (6th Cir. 1978); Harralson v. Monger, 206 S.W.3d 336, 2006 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 2006 ); Ball v. Stalnaker, 517 F. Supp. 2d 946, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74800 (E.D. Ky. 2007 ); Anderson v. Bd. of Educ., 616 F. Supp. 2d 662, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37476 (E.D. Ky. 2009 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.Application.

Unpublished decision: Buyer was aware at the time that it filed the lawsuit that the seller might have omitted disclosing additional pollution on its property and even alleged that the seller did so; thus, KRS 413.190(2) certainly did not operate to toll the limitations periods past 1996. 500 Assocs. v. Vt. Am. Corp., 496 Fed. Appx. 589, 2012 FED App. 0947N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 18272 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

2.Estoppel.

Unpublished decision: Contractor’s fraud counterclaim against an insurer and agent foundered on Kentucky’s statute of limitations; the agent’s vague and isolated statement, that the situation would “work itself out,” could not excuse the contractor’s delay in filing a claim. Frontier Ins. Co. in Rehab. v. RLM Constr. Co., 468 Fed. Appx. 506, 2012 FED App. 0287N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5395 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Unpublished decision: In plaintiffs’ proposed 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 class action against a county government and former officials for failing to report the sexual abuse of plaintiffs, the district court properly held that the claims were time-barred because the statute of limitations began to run at the time the individuals were abused or, if they were minors, when they turned eighteen pursuant to KRS 413.170 , and a finding of fraudulent concealment under KRS 413.190(2) would not preserve the claims based on the time published newspaper articles put plaintiffs on notice; class certification was properly denied under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 because the class failed on numerosity grounds under Rule 23(a) since only four class members’ claims were not time-barred with regard to the government and only three were not time-barred with regard to the officials. Guy v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Gov't, 488 Fed. Appx. 9, 2012 FED App. 0472N, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9364 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ), cert. denied, 568 U.S. 980, 133 S. Ct. 547, 184 L. Ed. 2d 343, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 8427 (U.S. 2012).

4.Obstruction.

Unpublished decision: Statute of limitations on claims against plaintiff’s treating physician was not tolled because physician’s conduct was not calculated to mislead or deceive, and physician had no reason to hide his identity or delay suit because no cause of action had accrued when he treated plaintiff. Ham v. Sterling Emergency Servs. of the Midwest, Inc., 575 Fed. Appx. 610, 2014 FED App. 0607N, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15329 (6th Cir. Ky. 2014 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 20 N. Ky. L. Rev. 605 (1993).

Bartlett, Civil Procedure, 21 N. Ky. L. Rev. 269 (1994).

ALR

Fraud, misrepresentation, or deception as estopping reliance on statute of limitations. 43 A.L.R.3d 429.

413.200. Action against personal representative who has settled accounts. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (2529: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 299, § 5) was repealed by Acts 1988, ch. 90, § 32, effective July 15, 1988.

413.210. Action against heirs and personal representative when estate divided. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (2530: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 299, § 6) was repealed by Acts 1988, ch. 90, § 32, effective July 15, 1988.

413.220. Sureties who are discharged after seven years.

  1. A surety shall be discharged from all liability under any judgment or decree, after the lapse of seven (7) years without the issue of execution and prosecution in good faith for collection.
  2. A surety in any bond given in the course of any judicial proceeding shall be discharged from all liability on it unless suit is brought on it within seven (7) years after the cause of action accrues.
  3. A surety in any obligation or contract, other than those provided for in KRS 413.230 , shall be discharged from all liability on it unless suit is brought on it within seven (7) years after the cause of action accrues.

History. 2548, 2549, 2551.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The court has treated this section as a statute of limitations relating to sureties and not a statute providing for the discharge of sureties, thus, an action against a surety on a note is barred seven (7) years after the note matures. Harned v. Harned, 270 Ky. 735 , 110 S.W.2d 674, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 154 ( Ky. 1937 ).

2.Application.

A wife, who signed a note accepted in settlement of notes of her husband expecting him to sign as principal and he did not, was a principal and not a surety within KRS 413.090 and this section. Wm. Deering & Co. v. Veal, 78 S.W. 886, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1809 (1904).

A cause of action against surety on administrator’s bond did not accrue until administrator, who had fraudulently collected insurance in 1930, was brought into court in 1942 after the heirs discovered the fraud in 1941, failed to settle his accounts in 1942 and subsection (12) of KRS 413.120 , subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 , and KRS 413.230 and this section did not apply. Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ).

3.Judgments.

It was immaterial whether judgment on a note was rendered against the surety in his lifetime or against his administratrix to be levied on assets in her hands for, in either case, this section applied and voluntary payments by heir of surety made in ignorance of her rights and in the mistaken belief she was liable for her father’s debts did not extend the time for issuing execution, and plea of limitation should have been sustained and surety’s estate discharged from all liability where execution was not issued until more than nine (9) years after rendition of judgment. Rafferty v. Bank of Hardinsburg & Trust Co., 176 Ky. 145 , 195 S.W. 429, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Under this section discharging a surety from liability under judgment after seven (7) years without execution issued thereon, held that whether judgment on a note was against a surety in lifetime or his administratrix to be levied on assets in her hands is immaterial. Rafferty v. Bank of Hardinsburg & Trust Co., 176 Ky. 145 , 195 S.W. 429, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Where execution on judgment issued more than nine (9) years after rendition and more than seven (7) years after last payment made thereon by heir of surety, held that surety’s estate was discharged from liability. Rafferty v. Bank of Hardinsburg & Trust Co., 176 Ky. 145 , 195 S.W. 429, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Lapse of seven (7) years between rendition of judgment and issuance of execution, or between return of one execution and issuance of another, discharges surety from liability on judgment. Frick Co. v. Eversole, 273 Ky. 160 , 116 S.W.2d 333, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 622 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The bringing of a suit cannot take the place of, or satisfy the requirement of subsection (1) of this section. Frick Co. v. Eversole, 273 Ky. 160 , 116 S.W.2d 333, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 622 ( Ky. 1938 ).

4.Bonds in Judicial Proceedings.

Where a guardian having a life estate in land brought an action to sell the land and executed the necessary bond and, without any court order, the proceeds were paid to him, the guardian was entitled to the use of the proceeds for life and no cause of action accrued to the wards, who were the remaindermen, until the guardian’s death at which time the statute of limitations commenced running against the surety on the bond. Brooks v. Troutman, 104 Ky. 392 , 47 S.W. 271, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 640 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 178 ( Ky. 1898 ).

Where surety was not bound to the master commissioner or to anyone else for any sum whatever on the first bond because more than seven (7) years had elapsed from time the bond fell due and he authorized his agent by power of attorney to sign his name on a new bond for $6,000 in place of the old bond and his agent executed it for $8,667, the new bond was void as to the surety. Dugan v. Champion Coal & Towboat Co., 105 Ky. 821 , 49 S.W. 958, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1641 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 283 ( Ky. 1899 ).

Where sureties undertook that the receiver would pay, every six (6) months, interest on the sum of money named in the bond to a named person, the statute began to run as to each instalment from the time it should have been paid and was barred as to the sureties seven (7) years after that date. May v. Ball, 108 Ky. 180 , 56 S.W. 7, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1673 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1900 ).

An action by a judgment creditor against the sureties of an assignee for benefit of creditors held to have accrued as stated, so that an action on their bond was barred by this section. Neely v. City Nat'l Bank, 150 Ky. 512 , 150 S.W. 679, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1912 ).

KRS 379.130 exempts an assignee for creditors from being sued for nine (9) months after his qualification, so that such period must be deducted in computing the time when an action is barred on his official bond for appropriating the debtor’s assets, though his appropriation of the assigned assets occurred within such nine (9) months. Neely v. City Nat'l Bank, 150 Ky. 512 , 150 S.W. 679, 1912 Ky. LEXIS 941 ( Ky. 1912 ).

The plaintiff had no cause of action against the receiver while he held the fund subject to the order of the court and had never settled his accounts or made a report to the court, and until the court determined to whom the money was to be paid no action could be brought against the principal or the surety. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Shields, 157 Ky. 371 , 163 S.W. 203, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1914 ).

5.Obligations or Contracts.
6.— Personal Representatives.

Subsection (3) of this section applies to an action in behalf of creditors on an administrator’s bond and not subsection (2) of this section applying to a surety on a bond given in any judicial proceedings, or KRS 413.230 providing for a limitation of five (5) years for liability to a distributee, devisee or ward. Commonwealth v. Sammons, 180 Ky. 403 , 202 S.W. 885, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1918 ).

When the accounts of administratrix were settled by the commissioner and no exception was filed to his report, the balance in her hands was then due and collectible, and a creditor’s cause of action against the sureties on the bond then accrued and the statute of limitations in favor of sureties was not suspended while the creditors were litigating with others for the purpose of determining how much they were entitled to out of the estate; thus, an action on the administratrix’s bond brought by creditor more than seven (7) years after the cause of action accrued was barred by the statute of limitations. Commonwealth v. Sammons, 180 Ky. 403 , 202 S.W. 885, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1918 ).

7.— Persons Under Disabilities.

KRS 413.170 applies to actions against sureties on the bond of the committee for a person of unsound mind, and limitations in favor of the surety do not commence to run until the disability is removed. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The fact that a person of unsound mind may have a committee or may sue by a next friend does not alter the provisions of KRS 413.170 suspending the running of limitations during disability. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

This section applies to sureties on the bond of the committee of a lunatic, and the seven (7) year period controls actions against such sureties, not the five (5) year period of KRS 413.230 . Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

8.— Official Bonds.

Where plaintiff did not discover the fraud until more than seven (7) years had expired from date of officer’s bond because he was misled and deceived by the false report made officially, under oath, by the officer as to the number of licenses issued and amount of taxes collected by him during said period, the ten year period of limitation under KRS 413.130 applied and as the sureties, like the officer, covenanted for faithful discharge of their official duties the cause of action against them could not have been deemed to have accrued until discovery of the fraud. Schwerman v. Commonwealth, 99 Ky. 296 , 33 S.W. 78 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Under this section the sureties on a sheriff’s official bond were released from liability for his official misconduct after seven (7) years without suit. Hill v. Ragland, 114 Ky. 209 , 70 S.W. 634, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1053 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1902 ).

Sureties on deputy sheriff’s bond were released by limitation when action was not brought within seven (7) years after it accrued on January 1, 1912, and the postponement by the sheriff of the payment of unaccounted for taxes until March 1, 1912 did not lengthen the time in which he could bring an action against the sureties. Ford's Adm'r v. May, 213 Ky. 231 , 280 S.W. 965, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 486 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Under this section, period of limitation affecting the liability of surety on bond of county motor patrolman is seven (7) years from accrual of cause of action. National Surety Co. v. Hester's Adm'r, 241 Ky. 623 , 44 S.W.2d 563, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 127 ( Ky. 1931 ).

9.— Officers and Employees of Financial Institutions.

A bank could sue for each and every breach of duty of a bank clerk or could abandon any it desired and prosecute other breaches and the fact that an action on his bond for the first breach was barred by the seven (7) year statute of limitations did not bar later breaches. Deposit Bank of Midway's Assignee v. Hearne, 104 Ky. 819 , 48 S.W. 160, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1019 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 233 ( Ky. 1898 ).

The seven (7) year statute of limitations began to run against sureties on a fidelity bond from the time of the defalcation by the principal and not at the end of the year in which the defalcation occurred and for which the annual bond was executed. Grant County Bldg., Loan & Sav. Ass'n v. Lemmon, 78 S.W. 874, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1725 (1904).

10.— Notes and Mortgages.

Since a mortgage is not barred until the debt is barred, a mortgage executed by a surety to secure the debt and not merely his liability as surety may be enforced although the surety has been discharged from liability by this section. Craddock v. Lee, 61 S.W. 22, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 1651 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 421 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

The seven (7) year limitation would bar an action against an apparent principal in a note who showed, as against the obligee, that he was only a surety in realty as between him and his co-obligor, without reference to the knowledge of the obligee as to whether he was or was not a surety. Weller v. Ralston, 89 S.W. 698, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 572 (1905).

The five (5) year limitation provided in KRS 413.120 was applicable only to notes negotiated before maturity and in the hands of a third party, the 15 year statute being applicable as to the principals and the seven (7) year statute as applicable to the sureties so long as the instrument remains in the hands of the original payee. Southern Nat'l Bank v. Schimpeler, 160 Ky. 813 , 170 S.W. 178, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 539 ( Ky. 1914 ).

Mortgage lien given by one who signs a note as surety is not given to secure the obligation of the surety, but that of the principal debtor, and is not barred by the seven (7) year statute of limitations but by the 15 year statute of limitations. Rhinehart v. Stacy, 213 Ky. 684 , 281 S.W. 809, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 594 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Although the plea of limitations as to the personal liability of the sureties on a mortgage note was also personal, the grantees in a conveyance from the mortgagor could plead that the mortgage lien on the property given to the sureties was barred by limitations. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

It was for sureties to decide whether they would avail themselves of plea of limitations as against the note which they had not paid, or acknowledge their liability and compel their principal to pay by a sale of the property which he had mortgaged to them for the purpose of indemnifying them against loss. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Evidence held insufficient to rebut presumption that person whose name was first signed to note was principal, not surety. Peoples Bank v. Bowling, 276 Ky. 228 , 123 S.W.2d 1052, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 550 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Action, started in 1935 against surety on promissory note, was barred by seven (7) year statute of limitations, where evidence, although conflicting, showed that note had been executed in 1922, payable twelve (12) months after date, and had been altered to date in 1929. Kelly v. King, 284 Ky. 429 , 145 S.W.2d 78, 1940 Ky. LEXIS 527 ( Ky. 1940 ).

Where wife signed mortgage note with husband and later husband conveyed mortgaged property to her, action to foreclose mortgage was not barred by seven (7) year statute of limitation, notwithstanding wife’s claim that she signed note only as surety. Combs v. Salyer, 291 Ky. 592 , 165 S.W.2d 40, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Where life tenant as principal and her two daughters as sureties executed a $5,000 demand note and on the back assigned all their right, title and interest in and to funds to become due from an estate upon the death of the life tenant, judgment was entered upon a plea of the seven (7) year statute of limitations in favor of the sureties in respect to their personal liability on the note and where the life tenant died during the appeal and the remainderman took the fee simple title to the real estate the question became moot as to the sureties. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Louisville Trust Co., 295 Ky. 825 , 175 S.W.2d 524, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 349 ( Ky. 1943 ).

Where proceeds of discounted note executed by husband to wife and indorsed by her to a bank which had refused to make a loan to her husband on the ground he was insolvent were placed to the credit of the wife in the bank and she then voluntarily turned over to her husband that amount by issuing her check to him for deposit to his account in the same bank, she did not come within the protection of the seven (7) year statute of limitations applicable to sureties on notes, since the obligation was her individual transaction made in an effort to aid and assist her husband. Kann v. Peoples State Bank & Trust Co., 301 Ky. 708 , 192 S.W.2d 945, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 758 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Where in an action against daughter by her father’s administrator, she answered denying she executed the note and plead that her mother executed the note; that she signed the note as surety only; that she did not receive any part of the consideration; that after the note sued on was delivered to the payee, it was, without her knowledge, changed by erasing the figure “1” and inserting the figure “4” so that the date appeared as 1934 instead of 1931; and, that it was barred by the seven (7) year statute of limitations applicable to sureties, an instruction to the jury, who found note was executed in 1931 and was barred, that if they found the note was executed in 1934 they should find for plaintiff and if they found it was executed in 1931 for the defendant was not error. Stenger's Adm'r v. Lockman, 311 Ky. 209 , 223 S.W.2d 907, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1113 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Where persons who were liable as sureties under contract to pay interest on mortgage were named defendants in original petition seeking to recover interest, which action was brought within seven (7) year limitation period, fact, that after seven (7) year period had expired petition was amended to include another party defendant, did not introduce a new cause of action as to the original defendants so as to result in the action being barred by the statute of limitations. Lipski v. Brooks, 310 Ky. 64 , 219 S.W.2d 1000, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 854 ( Ky. 1949 ).

Mortgagors who did not sign the note but only mortgaged their property to secure the debt were not sureties within the meaning of the seven (7) year statute, since the 15 year statute of limitations applies to an action to enforce the mortgage lien. Dinsmore v. Warfield, 295 S.W.2d 566, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 171 ( Ky. 1956 ).

11.— — Accommodation Endorsement.

An action to enforce a promissory note against an accommodation indorser is barred by the seven-year statute of limitations of this section. Chapman Drug Co. v. Green, 685 S.W.2d 204, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 633 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

12.— — Accrual.

A pleading that more than seven (7) years had elapsed since the signing of a note was insufficient to constitute a defense of the bar of the seven (7) year statute of limitations since the time must be computed from the maturity of the note and not the execution. Dohn v. Bronger, 47 S.W. 619, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 823 (1898).

Where the note on which plaintiffs and their co-obligor were jointly bound was due when defendant executed a suretyship bond, and not an indemnity bond, binding himself as surety for the co-obligor, against whom plaintiffs were about to institute suit to subject his property, the cause of action on the bond accrued at that time and not from time plaintiff was forced to pay the note and where more than seven (7) years had elapsed before action was instituted on the bond the plea of the statute of limitations was a conclusive bar to recovery. Howard v. Lawrence, 63 S.W. 589, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 680 (1901).

The cause of action against the surety who signed note accrued upon maturity of note. Citizens Bank of Shelbyville v. Hutchison, 272 Ky. 195 , 113 S.W.2d 1148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1938 ).

13.Revival of Liability.

A surety is released after seven (7) years from the accrual of the cause of action unless as to the surety there is an obstruction of the right to sue and a payment by the surety will not elongate the statute as to himself for the reason that the debt is not personal as to him, but of another, and a payment by the principal may elongate the statute as to himself but it does not affect the surety. Lilly v. Farmers' Nat'l Bank, 56 S.W. 722, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 148 (1900).

Limitation did not begin to run as to the surety on a note on which the time of payment had been extended with the surety’s consent until the end of the period of extension. Cook v. Landrum, 82 S.W. 585, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 813 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 424 (Ky. Ct. App. 1904).

Where surety on a note, who was released under this section when action was not brought within seven (7) years after maturity, signed a renewal note in the same capacity payable to the same payee for the same sum from the same maker, the extension of time given the payee was sufficient consideration for the surety’s promise to pay the debt. Steger v. Jackson, 139 Ky. 491 , 102 S.W. 329, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 434 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 2 ( Ky. 1907 ).

If testator was a mere surety on executor’s note and it was barred by the statute of limitations provision in surety’s will that interest on the note from the date of the will should be paid by his estate was sufficient acknowledgment of the entire debt to remove it from the bar of the statute. Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Crass, 249 Ky. 827 , 61 S.W.2d 885, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 613 ( Ky. 1933 ).

A partial payment made by a surety, whether made before or after the seven (7) year statute of limitations has lapsed, will not revive his liability nor deprive him of the benefit of the statute of limitations. Sparkman's Guardian v. Huff, 266 Ky. 183 , 98 S.W.2d 484, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1936 ).

14.Pleading.

Where the petition did not, even by reference, negative the existence of written assent or delay nor negative the removal, obstruction, or hindering of defendant being sued which would remove the bar, the defense of the seven (7) year statute of limitations could not be presented by general demurrer in an action against the surety on an official bond. Commonwealth v. Gardner, 30 S.W. 413, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 75 (1895).

The seven (7) year statute, even if it be admitted to apply to an indebtedness as surety which had become merged in a judgment, was not well pleaded, where the petition did not show that the original cause of action was based upon an appeal bond, or that it was a debt against defendants as sureties and the answer contained no averment that such was the fact. Rosson v. Metcalf, 44 S.W. 423, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 1800 (1898).

Insofar as the sureties were personally liable, no one else could plead limitations on their behalf. Alexander v. West, 241 Ky. 541 , 44 S.W.2d 518, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 107 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The defense of limitations is not available unless pleaded by answer. Moore's Adm'x v. Brookins, 277 Ky. 668 , 126 S.W.2d 1059, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 686 ( Ky. 1939 ).

15.Running of Limitations.

An action by a creditor against the administrator of a surety was barred by this section since the death of the surety did not stop the statute of limitations from running nor did the time during which no administrator was appointed. Davis' Adm'r v. Auxier, 41 S.W. 767, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 719 (1897).

It is a generally accepted rule that the statute of limitations does not begin to run until there is a person in being capable of bringing a suit. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Cause of action accrues against the Kentucky Insurance Guaranty Association when substantive reclamation violations occur which would have rendered the insolvent surety liable. Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Kentucky Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 972 S.W.2d 276, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

The fact that the violations that gave rise to sureties’ bond forfeitures were unabated and continuing did not constitute an exception to the seven-year limitation period of subsection (3). Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Kentucky Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 972 S.W.2d 276, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

The filing of proofs of claims with liquidators for insolvent sureties was irrelevant to the requirement of subsection (3) that suit against the Kentucky Insurance Guaranty Association within seven (7) years of the accrual of the cause of action. Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Kentucky Ins. Guar. Ass'n, 972 S.W.2d 276, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

16.Lengthening Period of Limitation.

Contracts undertaking to fix a longer period of limitation than that established by statute are void. Citizens Bank of Shelbyville v. Hutchison, 272 Ky. 195 , 113 S.W.2d 1148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1938 ).

17.Waiver.

The waiver of “extensions of time of payment” was a waiver simply of the surety’s right to claim an immediate release from liability upon a mere indulgence to the maker, and was not to be considered as a waiver of the statute of limitations. Citizens Bank of Shelbyville v. Hutchison, 272 Ky. 195 , 113 S.W.2d 1148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 98 ( Ky. 1938 ).

The direction in a will to pay the testator’s “just debts” does not waive the bar of limitations, since the term “just debts” meant “legal debts.” Jones' Ex'r v. Jones, 275 Ky. 753 , 122 S.W.2d 779, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 504 ( Ky. 1938 ).

18.Performance Bonds.

Since sureties on performance bonds of corporation that had received permits to engage in surface mining could not be deemed to be in default until the date upon which they refused to honor their obligations as sureties after being called upon to do so, where no claims were asserted against sureties until 1993 when they were notified by letter that mining corporation had been cited for noncompliance and that state was entitled to undertake the required reclamation work and state filed action when the bonds were not honored, since it is clear from the record that a cause of action was filed against surety within 7 years of its right to institute suit, such claims were not barred by limitations. Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Whitley Dev. Corp., 940 S.W.2d 904, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 26 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

Cited:

Liberty Nat’l Bank & Trust Co. v. Kummert, 305 Ky. 769 , 205 S.W.2d 342, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 899 ( Ky. 1947 ); Ladd v. Overcast, 386 S.W.2d 949, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 527 ( Ky. 1965 ).

413.230. Sureties who are discharged after five years.

A surety for an executor, administrator, guardian or curator, or for a sheriff to whom a decedent’s estate has been transferred, shall be discharged from all liability to a distributee, devisee or ward when five (5) years have elapsed without suit after the cause of action accrued, and after the devisee, distributee or ward attained full age. But the failure of one to commence action in time shall not affect the right of another.

History. 2550: amend. Acts 1974, ch. 299, § 7; 1980, ch. 259, § 28, effective July 15, 1980.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

Statutes of limitation are construed strictly and the court will not read into them exemptions which are not expressly put there. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

2.Trusts.

Where bond is required to be executed with surety for faithful performance by administrator of a trust, the limitation of five (5) years under this section applies to the surety from the time the cause of action accrues. Hargis v. Sewell's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 63 , 7 S.W. 557, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 920 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1888 ).

3.Administrator’s Bonds.

The five (5) year statute of limitations under this section was applicable to bar an action brought, more than five (5) years after a final settlement, by a relative excluded from the final settlement, against the surety on the administrator’s bond on the ground that the final settlement was procured through the fraud and collusion of the administrator and certain relatives. Tucker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 270 Ky. 723 , 110 S.W.2d 649, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1937 ).

A cause of action against a surety on an administrator’s bond did not accrue until the administrator, who had fraudulently collected insurance in 1930 was brought into court in 1942 after the heirs discovered the fraud in 1941, failed to settle his accounts in 1942 and subsection (12) (now (11)) of KRS 413.120 , subsection (3) of KRS 413.130 , KRS 413.220 and this section did not apply. Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ).

4.Committee of Lunatic.

Subsections (2) and (3) of KRS 413.220 apply to sureties on the bond of the committee of a lunatic, and the seven (7) year period controls actions against such sureties, not the five (5) year period of this section. Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

This section does not apply to a surety for the committee of a person of unsound mind, notwithstanding the provisions of KRS 387.210 (now repealed) that a committee shall give bond “in the same manner as a guardian.” Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

5.Accrual of Action.

A suit on the bond of a personal representative for a devastavit cannot be maintained until there has been a judgment ascertaining the amount of the demand against the estate and showing assets in the hands of the personal representative sufficient to pay the demand or a part of it; therefore, where there was a controversy between the creditors of the deceased and his distributees as to who was entitled to the funds in the hands of the personal representative, the statute of limitations under this section did not start to run against an action on the bond by the distributee until a judgment was rendered deciding the controversy. Craddock v. Browning, 114 Ky. 298 , 70 S.W. 684 ( Ky. 1902 ).

6.Infants.

Where no attempt was made in plaintiff’s reply to allege any matter to stop or avoid the running of the statute of limitations, an action, brought more than five (5) years after the ward obtained 21 years of age, against the sureties on the guardian’s bond to secure the balance due the ward, was barred by the five (5) year statute of limitations. Bybee's Ex'r v. Poynter, 117 Ky. 109 , 77 S.W. 698, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1251 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 285 ( Ky. 1903 ).

Where, at the time of distribution, a distributee was a nonresident and an infant, he could, within five (5) years after arriving at the age of 21, bring an action against the surety on the executor’s bond to enforce his rights. Smith v. Hardesty, 83 S.W. 646, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 1266 (1904).

Cited:

Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ), appeal denied, 295 F.2d 107, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468 (6th Cir. Ky. 1961 ).

413.240. Action against surety — When limitation does not run.

The limitations given in KRS 413.220 and 413.230 shall not apply to the time elapsed when there was no executor, administrator or other person authorized to commence an action, nor to the six (6) months during which an action cannot be brought against a personal representative, nor to any delay assented to by the surety in writing. If judgment is rendered for the plaintiff in any case provided for in those sections and it is afterwards reversed or arrested so that the plaintiff takes nothing by it, he may commence another action within one (1) year thereafter. If the surety absconds, conceals himself or by removal from the state or otherwise, obstructs or hinders his being sued the time of such obstruction shall not be counted as part of the time of limitation allowed by those sections. If the judgment is obstructed by appeal, supersedeas or injunction the time of such obstruction shall also be disallowed.

History. 2552.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The only conditions or acts which do stop the running of the statute of limitations in favor of sureties are prescribed by this section. Schwerman v. Commonwealth, 99 Ky. 296 , 33 S.W. 78 ( Ky. 1895 ). See Grant County Bldg., Loan & Sav. Ass'n v. Lemmon, 78 S.W. 874, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 1725 (1904).

This section prescribes the only conditions or acts that will operate to suspend the running of the seven (7) year statute of limitations relating to sureties provided in KRS 413.230 and an action brought by relative against administrator, other relatives and the surety on the administrator’s bond seeking to surcharge final settlement made more than seven (7) years previously on the ground of fraud and collusion by and between the administrator and the other relatives, was barred as to the surety since none of the alleged conduct upon the part of the administrator or other parties to the suit for the settlement would operate to suspend the running of the statute in favor of the surety on the administrator’s bond. Tucker v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 270 Ky. 723 , 110 S.W.2d 649, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 144 ( Ky. 1937 ).

The Kentucky Legislature often uses alternatives to the phrase “statute of limitations” to refer to legislatively imposed limitations periods. In other cases, a legislatively prescribed statute of limitation is referred to merely as a “limitation” or as a “time of limitation,” both of which terms occur in this section. Curry v. Vanguard Ins. Co., 923 F.2d 484, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 885 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ).

2.Application.

This section was not applicable where wife signed mortgage note with husband, and later husband conveyed mortgaged property to her, and action to foreclose mortgage was not barred by seven (7) year statute of limitation, notwithstanding wife’s claim that she signed note only as surety. Combs v. Salyer, 291 Ky. 592 , 165 S.W.2d 40, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 273 ( Ky. 1942 ).

3.Suit Against Personal Representative.

Where an action survives to the obligee, the time during which there was no executor or other person authorized to sue shall not be counted in estimating the statutory bar but the only time to be deducted as to the liability of the obligor is the six (6) months during which the administrator or executor cannot be sued; therefore, the time elapsing between the death of a surety and the appointment of his personal representative is not deductible from the seven (7) years. Davis' Adm'r v. Auxier, 41 S.W. 767, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 719 (1897).

4.Surety’s Assent to Delay.

This section did not apply and action against surety on note was barred by the statute of limitations regardless of an oral promise made by him after the statute had run that he would pay the note where there was no pleading or proof of any written assent by surety that payee should forbear instituting suit. Sparkman's Guardian v. Huff, 266 Ky. 183 , 98 S.W.2d 484, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1936 ).

5.— Promise to Pay.

When a surety is discharged from his legal liability, a promise to pay a debt, even if the promise were in writing, would not be legally binding, unless it was made upon sufficient consideration. Sparkman's Guardian v. Huff, 266 Ky. 183 , 98 S.W.2d 484, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 629 ( Ky. 1936 ).

6.Prior Action.

Where an appeal was taken by the defendant in a previous action against a policeman for illegal arrest and assault and a subsequent action was brought against the sureties on the policeman’s bond, this section was not applicable to stop the running of the statute of limitations against the sureties and an action brought against the sureties more than seven (7) years after the assault was barred by the statute of limitations. McGovern v. Rectanus, 139 Ky. 365 , 105 S.W. 965, 32 Ky. L. Rptr. 364 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1907 ).

7.Absence from State.

If surety is only temporarily absent from the state during the time for bringing suit and is often in the country during the period and plaintiff either knows of his presence or could know of such presence by the exercise of reasonable diligence this section is not applicable. Nunez v. Taylor, 91 Ky. 461 , 16 S.W. 128, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 22 , 1891 Ky. LEXIS 72 ( Ky. 1891 ).

Evidence that surety had moved with his family to Washington and then to Georgia where he purchased property and went into business there justified the court in submitting to the jury the issue of whether a surety has been absent “by removal” from the state within this section, so as to prevent the bar by limitation described by KRS 413.220 . Beavers' Adm'r v. Ashlock, 156 Ky. 98 , 160 S.W. 785, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 383 ( Ky. 1913 ).

8.Obstruction or Hindrance.

Delay of creditor to sue beyond the period of seven (7) years, when procured by fraud of the surety, is properly treated as an obstruction or hindrance. Newton v. Carson, 80 Ky. 309 , 4 Ky. L. Rptr. 1 , 1882 Ky. LEXIS 55 (Ky. Ct. App. 1882).

Where a surety, who was mailed a renewal note about a month before the statute of limitations ran on the original note and was asked to sign it and mail it to the principal, delayed signing it until the last day and when the principal received it he refused to sign it, there was no obstruction or hindrance by the surety of his being sued and the act of the surety in signing the note was not “a delay assented to by the surety in writing.” Reid v. Hamilton, 92 Ky. 619 , 18 S.W. 770, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 849 , 1892 Ky. LEXIS 32 ( Ky. 1892 ), overruled, Newby's Adm'r v. Warren's Adm'r, 277 Ky. 338 , 126 S.W.2d 436, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 648 ( Ky. 1939 ).

In an action against surety on a note where surety procured principal to deposit money in payee bank so that the bank could appropriate the deposit to the payment of its debt, the joint acts of the surety and the principal put it out of the bank’s power to sue until after a final decision in an action brought by other creditors to declare the deposit an illegal preference so the period intervening between the appropriation of the deposit by the bank and the decision in the creditor’s suit to declare the deposit an illegal preference should be deducted from the seven (7) year period of limitation running in favor of the surety. Exchange Bank of Kentucky v. Thomas, 115 Ky. 832 , 74 S.W. 1086, 25 Ky. L. Rptr. 228 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 159 ( Ky. 1903 ).

An executor of a surety in causing the creditor to refrain from suing and in postponing the reference of the case to the commissioner, thereby preventing the filing of notes before him within seven (7) years from and after their maturity, is estopped to rely on the statute of limitations in favor of sureties. Hamilton v. Wright, 87 S.W. 1093, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 1144 (1905).

Statements made by surety to creditor, before the statute of limitations had run, that he would pay the note if the principal did not, are not such an “obstructing” or “hindering” of suit as to stop the running of the statute. Jones' Ex'r v. Jones, 275 Ky. 753 , 122 S.W.2d 779, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 504 ( Ky. 1938 ).

9.Pleading.

In an action against a surety on a clerk’s bond after seven (7) years had elapsed from the accrual of the action, the defense of limitations could not be presented by general demurrer but defendant had to plead it by answer where the petition did not even, by reference, negative the existence of written assent to delay, nor negative the removal, obstruction or hindering of defendant being sued. Commonwealth v. Gardner, 30 S.W. 413, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 75 (1895).

Cited:

Louisville Trust Co. v. Smith, 192 F. Supp. 396, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3112 (W.D. Ky. 1961 ), appeal denied, 295 F.2d 107, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468 (6th Cir. Ky. 1961 ); Rison v. Shepherd, 299 Ky. 693 , 186 S.W.2d 648, 1945 Ky. LEXIS 490 ( Ky. 1945 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Action against personal representative, except creditor whose claim has been denied, not until five months after qualification, KRS 395.270 .

413.241. Legislative finding — Limitation on liability of licensed sellers or servers of intoxicating beverages — Liability of intoxicated person.

  1. The General Assembly finds and declares that the consumption of intoxicating beverages, rather than the serving, furnishing, or sale of such beverages, is the proximate cause of any injury, including death and property damage, inflicted by an intoxicated person upon himself or another person.
  2. Any other law to the contrary notwithstanding, no person holding a permit under KRS Chapters 241 to 244, nor any agent, servant, or employee of the person, who sells or serves intoxicating beverages to a person over the age for the lawful purchase thereof, shall be liable to that person or to any other person or to the estate, successors, or survivors of either for any injury suffered off the premises including but not limited to wrongful death and property damage, because of the intoxication of the person to whom the intoxicating beverages were sold or served, unless a reasonable person under the same or similar circumstances should know that the person served is already intoxicated at the time of serving.
  3. The intoxicated person shall be primarily liable with respect to injuries suffered by third persons.
  4. The limitation of liability provided by this section shall not apply to any person who causes or contributes to the consumption of alcoholic beverages by force or by falsely representing that a beverage contains no alcohol.
  5. This section shall not apply to civil actions filed prior to July 15, 1988.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 434, § 1, effective July 15, 1988; 1998, ch. 121, § 36, effective July 15, 1998; 2013, ch. 121, § 103, effective June 25, 2013.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.In General.

A dram shop and a drunken driver are not in pari delicto; although both can be held liable for injuries caused to a third person, the drunken driver is primarily liable and the dram shop is secondarily liable and entitled to indemnity from the drunken driver. Destock #14, Inc. v. Logsdon, 993 S.W.2d 952, 1999 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1999 ).

The constraint against first-party claims by over age persons against sellers of alcoholic beverages for injuries such persons inflict upon themselves as a result of being intoxicated is also applicable to those persons 18 to 21 years of age. Dubord v. GMRI, Inc., 52 F. Supp. 2d 779, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10332 (W.D. Ky. 1999 ), aff'd, 215 F.3d 1325, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 11348 (6th Cir. Ky. 2000 ).

Statute clearly implied that any dram shop that sold intoxicating beverages to persons under the legal age would be liable for such injuries or death. Colvin v. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc., 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 772 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 14, 2001), aff'd, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

The buyer/driver’s primary liability applied to injuries suffered by third persons. Colvin v. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc., 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 772 (Ky. Ct. App. Sept. 14, 2001), aff'd, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

2.Punitive Damages.

Punitive damages cannot be awarded against a dram shop as under KRS 411.184(1)(f) a plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages against a defendant unless that defendant’s conduct was the proximate cause of any injury to the plaintiff; under KRS 413.241(1), a dram shop’s sale or service of intoxicating beverages cannot be the proximate cause of any injury caused by an intoxicated tortfeasor. Jackson v. Tullar, 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

3.Apportionment of Damages.

Apportionment jury instruction violated KRS 413.241 as it directed the jury to apportion damages between a passenger, a driver, and two bars, which erroneously assigned a percentage of primary fault independent of the fault of the driver; the instruction should have required the jury to apportion fault between just the driver and the passenger, and only after the jury found the driver to have some percentage of fault, should the jury have determined whether the elements under KRS 413.241 were satisfied such that either or both of the bars could be held secondarily liable. Jackson v. Tullar, 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

Where an insurer moved to implead a resort owner in a case arising from car crash, since the resort owner and the tortfeasor were not in pari delicto under Kentucky law, the insurer was not entitled to implead the resort owner under Fed. R. Civ. P. 14(a) for apportionment purposes. Contrary to the insurer’s argument, Kentucky’s dram-shop statute was still partially operative. Botkin v. Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Ins. Co., 956 F. Supp. 2d 795, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96249 (E.D. Ky. 2013 ).

4.Multiple Dram Shops.

Multiple dram shops that violated KRS 413.241 committed similar acts that had a similar relationship to a passenger’s ultimate injury, and liability among multiple dram shops was properly apportioned under comparative fault principles; once a jury found that the elements in KRS 413.241 were satisfied such that either or both bars could be held secondarily liable, the jury should have been instructed to determine to what degree the sale or service of alcohol by each bar was a substantial factor in causing a driver’s intoxication. Jackson v. Tullar, 285 S.W.3d 290, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 170 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

5.Social Hosts.

Trial court, which held that defendant breached no duty by allowing his son to host a party at his residence where alcohol was consumed by teenagers, was correct in granting summary judgment; the alleged tortious conduct was an assault by a friend on plaintiff, an act which occurred at another location and due to an automobile fender bender, and this conduct was beyond the scope of reasonable foreseeability by defendant. Martin v. Elkins, 2012 Ky. App. LEXIS 164 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2012 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1004 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 31, 2012), review denied, ordered not published, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 127 (Ky. Apr. 17, 2013).

6.Applicability.

As a country club that provided alcohol to patrons did not have a retail package license but instead, had a special private club license under KRS 243.270 , it was not entitled to protection under the Dram Shop Act, KRS 413.241 , in a personal injury action involving the intoxicated patron’s conduct. Lamarre v. Fort Mitchell Country Club, 2011 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 980 (Ky. Ct. App. June 24, 2011), rev'd, 394 S.W.3d 897, 2012 Ky. LEXIS 206 ( Ky. 2012 ).

7.Release.

Hold harmless language in a settlement agreement with an intoxicated driver, his family, and an insurer precluded a cause of action against a dram shop under the Kentucky Dram Shop Act because there was no limiting language in the agreement excluding indemnification for a dram shop claim. Butt v. Independence Club Venture, Ltd., 453 S.W.3d 189, 2014 Ky. App. LEXIS 189 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).

8.Appeal.

Interlocutory appeal was not permitted after a trial court denied, on summary judgment, a dram shop owner’s defense in a negligence action of absolute immunity under Kentucky’s Dram Shop Act, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.241 , because an interlocutory appeal was authorized only from the denial of a substantial claim of absolute immunity and the statute did not guarantee dram shop owners absolute immunity from suit, but rather, provided a liability defense. Recbar, LLC v. Drake, 579 S.W.3d 198, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 120 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

Cited in:

Estate of Vosnick v. RRJC, Inc., 225 F. Supp. 2d 737, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19326 (E.D. Ky. 2002 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

Analysis

1.In General.

Unpublished decision: Upon the plain language of KRS 413.241 and persuasive decisional law, a minor has a valid claim against the dram shop that sells him alcohol thereby causing or contributing to his injuries; the result should be the same whether the sale or service of alcohol is to a minor or to an intoxicated person. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc. v. Colvin, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: On the question of indemnity, KRS 413.141(3) grants a licensed alcohol establishment a right of indemnity even where it has sold intoxicating beverages to a minor who subsequently injures or kills others. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc. v. Colvin, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: KRS 413.241 (2) imputes liability to a dram shop for the sale or service of alcohol to a minor because the statutory assignment of proximate cause requires that the purchaser be over the age for lawful purchaser; a legal sale is required for a dram shop to be shielded from liability under KRS 413.241 . Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc. v. Colvin, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: Licensed liquor establishment could be held liable for the minor’s death under KRS 413.241 (1) because the establishment made an unlawful sale of alcoholic beverages to the minor and § 413.241 required a legal sale of alcohol for a dram shop to be shielded from liability and (2) because his intoxication could have been a substantial causative factor of the fatal accident; thus, the minor’s parents’ claims against the establishment were reinstated. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc. v. Colvin, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: In a claim by the minor’s parents against the licensed liquor establishment, pursuant to KRS 413.241(3), the establishment clearly had a valid claim against the parents for indemnity relative to claims made by an injured third person against the establishment; however, the establishment had no indemnity claim against the deceased minor’s estate for liability it could have to the estate due to the minor’s injuries and death. Sixty-Eight Liquors, Inc. v. Colvin, 118 S.W.3d 171, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 235 ( Ky. 2003 ).

2.Social Hosts.

Unpublished decision: Neither a national social fraternity nor individual local chapter members were liable for the death of a college student by a drunk fraternity member because KRS 413.241(1) placed sole liability on the drunk member; there was no evidence of intent by the national fraternity to assist in underage drinking or participate in the fraternity party, and none of the members gave the drunk member alcohol. Shaheen v. Yonts, 394 Fed. Appx. 224, 2010 FED App. 0581N, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 18461 (6th Cir. Ky. 2010 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Elder, 2001: An End of Millennium Odyssey Through Tort Liability of Occupiers and Owners of Land, 28 N. Ky. L. Rev. 352 (2001).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant Tavern Asserting Defenses and Crossclaim Against Co-defendant for Indemnity, Form 132.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Answer by Defendant Tavern Asserting Defenses and Crossclaim Against Driver for Indemnity, Form 135.07.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Bar KRS 413.241 by Third Party Injured by Intoxicated Driver, Form 132.01.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint Against Tavern and Driver by Pedestrian Struck by Intoxicated Driver on Sidewalk, Failure to Keep Control of Vehicle, Form 135.06.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint by Third Party Against Liquor Store That Sold Liquor to Minor Who Caused Automobile Accident, Form 132.02.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Synopsis to Chapter 132 Dram Shop/Liquor Liability, § 132.syn.

413.242. Prerequisite to action against purchaser or selling agent of equine interest.

Before a party possessing a security interest or lien against an equine interest that has been sold without the debt to the party being discharged may bring an action against the purchaser or selling agent of the equine interest, the secured party shall pursue a remedy against the debtor to the point where a judgment is rendered on the merits or the suit is dismissed with prejudice.

History. Enact. Acts 2000, ch. 408, § 184, effective July 1, 2001.

413.243. “Professional services” defined.

As used in KRS 413.245 , “professional services” means any service rendered in a profession required to be licensed, administered and regulated as professions in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, except those professions governed by KRS 413.140 .

History. Enact. Acts 1980, ch. 159, § 1, effective July 15, 1980.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Engineers.

Factual issues as to whether any licensed engineer oversaw or delegated the allegedly negligent work of a non-engineer under KRS 322.020(1), 322.030 and whether the company held itself out as an engineering firm precluded summary judgment on the professional services statute of limitations under KRS 413.243 , 413.245 . ISP Chems. LLC v. Dutchland, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7675 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 25, 2011).

2.Attorneys.

Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.245 , when read in conjunction with this section which makes clear the referenced professional services include the practice of law, is unambiguous. Pertinently, whether brought in tort or contract, a civil action commenced against an attorney arising out of any act or omission in rendering, or failing to render, professional services for others must be brought within one year. Seiller Waterman, LLC v. RLB Props., 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Cited:

Plaza Bottle Shop, Inc. v. Al Torstrick Ins. Agency, Inc., 712 S.W.2d 349, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1065 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986); Old Mason’s Home v. Mitchell, 892 S.W.2d 304, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 15 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Johnston, Attorney Accountability in Kentucky — Liability to Clients and Third Parties, 70 Ky. L.J. 747 (1981-82).

413.245. Actions for professional service malpractice.

Notwithstanding any other prescribed limitation of actions which might otherwise appear applicable, except those provided in KRS 413.140 , a civil action, whether brought in tort or contract, arising out of any act or omission in rendering, or failing to render, professional services for others shall be brought within one (1) year from the date of the occurrence or from the date when the cause of action was, or reasonably should have been, discovered by the party injured. Time shall not commence against a party under legal disability until removal of the disability.

History. Enact. Acts 1980, ch. 159, § 2, effective July 15, 1980.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.In General.

Distinction between the accrual and discovery rules is important because, when properly applied, the accrual rule means that the limitations period does not even begin to run until the cause of action accrues; until that time, no cause of action yet exists, meaning a lawsuit would be premature and should be dismissed. A plaintiff’s statute of limitations claim must be evaluated separately under both the accrual and discovery rules. Queensway Fin. Holdings Ltd. v. Cotton & Allen, P.S.C., 237 S.W.3d 141, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 212 ( Ky. 2007 ).

By its plain, unambiguous language, this section applies to civil actions arising out of any act or omission in rendering or failing to render professional services; nothing in the statute limits its application to only those claims brought by individuals or entities who engaged the professional to provide such services. This section thus applies to any civil action against an attorney arising out of any act or omission in rendering or failing to render professional services without regard to the identity of the claimant. Seiller Waterman, LLC v. RLB Props., 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

2.Commencement of Limitations Period.

The statute of limitations starts to run when the party discovers that a wrong has been committed, not when the party discovers that he may sue for the wrong; accordingly, the statute of limitations on a legal malpractice action began to run when plaintiff was first told that she had been inadequately represented in previous action and not some six weeks later when she was told that she had grounds for a legal malpractice action. Conway v. Huff, 644 S.W.2d 333, 1982 Ky. LEXIS 327 ( Ky. 1982 ).

Until the client suffers appreciable harm as a consequence of his attorney’s negligence, the client cannot establish a cause of action for malpractice; it follows that the statute of limitations does not begin to run against a negligence action until some damage has occurred. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 573 F. Supp. 1045, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12060 (E.D. Ky. 1983 ).

The occurrence of appreciable harm sufficient to commence the running of this statute of limitations is a question of fact; however, where there is no dispute concerning the material facts, it becomes a question of law for the court. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 573 F. Supp. 1045, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12060 (E.D. Ky. 1983 ).

The knowledge that one has been wronged and by whom starts the running of the statute of limitations for professional malpractice, not the knowledge that the wrong is actionable. Graham v. Harlin, Parker & Rudloff, 664 S.W.2d 945, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 351 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983), overruled, Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ).

The use of the word “occurrence” in this section, indicates a legislative policy that there should be some definable, readily ascertainable event which triggers the statute. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 610 F. Supp. 126, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19567 (E.D. Ky. 1985 ), aff'd, 787 F.2d 592, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 23811 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

Where insurer, which settled action brought by insured for damages for loss of house by fire and for wrongful denial of coverage after default was entered against it for its alleged failure to produce witnesses for depositions and other alleged violations of civil rules, brought malpractice action against the attorney who had represented it in such action, the malpractice statute of limitations began to run against that attorney as soon as the insurer had an irrevocable nonspeculative injury, which occurred when it retained an independent attorney and billable services were rendered by such attorney for the insured. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 610 F. Supp. 126, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19567 (E.D. Ky. 1985 ), aff'd, 787 F.2d 592, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 23811 (6th Cir. Ky. 1986 ).

The client’s knowledge of the judicial sale of his farm, necessitated to satisfy the default judgment against him, was sufficient knowledge that he was injured by his attorney’s advice as contemplated by the discovery rule incorporated in this section. Gill v. Warren, 751 S.W.2d 33, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

In a legal malpractice action, the cause of action does not accrue until the appellate process is final. The malpractice claimant is put on sufficient notice when the appeal is final and the trial court’s judgment is the unalterable law of the case. Only then is the malpractice claimant put on notice that the principal damage (the adverse judgment) is real, and more importantly only then can he justifiably claim that the entire damage is proximately caused by counsel’s failure, for which he might seek a remedy; and not by the trial court’s error, for which he would have none. Hibbard v. Taylor, 837 S.W.2d 500, 1992 Ky. LEXIS 136 ( Ky. 1992 ).

The “continuous representation rule” is a branch of the discovery which says that by virtue of the attorney-client relationship, there can be no effective discovery of legal negligence so long as the relationship prevails; therefore, it tolls the legal negligence statute of limitations so long as attorney continues to represent the client in the matter. Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ).

Because any damages plaintiff suffered as a result of any alleged professional malpractice of defendants in handling his will contest became fixed and non-speculative on the day the Kentucky Supreme Court denied discretionary review, the one-year statute of limitations under this section began to run on that date and thus plaintiff’s complaint was not filed within the period and was properly dismissed; had plaintiff sought a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court within the 90-day period following the ruling, the statute of limitations would have been tolled pending ruling. Barker v. Miller, 918 S.W.2d 749, 1996 Ky. App. LEXIS 55 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).

Damage to a middle school was fixed and non-speculative on the date that the board of education first learned that the middle school was damaged and, therefore, the one (1) year statute of limitations for professional malpractice against a geo-technical engineering services provider began to run on that date; a contrary result was not required by the fact that the board may not have known the full extent of the damage or even who was responsible, as the important and ultimately dispositive point was that the board knew of damage. Bd. of Educ. v. Zurich Ins. Co., 180 F. Supp. 2d 890, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 678 (E.D. Ky. 2002 ), aff'd, 84 Fed. Appx. 516, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25695 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Where the parties’ contract established a one-year time limitation for claims, the contract did not violate public policy and the discovery rule of KRS 413.245 was inapplicable; therefore, because the owner’s breach of contract and breach of warranty of merchantability action against the architect was brought 13 years after the home was completed, the trial court properly dismissed the action. Schultz v. Cooper, 134 S.W.3d 618, 2003 Ky. App. LEXIS 142 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Where a patient alleged that a doctor was negligent and fraudulently concealed the dangers of certain diet drugs because he failed to advise her to undergo a thorough cardiovascular examination, the patient’s medical negligence and fraud claims were barred by the statute of limitations because they were not filed within one (1) year after the patient knew or should have known of her injuries and her claims. The patient had constructive knowledge of her claims against the doctor from the extensive national and local media coverage concerning the withdrawal of the drugs from the market. Collett v. Freid, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19937 (E.D. Ky. July 15, 2004).

When professional negligence occurs during the course of formal litigation, the injury becomes definite and non-speculative when the underlying case is final; the statute of limitations on a client’s legal malpratice claim, which alleged that a lawyer lost her medical records, which in turn forced the client to settle her products liability suit for a fraction of its value, began to run on the date that the client settled her underlying products liability claim, and where the client filed her suit against the lawyer within one (1) year of the date of that settlement, the legal malpractice claim was timely. Pedigo v. Breen, 155 S.W.3d 40, Ky. LEXIS 348 (Ky., sub. op., 169 S.W.3d 831, 2004 Ky. LEXIS 347 ( Ky. 2004 ), modified, 2005 Ky. LEXIS 523 (Ky. Feb. 17, 2005).

As plaintiff waited over a year to file suit after being advised that a power of attorney that defendant had prepared should be investigated as to its legality, he knew or should of known of his cause of action against defendant at that time; his suit was properly dismissed on summary judgment as barred by KRS 413.245 . Bohlinger v. O'Hara, Ruberg, Taylor, Sloan & Sergent, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 317 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2004 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 930 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 29, 2004).

In a clients’ malpractice suit against an engineering firm, KRS 413.245 began to run as soon as their potential damages became apparent; in this case, when the company walked off the job. Matherly Land Surveying, Inc. v. Gardiner Park Dev., LLC, 230 S.W.3d 586, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Where a buyer alleged that an accounting firm was negligent in auditing an insurance company before the buyer purchased the insurance company because loss reserves were deficient, the suit was untimely because (1) any damages that the buyer suffered became fixed and non-speculative when it purchased the insurance company, and (2) under the discovery rule, the buyer should have known of its cause of action when it completed its purchase. Queensway Fin. Holdings Ltd. v. Cotton & Allen, P.S.C., 237 S.W.3d 141, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 212 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Auditors were not entitled to summary judgment on the bank’s professional negligence and breach of fiduciary duty claims, as those claims were not barred by the one-year limitations period in KRS 413.245 . The claims did not accrue until the damage against the bank was fixed and non-speculative and, thus, those claims under the facts of the case did not accrue more than one year before the bank filed its complaint. Peoples Bank of N. Ky., Inc. v. Crowe Chizek & Co. LLC, 277 S.W.3d 255, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 176 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Plaintiff’s attorney malpractice complaint was untimely under the occurrence limitations period of KRS 413.245 since the occurrence limitations period ended one year after no writ for certiorari was filed, and the client’s original claim terminated; the occurrence period did not begin when appellate counsel advised the client that the client had a malpractice claim against the attorney since at that point the client had not been damaged as the federal appellate court’s decision was not yet final. Lane v. Richards, 256 S.W.3d 581, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Plaintiff’s attorney malpractice complaint was timely under the discovery limitations period of KRS 413.245 since the client’s reasonable reliance on Supreme Court counsel’s representations that the appeal was on track even though counsel failed to file a writ of certiorari prevented the plaintiff from discovering the accrual of the cause of action against the trial attorney until the plaintiff learned of the failure to file the writ several months later. Lane v. Richards, 256 S.W.3d 581, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 183 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Claims against an architectural firm were barred by the one-year limitation in KRS 413.245 because under the plain meaning of the parties’ contract, there was no requirement that the work be “substantially complete” before a certificate of occupancy was issued or before the parties’ causes of action accrued. Van Eekeren Family, LLC v. Carter & Burgess, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17730 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 3, 2009).

Debtor’s malpractice claim was not barred by KRS 413.245 because (1) the debtor asserted a claim for negligence in providing legal services against the attorney in his initial complaint filed December 7, 2007; (2) additional claims against the attorney, a former business partner, and the partner’s companies were asserted in the first amended complaint filed in September of 2008; (3) the claims in the amended complaint formed the basis of the malpractice claim based on an actual conflict of interest; (4) these claims were not discovered until extensive discovery had taken place in the lawsuit; and (5) under the discovery rule, the claims were timely raised. Stone v. Atherton (In re Stone), 421 B.R. 401, 2009 Bankr. LEXIS 3476 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2009 ), aff'd, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124172 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2010), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 698 F.3d 910, 2012 FED App. 0372P, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22230 (6th Cir. Ky. 2012 ).

Discovery rule required the clients to commence their actions within one year from the date when the cause of action was, or reasonably should have been, discovered, under KRS 413.245 . Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Trial court had sufficient information to conclude that the client’s claims were time-barred as a matter of Kentucky law and there were no genuine issues of material fact to submit to a jury, for purposes of KRS 413.245 , given that documentation indicated that each client was entitled to more from a settlement than the amount they received, and additional information became available which indicated something was amiss. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Law firm’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ malpractice action as time barred under KRS 413.245 was denied because not until damages were fixed by the final compromise with the Internal Revenue Service was there an occurrence of the type required to commence the running of the statute; while there continued to be an ongoing tax controversy, plaintiffs’ claim of legal malpractice had not yet accrued and thus, the statute of limitations had not yet commenced. Corporex Cos., LLC v. Proskauer Rose, LLP, 713 F. Supp. 2d 678, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50590 (E.D. Ky. 2010 ).

Brothers had standing to bring a legal malpractice claim because they were the intended beneficiaries of the claim and were entitled to one-half of the proceeds of any recovery and the one-year statute of limitations period, and thus, the attorneys’ actions in litigating the claim were undertaken for the brothers; the one-year statute of limitations period was tolled until the brothers reached the age of majority. Pete v. Anderson, 413 S.W.3d 291, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 2013 ).

3.Legal Malpractice Elements.

The present law of Kentucky requires the following three elements for the accrual of a cause of action for legal malpractice: (1) a negligent act or omission on the part of the attorney; (2) the occurrence of damage that is not merely speculative as a proximate result of such act or omission; (3) discovery of the negligence and damage by the client. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Osborne, 573 F. Supp. 1045, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12060 (E.D. Ky. 1983 ).

In a professional malpractice action a cause of action will not accrue until the plaintiff discovers or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered not only that he has been injured but also that his injury may have been caused by the defendant’s conduct. Graham v. Harlin, Parker & Rudloff, 664 S.W.2d 945, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 351 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983), overruled, Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ).

In claim for attorney negligence in connection with legal advice concerning estate planning and gift taxes, there was not an occurrence of the type required to commence the running of the statute of limitations until damages were fixed by a final compromise with the IRS, overruling Graham v. Harlin, Parker & Rudloff, 664 S.W.2d 945, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 351 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ).

Legal malpractice action was premature when filed and was not ripe where damages were not fixed and non-speculative and where the federal class action cases on which the malpractice case was based were not final when the malpractice complaint was filed. Since the legal malpractice action had not accrued when the case was filed, the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, erroneously made a summary judgment order, and the case had to be dismissed without prejudice. Doe v. Golden & Walters, PLLC, 173 S.W.3d 260, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 197 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).

Plain language of KRS 413.245 says that it applies to a civil action, whether brought in tort or contract, arising out of any act or omission in rendering, or failing to render, professional services for others, and the language expressly preempts any other prescribed limitation of actions which might otherwise appear applicable; notably, the language of the statute also encompasses any action for perceived fraud between an attorney and client. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Trial court correctly interpreted the clients’ misrepresentation count as a claim based on the rendering of professional services, which fell under KRS 413.245 ; appellants’ claims of misrepresentation were under the limitations purview of KRS 413.245 because this statute applies to civil actions, whether in tort or contract, that arise out of the rendering of professional services. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Clients argued that KRS 413.120 governed their misrepresentation claim, but the court noted that authority existed that KRS 413.245 applied to any claim against an attorney arising from his status, regardless of the form in which the claim was pleaded. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

All of a client's claims against an attorney for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duties, and professional negligence were time-barred, as the client's second complaint was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations, because the claims arose from the attorney's professional services as the contract between the parties, although not an engagement letter, set forth professional services, albeit some non-legal, to be performed by the attorney and the claims were not tolled by a federal lawsuit. Saalwaechter v. Carroll, 525 S.W.3d 100, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 69 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

4.Defense.

The defendant attorney in a legal malpractice action was not estopped from raising the defense of the statute of limitations, merely because the plaintiff client’s attorney’s direction to the clerk that summons not be served upon filing the complaint was at the request of the defendant attorney’s insurance carrier. Graham v. Harlin, Parker & Rudloff, 664 S.W.2d 945, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 351 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983), overruled, Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ).

Where, in an action against an attorney for legal malpractice, the attorney, in his fiduciary role as the client’s attorney, led the client to believe that the damages he had incurred could be reversed by the attorney’s continued efforts on the client’s behalf against the third parties, the attorney, in fact, filed suit against the third parties and continued as the attorney of record until the one-year limitations period had run, and the attorney allegedly concealed the nature of the legal proceedings and the effects of the default judgment, and lulled the client into inaction by promises that further litigation would cure his problems, the client was entitled to a jury determination of the issue of whether the attorney was estopped to raise the statute of limitations as a bar to the action. Gill v. Warren, 751 S.W.2d 33, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

5.Professional Services.

The services rendered by an insurance agent are not “professional services” as contemplated by this section. Plaza Bottle Shop, Inc. v. Al Torstrick Ins. Agency, Inc., 712 S.W.2d 349, 1986 Ky. App. LEXIS 1065 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).

Since the defendant, a registered licensed civil engineer, was a professional and was performing a duty consistent with his profession, even though it might have been done by a client or another layman, it was the type of duty envisioned by this section; thus, this action was dismissed due to the failure of the plaintiff to timely file it. Vandevelde v. Falls City Builders, Inc., 744 S.W.2d 432, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 10 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

Because architects are required to be licensed and architect was registered, licensed and performing duties consistent with his profession, the services he rendered and the cause of action against him for water penetrations problems of a building fell within the purview of this section imposing a one (1) year statute of limitations. Old Mason's Home v. Mitchell, 892 S.W.2d 304, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 15 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Where a breach of contract stems from the performance or lack of performance of professional services, the proper statute of limitations is KRS 413.245 . Matherly Land Surveying, Inc. v. Gardiner Park Dev., LLC, 230 S.W.3d 586, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Since the company held itself out as a professional engineering firm and had a professional engineer oversee its work, including land surveying tasks, and its clients believed the company was performing engineering services, both the company’s engineering and land surveying services were professional and thus subject to the statute of limitations in KRS 413.245 . Matherly Land Surveying, Inc. v. Gardiner Park Dev., LLC, 230 S.W.3d 586, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 2007 ).

KRS 413.245 applied to claims against an architectural firm for failing to timely advise a client that a site was located within an identified seismic zone. The claims for negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract and indemnity arose from the firm’s professional services because they were based on the same acts and omissions that underlay the professional negligence claim. Van Eekeren Family, LLC v. Carter & Burgess, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17730 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 3, 2009).

Court reconsidered its ruling that KRS 413.245 applied only to engineers who were licensed by the Commonwealth of Kentucky and found that the inclusion of any licensure requirement within KRS 413.243 was meant only to help identify those professions that received protection under § 413.245 , which included engineering under Kentucky Supreme Court precedent; thus, § 413.245 applied to all engineers, not just those licensed by Kentucky, so defendant employees received protection for their professional services rendered while employed with defendant employer. ISP Chems. LLC v. Dutchland, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112431 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 2010).

Factual issues as to whether any licensed engineer oversaw or delegated the allegedly negligent work of a non-engineer under KRS 322.020(1), 322.030 and whether the company held itself out as an engineering firm precluded summary judgment on the professional services statute of limitations under KRS 413.243 , 413.245 . ISP Chems. LLC v. Dutchland, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7675 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 25, 2011).

6.Pleadings.

Where a complaint stated that the malpractice occurred over four (4) years before the complaint was filed, the plaintiff should have anticipated the defense of a statute of limitations and alleged in the complaint facts necessary to overcome the defense. Lunsford v. Elfers, 756 S.W.2d 146, 1988 Ky. App. LEXIS 110 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).

7.— Amendment.

In a medical malpractice action, the trial court committed reversible error when it refused to permit the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to add the nurse as an additional party defendant, where the alleged misrepresentation on the part of the hospital nurse concerning the presence of the physician in the emergency room and the identity of the nurse were not discovered until the physician’s deposition was taken, and the plaintiffs took reasonable steps to amend their complaint within one (1) year of the deposition. Underhill v. Stephenson, 756 S.W.2d 459, 1988 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1988 ).

8.Litigation Negligence.

Where the cause of action is for “litigation” negligence, meaning the attorney’s negligence in the preparation and presentation of a litigated claim resulting in the failure of an otherwise valid claim, whether the attorney’s negligence has caused injury necessarily must await the final outcome of the underlying case. Michels v. Sklavos, 869 S.W.2d 728, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 8 ( Ky. 1994 ).

9.Statute of Limitations.

Five-year limitations period in KRS 413.120 governed a third party indemnity claim against a construction project’s engineers for substandard engineering services. Affholder, Inc. v. Preston Carroll Co., 27 F.3d 232, 1994 FED App. 0221P, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 15392 (6th Cir. Ky. 1994 ).

In an action by a law firm against a former client to recover the balance due for professional services rendered in a dissolution of marriage action, a counterclaim seeking a portion of the fees previously paid by the defendant was barred by the statute of limitations where the counterclaim was not filed within one (1) year after the last legal service was rendered. Lucchese v. Sparks-Malone, 44 S.W.3d 816, 2001 Ky. App. LEXIS 52 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001).

Where a patient’s medical negligence and fraud claims against a doctor were barred by the statute of limitations because they were not filed within one (1) year after the patient knew or should have known of her injuries and her claims, the statute of limitations was not subject to tolling because the doctor did not fraudulently conceal the patient’s injuries by neglecting to inform her that she should undergo a cardiovascular examination and echocardiogram. Collett v. Freid, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19937 (E.D. Ky. July 15, 2004).

Petition for a writ of habeas corpus following a criminal conviction did not extend the KRS 413.245 statute of limitations applicable to legal malpractice; a client’s case alleging legal malpractice was untimely, despite the fact that his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was allegedly still pending. Bryant v. Howell, 170 S.W.3d 421, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 173 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).

KRS 413.245 is not intended to govern the limitations period for any action that would otherwise be governed by KRS 413.140 . Combs v. Albert Kahn & Assocs., 183 S.W.3d 190, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 2 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Because the statute of limitations under KRS 413.245 begins to run for one year on either the date of occurrence or the date of discovery, Kentucky’s statute of limitations is actually longer than Alabama’s statute of limitations under Ala. Code § 6-5-574(a); Alabama’s “discovery” provision is only six months and subject to a four-year cap, while Kentucky’s discovery provision is one year and subject to no cap. Alabama’s statute of limitations is shorter than Kentucky’s statute. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Pursuant to KRS 413.320 , since Alabama’s statute of limitations under Ala. Code § 6-5-574 is shorter than Kentucky’s statute under KRS 413.245 , it should have been used as the measuring criterion for the two Alabama law firms. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Even though the action might have accrued in Kentucky, nothing mitigated against a determination that the action also accrued in Alabama; regardless of which limitations statute was applicable, the clients’ claims would have been barred under either limitations statute, KRS 413.245 or Ala. Code § 6-5-574, rendering an incorrect choice-of-law decision as harmless error. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

To the extent applicable to claims involving a leaking waste water tank, which accrued when the leak was discovered, KRS 413.245 would not bar an indemnity claim, which had a five-year limitations period under KRS 413.120 ; however, § 413.245 would apply to claims for breach of warranty, Kentucky Building Code violations, and negligent misrepresentation because those claims arose out of professional services. ISP Chems. LLC v. Dutchland, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7675 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 25, 2011).

Debtor’s malpractice claim was barred by KRS 413.245 because the record clearly demonstrated that the debtor failed to raise the claim within one year of when he became aware of and/or discovered any alleged claim. In re Alexander, 456 B.R. 298, 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 3075 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 2011 ).

Clients’ claims against attorneys were barred because their action was not commenced within one year of the date they knew or should have known that they had a cause of action; one year and fifteen days before the filing of the lawsuit, the clients knew with mathematical certainty that they had been shorted by the attorneys. Abel v. Austin, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Statute applied to clients’ action against attorneys because all of the clients’ claims arose out of acts or omissions in rendering, or failing to render, professional services; the statute is the exclusive statute of limitations governing claims of attorney malpractice. Abel v. Austin, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Because the statute relates exclusively to civil actions brought against providers of professional services, such as attorneys, for injury arising out of that service, it is more specific than the general, five-year limitation provided by KRS 413.120 (7) or (12); claims brought by clients against attorneys for acts or omissions arising out of the rendition of professional services are governed exclusively by the one-year limitation periods, and § 413.120 is not applicable. Abel v. Austin, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Legal malpractice claim arising out of a disputed title problem was time-barred, as plaintiffs had previously been informed that there was a question concerning title and that they, in fact, might have an interest in the property in question and thus, they could easily have examined the deeds related to the property, which were filed of public record and which stated on their face that they were prepared by the attorney. Thus, plaintiffs failed to exercise reasonable diligence, the burden imposed on them by Kentucky law. Osborn v. Griffin, 50 F. Supp. 3d 772, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139915 (E.D. Ky. 2014 ).

Circuit court correctly held that plaintiff's malpractice claims against his criminal attorney were time-barred under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.245 where the one-year period began to run when his conviction was final, and even if the discovery rule applied, the date of discovery was no later than the date he filed his habeas petition, which was more than one year prior to the date of his malpractice complaint. Applegate v. Dickman Law Offices, P.S.C., 507 S.W.3d 28, 2016 Ky. App. LEXIS 205 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).

Property owner’s slander of title claim was outside the scope of negligent performance of professional services, would not constitute negligent malpractice, and would not fall under the one-year professional malpractice statute of limitations, because the owner alleged the filing of a mechanic’s lien was in bad faith; to escape liability under the guise of attorney professional services would be unconscionable if the obligations surrounding the claims are true. RLB Props., Ltd. v. Seiller Waterman, LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 179 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018), rev'd, in part, aff'd, 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

One-year statute of limitations could apply, but additional discovery had to be performed because it had to be determined determine if a mechanic’s lien was filed maliciously, thereby not falling under the one-year statute of limitations. RLB Props., Ltd. v. Seiller Waterman, LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 179 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018), rev'd, in part, aff'd, 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Wrongful death attorney was entitled to partial summary judgment as to the claims of wrongful death beneficiaries because, (1) as to beneficiaries who turned 18 more than one year before suit was filed, those beneficiaries’ claims were time barred, but, (2) as to a beneficiary who turned 18 after suit was file, that beneficiary’s claim was not time barred. Reynolds v. Randolph, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 257 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2018 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 975 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2018).

Trial court properly determined that a slander of title claim brought against the law firm by the owner, a nonclient, was time barred by this section after one year and therefore relief could not be granted. Seiller Waterman, LLC v. RLB Props., 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Claims brought by clients or former clients against attorneys for acts or omissions arising out of the rendition of professional services are governed exclusively by the one-year limitation periods established by this section. Seiller Waterman, LLC v. RLB Props., 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

This section, when read in conjunction with Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.243 which makes clear the referenced professional services include the practice of law, is unambiguous. Pertinently, whether brought in tort or contract, a civil action commenced against an attorney arising out of any act or omission in rendering, or failing to render, professional services for others must be brought within one year. Seiller Waterman, LLC v. RLB Props., 610 S.W.3d 188, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 218 ( Ky. 2020 ).

10.Continuous Representation.

In order for the continuous representation doctrine to apply with regard to the statute of limitations for a legal malpractice action, the representation must be for the same or a related matter. Nicely v. McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie, & Kirkland, 163 F.3d 376, 1998 FED App. 0366P, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 31482 (6th Cir. Ky. 1998 ).

Continuous representation rule did not save plaintiffs' legal malpractice claim from being barred by the Kentucky statute of limitations because their personal estate and tax matters were not the same transaction or subject matter as a disputed title problem, and they offered no evidence that the attorney's continued representation in personal estate matters in any way delayed their discovery of the alleged malpractice in the title matter. Osborn v. Griffin, 50 F. Supp. 3d 772, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139915 (E.D. Ky. 2014 ).

Cited:

Manning v. Stigger, 919 F. Supp. 249, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2945 (E.D. Ky. 1996 ); Harralson v. Monger, 206 S.W.3d 336, 2006 Ky. LEXIS 291 ( Ky. 2006 ); Victory Cmty. Bank v. Socol, 524 S.W.3d 24, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017); Demoisey v. Ostermiller, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 174 (Ky. Ct. App. June 1, 2018).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Commencement of Limitations Period.

Unpublished decision: Former client’s lawsuit against her former attorney for legal malpractice was time-barred under the statute of limitations for legal malpractice because the client did not file the lawsuit until more than one year after the client learned of the attorney’s negligence. The statute of limitations was not tolled by the fact that the client sought to reopen the client’s divorce proceeding through the use of a CR 60.02 motion. Faris v. Stone, 103 S.W.3d 1, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 71 ( Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: Insurer’s subrogation action for malpractice against inspectors of the insureds’ proposed school location was time-barred under Kentucky’s one-year statute of limitations, as the limitations period began to run when the insureds discovered damage to the completed school due to the rising of earth beneath the school building, as the damage to the school was “fixed and non-speculative.” Estill County Bd. of Educ. v. Zurich Ins. Co., 84 Fed. Appx. 516, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25695 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: In applying KRS 413.245 , the phrase “fixed and non-speculative” is more properly interpreted as tolling the limitations period for professional negligence claims until the plaintiff is certain that damages will indeed flow from defendant’s negligent act; the statute requires that in order for the limitations period to commence, the plaintiff must be aware that the plaintiff has in fact been damaged by the defendant’s negligence, but the statute does not require that the plaintiff be aware of the precise dollar amount or even the exact extent of the damage. Estill County Bd. of Educ. v. Zurich Ins. Co., 84 Fed. Appx. 516, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25695 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Unpublished decision: In the context of the statute of limitations contained in KRS 413.245 , the fact that the parties could not agree on the cost of repairs, or which insurance company would be responsible for them, does not render the alleged legal injury “speculative;” the process of litigation itself is where the amount of damages become fixed and non-speculative, and that litigation cannot commence until the fact of damage is fixed. Estill County Bd. of Educ. v. Zurich Ins. Co., 84 Fed. Appx. 516, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25695 (6th Cir. Ky. 2003 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Davies, Children Born Out of Wedlock: Their Time Has Come, Volume 49, No. 2, April 1985 Ky. Bench & B. 10.

O’Roark Jr., Discovery-Damage-Continuous Representation: Do You Know the Rules? The Kentucky Statute of Limitations for Malpractice, 56 Ky. Bench & B. 36.

O’Roark, The Kentucky Malpractice Statute of Limitations — The Supreme Court Clears the Air, Vol. 58, No. 4, Fall 1994, Ky. Bench & Bar 47.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Johnston, Attorney Accountability in Kentucky — Liability to Clients and Third Parties, 70 Ky. L.J. 747 (1981-82).

Kentucky Law Survey, Underwood and Geisler, Evidence, 71 Ky. L.J. 287 (1982-83).

Comments, Design for Challenge: The Kentucky Statute of Repose for Improvements to Real Property, 73 Ky. L.J. 1143 (1984-85).

Leathers and Mooney, Civil Procedure, 74 Ky. L.J. 355 (1985-86).

Northern Kentucky Law Review.

Article: Advice Attorneys May Not Think to Give: The Peripheral Duty in Kentucky and Beyond, 36 N. Ky. L. Rev. 349 (2009).

Kentucky Survey Issue: Article: “Murky?” 1 Maybe! A Survey of Cases Interpreting Kentucky’s Professional Malpractice Statute of Limitations, 38 N. Ky. L. Rev. 333 (2011).

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Hourly Fee Agreement, Form 1.03.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Practice Context for Attorney and Client, § 1.00.

413.246. Action for damages based on professional services rendered by licensed home inspector.

  1. An action for damages, whether brought in contract or tort, or on any other basis, based on professional services that were rendered or that should have been rendered by a licensed home inspector under KRS 198B.700 to 198B.738 shall not be brought, commenced, or maintained unless the action is filed within one (1) year of the time that the claimant knew or should have known of a deficient inspection and damages and injuries resulting therefrom.
  2. Nothing in this section creates any duty to a third party that is not available under common law.

History. Repealed, reenact. and amend., Acts 2008, ch. 100, § 10, effective July 15, 2008.

Compiler’s Notes.

This section was formerly compiled as KRS 198B.734 .

413.247. Definitions. [Repealed]

History. Enact. Acts 1982, ch. 304, § 1, effective April 2, 1982; repealed by 2017 ch. 19, § 5, effective June 29, 2017.

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (Enact. Acts 1982, ch. 304, § 1, effective April 2, 1982), was repealed by Acts 2017, ch. 19, § 1, effective June 29, 2017.

413.248. Liability of donor for damages resulting from condition of donated food. [Repealed]

History. Enact. Acts 1982, ch. 304, § 2, effective April 2, 1982; 2006, ch. 64, § 3, effective July 12, 2006; repealed by 2017 ch. 19, § 5, effective June 29, 2017.

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (Enact. Acts 1982, ch. 304, § 2, effective April 2, 1982; 2006, ch. 64, § 3, effective July 12,2006), was repealed by Acts 2017, ch. 19, § 1, effective June 29, 2017.

413.2485. Action relating to injury to or illness of an adult as a result of a sexual offense.

  1. As used in this section, “injury or illness” means either a physical or psychological injury or illness.
  2. A civil action for recovery of damages for an injury or illness suffered as a result of an act or series of acts against a person eighteen (18) years old or older that meets the criteria of KRS 510.040 , 510.050 , 510.060 , 510.070 , 510.080 , 510.090 , 510.110 , 510.120 , 510.130 , 510.140 , 510.150 , 529.100 where the offense involves commercial sexual activity, 529.110 where the offense involves commercial sexual activity, 530.020 , 531.090 , or 531.100 , shall be brought before whichever of the following periods last expires:
    1. Within five (5) years of the act or the last of a series of acts by the same perpetrator;
    2. Within five (5) years of the date the victim knew, or should have known, of the act;
    3. Within five (5) years upon knowledge or identity of the perpetrator; or
    4. Within five (5) years of the conviction of a civil defendant for KRS 510.040 , 510.050 , 510.060 , 510.070 , 510.080 , 510.090 , 510.110 , 510.120 , 510.130 , 510.140 , 510.150 , 529.100 where the offense involves commercial sexual activity, 529.110 where the offense involves commercial sexual activity, 530.020 , 531.090 , or 531.100 .
  3. No prior criminal prosecution or conviction of the civil defendant for the act or series of acts shall be required to bring a civil action under this section for redress of an injury or illness.

HISTORY: 2017 ch. 114, § 1, effective June 29, 2017.

413.249. Action relating to childhood sexual abuse or childhood sexual assault.

  1. As used in this section:
    1. “Childhood sexual assault or abuse” means an act or series of acts against a person less than eighteen (18) years old and which meets the criteria defining a misdemeanor or felony in:
      1. KRS Chapter 510;
      2. KRS 529.040 when the defendant advances or profits from the prostitution of a minor;
      3. KRS 529.100 when the offense involves commercial sexual activity;
      4. KRS 529.110 when the offense involves commercial sexual activity;
      5. KRS 530.020 or 530.064(1)(a);
      6. KRS Chapter 531 involving a minor or depiction of a minor; or
      7. KRS 506.010 or 506.030 for attempt to commit or solicitation to commit any of the offenses described in subparagraphs 1. to 6. of this paragraph. No prior criminal prosecution or conviction of the civil defendant for the act or series of acts shall be required to bring a civil action for redress of childhood sexual assault or abuse;
    2. “Entity” means a firm, partnership, company, corporation, trustee, association, or any private or public entity, including the Commonwealth, a city, county, urban-county, consolidated local government, unified local government, or charter county government, or any of their agencies, departments, or any KRS 58.180 nonprofit nonstock corporation; and
    3. “Injury or illness” means either a physical or psychological injury or illness.
  2. A civil action for recovery of damages for injury or illness suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault or abuse shall be brought before whichever of the following periods last expires:
    1. Within ten (10) years of the commission of the act or the last of a series of acts by the same perpetrator;
    2. Within ten (10) years of the date the victim knew, or should have known, of the act;
    3. Within ten (10) years after the victim attains the age of eighteen (18) years; or
    4. Within ten (10) years of the conviction of a civil defendant for an offense included in the definition of childhood sexual assault or abuse.
  3. The time periods set forth in subsection (2) of this section shall apply to a civil action for recovery of damages for injury or illness against;
    1. A person alleged to have committed the act of childhood sexual assault or abuse; or
    2. An entity that owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, where a wrongful or negligent act by an employee, officer, director, official, volunteer, representative, or agent of the entity was a legal cause of the childhood sexual assault or abuse that resulted in the injury to the plaintiff.
  4. If a complaint is filed alleging that an act of childhood sexual assault or abuse occurred more than ten (10) years prior to the date that the action is commenced, the complaint shall be accompanied by a motion to seal the record and the complaint shall immediately be sealed by the clerk of the court. The complaint shall remain sealed until:
    1. The court rules upon the motion to seal;
    2. Any motion to dismiss under CR 12.02 is ruled upon, and if the complaint is dismissed, the complaint and any related papers or pleadings shall remain sealed unless opened by a higher court; or
    3. The defendant files an answer and a motion to seal the record upon grounds that a valid factual defense exists, to be raised in a motion for summary judgment pursuant to CR 56. The record shall remain sealed by the clerk until the court rules upon the defendant’s motion to close the record. If the court grants the motion to close, the record shall remain sealed until the defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted. The complaint, motions, and other related papers or pleadings shall remain sealed unless opened by a higher court.
  5. A victim of childhood sexual assault or abuse shall not have a cause of action against a third party, unless the third party failed to act as a reasonable person or entity in complying with their duties to the victim. If a victim of childhood sexual assault or abuse has a cause of action under this section, the cause of action shall be commenced within the time period set forth in subsection (2) of this section.
    1. Neither the husband-wife nor any professional-client/patient privilege, except the attorney-client and clergy-penitent privilege, shall be a ground for excluding evidence regarding childhood sexual assault or abuse or the cause thereof when an exception to the Kentucky Rules of Evidence is met, in any judicial proceeding. This subsection shall also apply in any criminal proceeding in District or Circuit Court regarding childhood sexual assault or abuse. (6) (a) Neither the husband-wife nor any professional-client/patient privilege, except the attorney-client and clergy-penitent privilege, shall be a ground for excluding evidence regarding childhood sexual assault or abuse or the cause thereof when an exception to the Kentucky Rules of Evidence is met, in any judicial proceeding. This subsection shall also apply in any criminal proceeding in District or Circuit Court regarding childhood sexual assault or abuse.
    2. As used in paragraph (a) of this subsection, the clergy-penitent privilege is limited to information received solely through confidential communications with a clergy member, privately or in a confessional setting, when in the course of the discipline or practice of the clergy member’s church, denomination, or organization, he or she is authorized or accustomed to hearing those communications, and under the discipline, tenets, customs, or practices of his or her church, denomination, or organization, has a duty to keep those communications secret.
    1. As was its intention with the passage of 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 114, sec. 2, the General Assembly hereby states that the amendments enacted in 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 114, sec. 2 shall be applied retroactively to actions accruing before its effective date of June 29, 2017. This section is a remedial statute which is to be given the most liberal interpretation to provide remedies for victims of childhood sexual assault or abuse. (7) (a) As was its intention with the passage of 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 114, sec. 2, the General Assembly hereby states that the amendments enacted in 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 114, sec. 2 shall be applied retroactively to actions accruing before its effective date of June 29, 2017. This section is a remedial statute which is to be given the most liberal interpretation to provide remedies for victims of childhood sexual assault or abuse.
    2. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, any claim for childhood sexual assault or abuse that was barred as of the effective date of this Act because the applicable statute of limitations had expired is hereby revived, and the action may be brought if commenced within five (5) years of the date on which the applicable statute of limitations expired.

History. Enact. Acts 1998, ch. 577, § 1, effective July 15, 1998; 2007, ch. 19, § 9, effective June 26, 2007; 2013, ch. 25, § 20, effective June 25, 2013; 2017 ch. 114, § 2, effective June 29, 2017; 2021 ch. 89, § 2, effective March 23, 2021.

Compiler’s Notes.

Section 2 of Acts 1998, ch. 577, read: “This Act shall apply to all actions which accrue before or after the date this Act becomes law.”

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Applicability.

Claim against school staff members concerning the members’ alleged failure to prevent or report alleged sexual abuse of a student by a special education teacher was time-barred because it was not filed within one year of the student’s eighteenth birthday, and the extended limitations period did not apply to claims against non-perpetrator third parties. Doe v. Logan, 602 S.W.3d 177, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

Cited in:

Doe v. Logan, 602 S.W.3d 177, 2020 Ky. App. LEXIS 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 2020).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Wiederstein, Closed Courtrooms and the Public’s Right of Access, Vol. 67, No. 4, July 2003, Ky. Bench & Bar 15.

Hunt, Human Trafficking: A Primer for Kentucky Lawyers. Vol. 73, No. 4, July 2009, Ky. Bench & Bar, 17.

Provisions for Application of Limitations

413.250. When action commences.

An action shall be deemed to commence on the date of the first summons or process issued in good faith from the court having jurisdiction of the cause of action.

History. 2524.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section must be read in connection with KRS 413.120 which applies to an action by a city to recover taxes and provides that action must be commenced within five (5) years next after the cause of action accrues. Louisville v. Meglemery, 107 Ky. 122 , 52 S.W. 1052, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 751 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1899 ).

This section must be read with KRS 342.285 in order to determine whether the petition was filed and summons issued in time to give the Circuit Court jurisdiction in appeal from Workers' Compensation Board. Blue Grass Mining Co. v. North, 265 Ky. 250 , 96 S.W.2d 757, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1936 ).

2.Nonresidents.

An action was commenced by the filing in the proper court of a petition stating the cause of action, and by causing a summons to be issued or warning order to be made therein and where plaintiff filed his petition and procured the warning order within the prescribed time he had an action pending in court, and an attachment levied subsequently on defendant’s property was valid although the petition was amended at the time of the attachment and no new warning order or summons issued. Fremd v. Ireland, 33 S.W. 89, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 1140 (1895). (See KRS 454.210 .).

An action is not commenced until a summons is issued or a warning order made thereon and, where plaintiff knew defendant was a nonresident, issuance of a summons that could not be served within the time prescribed by the statute of limitations was not sufficient to stop the running of the statute. Traders' Deposit Bank v. Hoffman, 99 Ky. 240 , 35 S.W. 631, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 148 , 1896 Ky. LEXIS 79 ( Ky. 1896 ). (See KRS 454.210 .).

Where plaintiff and his attorney did not know defendant was a nonresident the filing of petitions and issuing of summons against defendant stopped the running of the statute of limitations. Walston v. Louisville, 66 S.W. 385, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1852 (1902). (See KRS 454.210 .).

An action against a nonresident was commenced by obtaining a warning order. Hyden v. Calames, 161 Ky. 593 , 171 S.W. 186, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 124 ( Ky. 1914 ). (See KRS 454.210 .).

Where a summons, rather than a warning order, was issued in an action filed two (2) days after the defendant left the state, the plaintiff’s knowledge of the defendant’s leaving was not alone sufficient to show that they knew that he was no longer a resident of the state and, therefore, in the absence of further proof, the issuance of summons was deemed to be in good faith. Appleton v. Southern Trust Co., 244 Ky. 453 , 51 S.W.2d 447, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 452 ( Ky. 1932 ). (See KRS 454.210 .).

Where action for wrongful death brought by nonresident administrator was not maintainable because administrator had no authority to sue in Kentucky, the filing of the action did not operate to suspend the running of the statute of limitations; therefore an attempt, after the statute had run, to substitute as plaintiff an ancillary administrator appointed in Kentucky, was too late. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

3.Commencement of Action.

Plaintiff’s contention that her failure to comply with the applicable statutes and Civil Rule regarding commencement of actions was induced by statements of adjusters for defendant’s insurance company did not afford a basis for estoppel to plead limitations; if in fact such agreement as plaintiff alleged did exist, KRS 413.265 provided a legitimate, binding manner to memorialize and enforce the same. Gibson v. EPI Corp., 940 S.W.2d 912, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

Although plaintiffs’ personal injury complaint was filed within the one-year statute of limitations found in KRS 413.140(1), plaintiffs failed to commence an action within the one-year statute of limitations because, under KRS 413.250 and CR 3, plaintiffs’ action did not commence until a summons was actually issued; the statute of limitations was not equitably tolled simply because plaintiffs moved to file an amended complaint within the one-year time frame. Bradford v. Bracken County, 767 F. Supp. 2d 740, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3894 (E.D. Ky. 2011 ).

4.—Verification of Petition.

An action was begun within one (1) year after injury where the action was filed and summons issued within the year, although the petition was not verified until after one (1) year had expired from the date of the injury. Dayton v. Hirth, 121 Ky. 42 , 87 S.W. 1136, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 1209 , 1905 Ky. LEXIS 174 ( Ky. 1905 ).

5.—Diligence in Prosecution.

The statute of limitations is arrested by the filing of the suit and issuing of summons within the period prescribed by the statute of limitations and delay in bringing to trial an issue made by the parties or failure to use diligence in prosecution will not again set in motion the running of the statute. Louisville v. Meglemery, 107 Ky. 122 , 52 S.W. 1052, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 751 , 1899 Ky. LEXIS 138 ( Ky. 1899 ). See Louisville v. Hornsby's Ex'r, 64 S.W. 996, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 1238 , 1901 Ky. LEXIS 600 (Ky. Ct. App. 1901).

6.— —Change of Venue.

Where a complaint was filed in federal district court of Michigan before the expiration of the statute of limitations and subsequently transferred to a federal district court of Kentucky after the expiration of the statute of limitations, the action was commenced and the running of the statute was interrupted by the initial filing of such complaint. Smith v. Peters, 482 F.2d 799, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 8447 (6th Cir. Ky. 1973 ), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 989, 94 S. Ct. 1587, 39 L. Ed. 2d 886, 1974 U.S. LEXIS 761 (U.S. 1974), disapproved, Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., 446 U.S. 740, 100 S. Ct. 1978, 64 L. Ed. 2d 659, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 109 (U.S. 1980).

7.—Issuance of Summons in Good Faith.

Action arising out of an automobile accident occurring March 8, 1953 in Kentucky, while plaintiff was a passenger in an automobile owned and operated by defendant’s decedent, filed in federal court against administrator on March 6, 1954, was barred by the one (1) year statute of limitations under this section and the three (3) year New York statute of limitations where clerk’s office was asked to retain the complaint and not issue summons because the whereabouts of driver’s administrator was unknown and on March 13, 1957, complaint was served upon the clerk of the New York surrogate court. Decker v. Boyle, 162 F. Supp. 164, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2699 (D.N.Y. 1957).

When plaintiff has filed its petition setting forth its cause of action, and has caused a summons to issue thereon in time to save its right of action, it has done all that the law requires it to do for it is the official duty of the clerk to issue the summons and to see to its proper delivery to the sheriff. Blackburn v. Louisville, 55 S.W. 1075, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1716 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 580 ( Ky. 1900 ).

When summons is issued in good faith, the action is commenced. H. A. Thierman Co. v. Wolff, 125 Ky. 832 , 102 S.W. 843, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 376 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 343 ( Ky. 1907 ).

An action is commenced by the issuance of the summons and not by a mere request to have the summons issued. Casey v. Newport Rolling Mill Co., 156 Ky. 623 , 161 S.W. 528, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Filing of petition without issuance of summons held not “commencement of action” which would stop running of limitation. Simpson v. Antrobus, 260 Ky. 641 , 86 S.W.2d 544, 1935 Ky. LEXIS 534 ( Ky. 1935 ).

When a party has caused the summons to issue in good faith he has complied with the law and saved the right of action in respect of time, for it is the official duty of the clerk to see that the process is delivered to the sheriff for service, and of the sheriff or one of his deputies to attend the clerk’s office daily to receive such process as may have been issued and where there was nothing in the record to show that summons was not issued in good faith but simply that it did not reach the office of the sheriff until after the period of limitation had expired, the action was not barred. Blue Grass Mining Co. v. Stamper, 267 Ky. 643 , 103 S.W.2d 112, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 376 ( Ky. 1937 ).

A delay of six (6) weeks in placing summons in process of execution, without excuse and without circumstances indicating a present intention of having the summons executed would be sufficient to show lack of good faith. Rucker's Adm'r v. Roadway Express, Inc., 279 Ky. 707 , 131 S.W.2d 840, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Negligence in the execution of a summons until after statutory period has run does not of itself bar the right of action, but a negligent delay, if of sufficient length of time, may indicate lack of good faith. Rucker's Adm'r v. Roadway Express, Inc., 279 Ky. 707 , 131 S.W.2d 840, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1939 ).

Where petition was filed within the statute of limitations, but no evidence was available that summons had been delivered to sheriff for service on defendant, six (6) months had passed, and the statute of limitations had run before another summons was obtained, the “good faith” in the issuing of process necessary for the “commencement” of an action so as to toll the statute of limitations had been destroyed. Brock v. Turner Fuel Co., 296 Ky. 729 , 178 S.W.2d 427, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 624 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Where subsection (1) of KRS 342.285 required in in appeals of awards of Workmen’s (now Workers’) Compensation Board the service of process upon the board shall be had on the executive secretary of the board and CR 4.04 prescribed that service of process should be made upon the Commonwealth or any agency thereof by serving the Attorney General, service of summons upon the Workmen’s (now Workers’) Compensation Board by serving the Attorney General was not made in bad faith. Commonwealth, Dep't of Highways v. Parker, 394 S.W.2d 899, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 217 ( Ky. 1965 ).

In an action against an insurance company, a summons issued to be served on the agent of the company instead of on the commissioner of insurance as required by subsection (1) of KRS 304.094 (now repealed), was nevertheless issued in good faith within the meaning of this section and CR 3, and the action commenced with the issuance of the summons. Roehrig v. Merchants & Businessmen's Mut. Ins. Co., 391 S.W.2d 369, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Issuance of summons upon the Attorney General commenced the appeal to the circuit court from the order of the administrative agency; once commenced, the mere delay in serving the secretary did not defeat the action. Commonwealth, Transp. Cabinet, Dep't of Highways v. Campbellsville, 740 S.W.2d 162, 1987 Ky. App. LEXIS 530 (Ky. Ct. App. 1987).

Circuit court properly dismissed a customer's personal injury action against a store as time-barred because, while the customer filed the summons the same day on which the complaint was filed, which was before the limitations period expired, an action was statutorily commenced on the date of the first summons or process issued in good faith, the customer did not attempt to serve any of the defendants with the summons, her claim that the parties were attempting to negotiate a settlement was denied by the store, and the customer's delay constituted a lack of good faith that prevented the action from being commenced until summonses were reissued well outside the limitations period. Hearn v. Family Dollar Holdings, Inc., 519 S.W.3d 785, 2017 Ky. App. LEXIS 106 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).

Circuit court correctly allowed a case to proceed because the case was commenced in good faith since a trainer and an owner gave copies of their appeal to the Attorney General and to agents of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission within the 30-day timeframe and had summonses issued; they intended to properly commence the action and believed a summons was not necessary, and that belief was reasonable based on the wording of Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13B.140 and the lack of published case law. Ky. Horse Racing Comm'n v. Motion, 592 S.W.3d 739, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 49 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).

8.— —Error by Clerk.

Action against Kentucky resident by Virginia resident for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident occurring in Kentucky was not barred by the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations since plaintiffs had done everything possible to protect their rights where their attorney, prior to the expiration of the one (1) year statute, attempted to file their complaint, found the clerk’s office closed, contacted the deputy clerk at her home, took the complaints to her, paid the required fees and delivered the summons with a request they be issued but summonses were not issued until after expiration of the one (1) year period. Hagy v. Allen, 153 F. Supp. 302, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3235 (D. Ky. 1957 ).

When plaintiff has filed his petition, and has actually caused summons to issue thereon in time to save his right of action, he has done all the law requires him to do, and cannot be prejudiced by some clerical mistake of the clerk. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Smith's Adm'r, 87 Ky. 501 , 9 S.W. 493, 10 Ky. L. Rptr. 514 , 1888 Ky. LEXIS 104 ( Ky. 1888 ). See Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Bowen, 39 S.W. 31, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 1099 (1897); Casey v. Newport Rolling Mill Co., 156 Ky. 623 , 161 S.W. 528, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1913 ).

Fact that clerk’s indorsement on petition showed that it was filed on April 21, 1930 was not conclusive that action was commenced at that time, where record showed that summons was issued and served on April 21, 1931, and it was apparent that indorsement of 1930 date was a clerical misprision. Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. McEuen, 281 Ky. 113 , 134 S.W.2d 1012, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 22 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The filing of a petition for revivor and issuance of process without qualification by plaintiff within one (1) year after defendant’s death, was deemed the commencement of an action in respect to avoiding the one (1) year limitation bar upon revivor of actions, though first summons was faulty due to clerk’s error and alias summons was not issued until after the year’s expiration. Harris' Ex'x v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 304 Ky. 840 , 202 S.W.2d 154, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 697 ( Ky. 1947 ).

The lawsuit filed three (3) days before the limitations period expired should not have been dismissed when the summons was not issued by the court clerk until one day after the limitations period expired; the plaintiff had filed her suit in a timely manner and should not have been punished when the issuance of the summons, which was beyond plaintiff’s duty or power, did not occur within a timely manner. Nanny v. Smith, 260 S.W.3d 815, 2008 Ky. LEXIS 183 ( Ky. 2008 ).

9.— —Failure of Sheriff to Serve.

Where city, attempting to enforce tax liens against defendant’s realty, delivered summonses to sheriff, there was no showing that the sheriff was obstructed in serving the summonses, and sheriff had served summonses in similar suits for city, it was held that the city had commenced suits in good faith, though several years had elapsed without summonses being served. Title Ins. & Trust Co. v. Paducah, 275 Ky. 392 , 121 S.W.2d 932, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 440 ( Ky. 1938 ).

10.— —Naming Defendants.

The issuing of the summons is the commencement of the action, and a summons, to be valid, must name the defendants to be summoned. Casey v. Newport Rolling Mill Co., 156 Ky. 623 , 161 S.W. 528, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1913 ).

11.— —Payment of Tax on Suit.

Where plaintiff filed petition in the clerk’s office and caused summons to be issued thereon within the statutory period of limitations, this was the limit of his duty and he had a right to rely upon the clerk to issue the summons in proper form and to the proper court, but where petition was not accompanied by the tax on the suit it was error to refuse to permit defendant’s amended answer pleading the bar of the statute of limitations. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Hall, 115 Ky. 567 , 74 S.W. 280, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 2487 , 1903 Ky. LEXIS 132 ( Ky. 1903 ).

12.— —Common Carrier.

Where plaintiff, in action against common carrier for personal injuries, caused petition to be filed in county which had venue, but caused summons to be issued to another county which did not have venue, which summons was never served, action was nevertheless commenced in good faith, and action was not barred by limitations, although later service on summons issued to a third county was made more than one (1) year after injury. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Alexander, 277 Ky. 719 , 127 S.W.2d 395, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 573 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where suit was brought against a common carrier in a proper court in time and summons issued against the defendant to a county where it did not reside but where it did have an agent it could not be said that the summons was caused to be issued in bad faith. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Alexander, 277 Ky. 719 , 127 S.W.2d 395, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 573 ( Ky. 1938 ).

13.— —Conditional Issuance.

Causing a summons to be issued by the clerk conditionally is not causing it to be issued in good faith. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Little, 264 Ky. 579 , 95 S.W.2d 253, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 373 ( Ky. 1936 ). See Rucker's Adm'r v. Roadway Express, Inc., 279 Ky. 707 , 131 S.W.2d 840, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1939 ).

14.— —Delivery to Plaintiff or Attorney.

Where personal injury action accrued on February 3, 1933, petition was filed on January 15, 1934, and summons was prepared and signed by the clerk and delivered to plaintiff’s attorney on that date but was not delivered to sheriff for service until March 10, 1934, the claim was barred by the statute of limitations for though its service has been postponed when a summons is actually served or put in line of service the mere intention to have it issued is translated into a good faith intentional action, but if the suspension is not closed before the right to sue ends it must be regarded that plaintiff slept through the time prescribed. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Little, 264 Ky. 579 , 95 S.W.2d 253, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 373 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Summons issued by clerk and delivered to plaintiff or his attorney is not deemed to have been issued in good faith until given to sheriff or other proper officer to be served. Blue Grass Mining Co. v. North, 265 Ky. 250 , 96 S.W.2d 757, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 470 ( Ky. 1936 ).

Summons was issued and delivered to plaintiff’s attorney. Attorney, being unable to ascertain name of defendant’s process agent, and because of illness of his wife, failed to forward process to sheriff for execution. New summons was issued and executed more than six (6) weeks later and after expiration of one (1) year from date of injury. Action was commenced in time, bad faith in retention of first summons not being shown. Rucker's Adm'r v. Roadway Express, Inc., 279 Ky. 707 , 131 S.W.2d 840, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1939 ).

In the absence of a showing of a valid excuse for delay a summons issued by the clerk and delivered to the plaintiff or his attorney is not deemed to have been issued in good faith until it is given to the sheriff or other officer to be served. Wooton v. Begley, 305 S.W.2d 270, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Where in an election contest suit plaintiff who obtained summons from the clerk within the 15 day period of limitation offered no excuse for holding the summons for three (3) days without delivering it to the sheriff for service and if it had been delivered service could have been made in time, a valid ground existed for dismissing the complaint since the action was not commenced until the summons was delivered to the sheriff which was beyond the limitation period. Wooton v. Begley, 305 S.W.2d 270, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 299 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Where summons issued on December 9, 1994, but held by plaintiff’s attorney until May, 1995, action for damages as a result of a fall on December 12, 1994, was not commenced with the limitation period of one (1) year. Gibson v. EPI Corp., 940 S.W.2d 912, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

15.— —Presumption.

The taking out of a summons is presumptive evidence of an intention to have it served in due course, but that presumption may be rebutted by the facts. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Little, 264 Ky. 579 , 95 S.W.2d 253, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 373 ( Ky. 1936 ).

16.— —Mistake in Date.

Where a summons bore a date one (1) day after the expiration of the period of limitations, plaintiff should have affirmatively pleaded that the date was the result of a mistake by the issuing officer and introduced evidence to so prove, and, where such pleading and proof was not made, the trial court erred in denying defendant’s plea in limitation. Clark v. Finch's Adm'x, 254 S.W.2d 934, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 1237 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).

17.— —Incorrect Address.

Facts failed to show that the first summons was not issued in good faith in spite of the fact that by exercising greater diligence than was exercised the correct address of the defendant could have been discovered, where plaintiff obtained the address from an official agency, the police, which in the normal course of events should have been the correct address, and summons was issued and immediately placed in the process of execution with an apparent intention to have it served and notice given to the defendant in due course. Hausman's Adm'r v. Poehlman, 314 Ky. 453 , 236 S.W.2d 259, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 674 ( Ky. 1951 ).

18.— —Intention of Having It Served.

The cause of action is not commenced until there is a bona fide intention to have the summons filled out and signed by the clerk, accompanied by a bona fide, unequivocal intention to have it served or proceeded on presently or in due course or without abandonment; action and intention combined constitutes the commencement of a suit, because a summons filled out and signed with no intention of having it served is altogether inoperative. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Little, 264 Ky. 579 , 95 S.W.2d 253, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 373 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The issuance of a summons does not commence an action unless accompanied by an intent that the summons be served in due course. Whittinghill v. Smith, 562 S.W.2d 649, 1977 Ky. App. LEXIS 898 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977).

19.—Defective Averments in Complaint.

Filing of petition and issuing summons thereon against “Alice Newhouse, Exec. R. A. Newhouse,” began action against estate so as to suspend the statute of limitations, although the petition was so defective in its averments setting out the nature of the complaint that any judgment rendered upon it alone against the estate would have been erroneous. Southern Contract Co.'s Assignee v. Newhouse, 119 Ky. 704 , 66 S.W. 730, 23 Ky. L. Rptr. 2141 , 1902 Ky. LEXIS 175 ( Ky. 1902 ).

20.Interpleader.

Where creditor intervened in action for appointment of receiver and for liquidation of insolvent corporation, and receiver filed “objections and exceptions” within statutory period of limitation claiming a setoff against creditor arising out of a fraudulent transaction, subsequent amendment of pleading by receiver, to properly set up claim as an answer, counterclaim and setoff, related back to filing of original pleading, and claim set up by amended pleading was not barred by limitations though not filed until after five-year period. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

An interpleader is not entitled to have his pleading given a retroactive effect relating back to the time of the filing of the action in which he seeks to interplead, for the purpose of avoiding the plea of limitations. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

21.Waiver.

After cause of action has accrued the parties may waive the statute of limitations by an agreement extending the time for commencing action beyond the time in which it would be barred by the statute. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

22.Federal Law.

Whether plaintiff’s action would be dismissed depended entirely on whether the federal or Kentucky rule for commencing an action applied, since the complaint was filed within the statutory period but summons was issued after the statute of limitations had expired; in this case, it was determined that state law determined when the statute of limitations was tolled. Wm. H. McGee & Co. v. Liebherr America, Inc., 789 F. Supp. 861, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5563 (W.D. Mo. 1992).

In diversity suit that arose out of an auto accident, amendments to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing commencement of actions at filing of complaint were not in conflict with Kentucky law which provided that suit was commenced not at the time the complaint was filed but rather on the date of the first summons or process issued in good faith from the court having jurisdiction of the cause; thus where summons did not issue until after the statute of limitations had run the suit was barred. Eades v. Clark Distrib. Co., 70 F.3d 441, 1995 FED App. 0343P, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 33482 (6th Cir. Ky. 1995 ), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1157, 116 S. Ct. 1545, 134 L. Ed. 2d 649, 1996 U.S. LEXIS 2706 (U.S. 1996).

23.Improperly Registered Agent.

First summons served on improperly registered agent was not time-barred, since plaintiffs’ counsel attempted to obtain the proper agent for service of process from the Secretary of State’s office, the usual agency from which such information is gleaned. Jones v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., 964 S.W.2d 805, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 68 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

24.Settlement Negotiations.

Although settlement negotiations between the parties cannot be used to extend the statute of limitations, settlement talks undoubtedly can show that defendant had notice of plaintiffs’ intent to sue before the statute of limitations expired. Jones v. Baptist Healthcare Sys., 964 S.W.2d 805, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 68 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

25.Summons.

Where suit was filed in time but summons was returned “not found” and no alias summons was taken out for nearly five (5) years, the suit had not been prosecuted in good faith or the last summons was the first summons that was issued in good faith upon the petition, since the diligence is in issuing and serving the process and not in prosecuting the action. Clark v. Kellar, 66 Ky. 223 , 1867 Ky. LEXIS 172 ( Ky. 1867 ).

Cited in:

Campbell v. Mason, 269 Ky. 128 , 106 S.W.2d 100, 1937 Ky. LEXIS 555 ( Ky. 1937 ); Kentucky-Virginia Stone Co. v. Ball, 426 S.W.2d 455, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 650 ( Ky. 1968 ); Farris v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 415 F. Supp. 594, 1976 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15011 (W.D. Ky. 1976 ); Pickhart v. United States Post Office, 664 S.W.2d 939, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 315 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983); Graham v. Harlin, Parker & Rudloff, 664 S.W.2d 945, 1983 Ky. App. LEXIS 351 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983), overruled, Alagia, Day, Trautwein & Smith v. Broadbent, 882 S.W.2d 121, 1994 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1994 ); Metts v. Frankfort, 665 S.W.2d 318, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 7 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984); Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Kentucky Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 972 S.W.2d 276, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Mihalek & McCauley, Why Statutes of Limitations Are Not Applicable in Kentucky Arbitrations, Volume 75, Number 2, March 2011, Ky. Bench & Bar 8.

Jakubowicz & McCubbin, Why Kentucky’s Statutes of Limitations Should Apply to Claims Raised in Arbitration, Volume 75, Number 2, March 2011, Ky. Bench & Bar 14.

Kentucky Law Journal.

Leathers and Mooney, Civil Procedure, 74 Ky. L.J. 355 (1985-86).

Collateral References.

ALR

Settlement negotiations as estopping reliance on statute of limitations. 39 A.L.R.3d 127.

413.260. Effect of injunction or other restraint on limitation.

  1. If the doing of an act necessary to save any right or benefit is restrained or suspended by injunction or other lawful restraint, vacancy in office, absence of an officer or his refusal to act, the time covered by the injunction, restraint, vacancy, absence or refusal to act shall not be counted in the application of any statute of limitations.
  2. When the collection of a judgment or the commencement of an action is stayed by injunction, the time of continuance of the injunction shall not be counted as part of the period limited for the collection of the judgment or the commencement of the action.

History. 2535, 2544.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The words “restrained or suspended” should not be given a broad meaning since statutes of limitation are denominated as statutes of repose, and rest upon a sound public policy tending to the peace and welfare of society and their provisions should not be lightly evaded. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ).

2.Application.

This section had no application where creditor sought to avoid statutory bar in a suit to subject conveyance made to debtor as trustee for her infant son on the ground that debtor had resisted her liability on a note in a suit brought by creditor thereby delaying a judgment against her for four (4) years since the mere fact debtor resisted her liability on the note did not act as a restraint because it was not necessary that creditor have a judgment against debtor on the note before proceeding against the trust fund. Graham's Adm'r v. English, 160 Ky. 375 , 169 S.W. 836, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 460 ( Ky. 1914 ).

This section was not applicable where the “restraint” plaintiff claimed existed was the pendency of her own suit in connection with the committee of her brother to obtain the same relief which she was seeking in the suit in question. Clay v. Clay, 199 Ky. 4 , 250 S.W. 829, 1923 Ky. LEXIS 788 ( Ky. 1923 ).

Plaintiff’s right to file action for personal injury occurring on June 13 was not restrained or suspended so as to bring him within the provisions of subsection (1) of this section and not count June 9, 10 and 11 of the following year in computation of the one (1) year statute of limitations because at the time plaintiff’s attorney went to the clerk’s office to file the suit the clerk’s office was closed, where the facts showed that the circuit court clerk was absent from office during the month of June but appointed two (2) deputy clerks, one of whom was in the office every weekday until 3:00 or 3:30 p.m. during the month of June except for two (2) afternoons when the other deputy clerk had the key at their joint home two (2) miles from the county seat and plaintiff’s attorney knew where they lived. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ).

Action on fire insurance policy was barred by one (1) year contractual period of limitations, although policy had been seized under jeopardy assessment for unpaid federal income taxes since this section does not apply to a limitation provided for in a contract. Turner v. California Ins. Co., 254 S.W.2d 481, 1953 Ky. LEXIS 588 ( Ky. 1953 ).

In an action by a barge owner and a pontoon boat owner for exoneration from or limitation of liability under the Limitation Act, 46 U.S.C.S. § 30501 et seq., arising out of a collision, the 14 injured and deceased passengers were not entitled to relief from the stay of their claims because their claims exceeded the limitation fund. Under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.260 , the statute of limitations on their actions would be tolled during the stay. In re Walsh Constr. Co., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50078 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 14, 2016).

3.Injunction.

Where plaintiff was restrained by injunction from prosecuting her suit for wrongful death of her husband which was brought in seasonable time, this section saved the cause of action from being barred by limitation during the pendency of the injunction. Reed's Adm'x v. Illinois C. R. Co., 182 Ky. 455 , 206 S.W. 794, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 404 ( Ky. 1918 ).

4.Restraint.

Litigation between counties, municipalities and other banks in which Court of Appeals held it was proper for the other banks to pay taxes into state treasury instead of to counties and cities was no legal restraint on plaintiff bank which would suspend the running of the statute of limitations under this section, and plaintiff bank was barred from compelling the auditor to refund the taxes it had paid into the state treasury in reliance on that decision where plaintiff bank made no application to the auditor for refund until after the Supreme Court of the United States overruled the Court of Appeals and the statute of limitations had run. Bank of Commerce v. Stone, 108 Ky. 427 , 56 S.W. 683, 22 Ky. L. Rptr. 70 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 60 ( Ky. 1900 ).

The refusal of the United States Circuit Court to sustain plaintiff’s motion to dismiss his action at the time it was made and the judgment entered was a lawful restraint under this section preventing the plaintiff from instituting the action he afterwards instituted when the action was dismissed by mandate of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals; thus, the time between the refusal to sustain plaintiff’s motion to dismiss and the dismissal on mandate should not be counted in the application of the statute of limitations. Knight's Adm'r v. Illinois C. R. Co., 143 Ky. 418 , 136 S.W. 874, 1911 Ky. LEXIS 423 ( Ky. 1911 ).

Statute of limitations under KRS 342.185 in the employee’s workers’ compensation case was not tolled pursuant to KRS 413.260 by the restraint placed upon the employee’s case by the employer’s declaration of bankruptcy, as no restraint occurred, because the workers’ compensation claim could be litigated during bankruptcy. Rogers v. Palm Beach Co., 114 S.W.3d 848, 2003 Ky. LEXIS 202 ( Ky. 2003 ).

5.Superseding Judgment.

Where the debtor superseded judgment on appeal the statute of limitations was suspended against an action to set aside a fraudulent conveyance and enforce the judgment against the property since the creditor was deprived of the right to bring any action looking to the collection or even the protection of his judgment. Cavanaugh v. Britt, 90 Ky. 273 , 13 S.W. 922, 12 Ky. L. Rptr. 204 , 1890 Ky. LEXIS 76 ( Ky. 1890 ).

6.Refusal to Act.

Where assessor had the right to make retrospective assessment of school taxes, the five year statute of limitations ceased to run during the time assessor failed to comply with the demand of the board of education that assessment of school taxes, which the city was authorized to collect for the state, be made retrospectively against manufacturing concerns exempted by the general council from city taxes. North Vernon Lumber Co. v. Louisville, 163 Ky. 467 , 173 S.W. 1120, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 243 ( Ky. 1915 ).

7.Computation of Time.

In this state, if the computation of time within which an act may be done exceeds a week, Sundays are to be included but if less than a week, Sundays are excluded; thus, where an automobile accident occurred on Sunday and the last day on which action for personal injuries could have been brought under this section was a Sunday, both Sundays must be included in the computation of the one (1) year statute of limitations. Fannin v. Lewis, 254 S.W.2d 479, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 1134 ( Ky. 1952 ). (see CR 6.01).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Motions on executions, limitation, KRS 426.360 , 426.510 .

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

Collateral References.

ALR

Agreement of parties as estopping reliance on statute of limitations. 43 A.L.R.3d 756.

413.265. Validity of agreements extending limitations periods.

Written agreements entered into in good faith and at arms length to extend limitations periods for the filing of civil actions, including agreements entered into prior to July 15, 1988, shall be valid and enforceable according to their terms.

History. Enact. Acts 1988, ch. 268, § 1, effective July 15, 1988.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.In General.

Plaintiff’s contention that her failure to comply with the applicable statutes and Civil Rule regarding commencement of actions was induced by statements of adjusters for defendant’s insurance company did not afford a basis for estoppel to plead limitations; if in fact such agreement as plaintiff alleged did exist, this section provided a legitimate, binding manner to memorialize and enforce the same. Gibson v. EPI Corp., 940 S.W.2d 912, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 24 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

413.270. Effect of judgment of no jurisdiction — Application to administrative agencies.

  1. If an action is commenced in due time and in good faith in any court of this state and the defendants or any of them make defense, and it is adjudged that the court has no jurisdiction of the action, the plaintiff or his representative may, within ninety (90) days from the time of that judgment, commence a new action in the proper court. The time between the commencement of the first and last action shall not be counted in applying any statute of limitation.
  2. As used in this section, “court” means all courts, commissions, and boards which are judicial or quasi-judicial tribunals authorized by the Constitution or statutes of the Commonwealth of Kentucky or of the United States of America.

History. 2545: amend. Acts 1958, ch. 54, § 1.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The prime purpose of this section is to afford a full opportunity for a hearing on the merits. Ockerman v. Wise, 274 S.W.2d 385, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1263 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954). See Shircliff v. Elliott, 384 F.2d 947, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4586 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

2.Construction.

When plaintiff has shown the proper diligence required by the applicable statute of limitations but has filed in an improper court, the saving statute provides him a further period of time in which to find the proper court, and if subsequent abortive attempts are not prosecuted in bad faith the number of such attempts is immaterial so long as the proper court is found before the grace period runs. Shircliff v. Elliott, 384 F.2d 947, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4586 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

Where the injured employee did not bring a common-law action for damages before the statute of limitations expired because he thought he could collect under workmen’s compensation, he could possibly still bring an action within 90 days after the date of final determination that the Workers’ Compensation Board had no jurisdiction. Morgan v. Maryland Casualty Co., 458 S.W.2d 789, 1970 Ky. LEXIS 194 ( Ky. 1970 ).

The term “action” as used in this section refers to the initiation of a legal action and this section does not govern a continuing step in an ongoing legal action such as an appeal. To rule otherwise would permit a party to extend the time for appeal to three (3) or four (4) times the normal time. J. A. Jones Constr. Co. v. Carrico, 639 S.W.2d 377, 1982 Ky. App. LEXIS 247 (Ky. Ct. App. 1982), overruled, Jent v. Commonwealth, Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet, 862 S.W.2d 318, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 123 ( Ky. 1993 ).

Where the estate representative timely filed the medical negligence complaint in the trial court in good faith and the complaint was dismissed because of lack of jurisdiction due to sovereign immunity, the estate representative was entitled pursuant to KRS 413.270 to timely refile the complaint in the proper forum, which was before the Board of Claims. Under such circumstances, KRS 413.270 tolled the time for filing and gave the estate representative 90 days to file the complaint from the date the complaint was dismissed in the trial court. Commonwealth of Ky. Univ. of Ky. Hosp. v. Douglas, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 228 (Ky. Ct. App. July 18, 2008), review denied, ordered not published, 2009 Ky. LEXIS 224 (Ky. Aug. 19, 2009).

3.Application.

If the litigant has already proceeded in the proper court, and of his own motion has dismissed the suit after the action was barred by limitation, the statute does not apply, and the bar is complete although another action in another court was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Fielder v. Hansbrough, 195 Ky. 574 , 242 S.W. 832, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 343 ( Ky. 1922 ).

Under this section where a death action was commenced in the state circuit court over two (2) years after the death, but within three (3) months (now 90 days) of the decision of the United States Court of Appeals affirming the judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky dismissing for lack of diversity of citizenship an action which had been commenced within one (1) year of the death, this section applied and the action in the state circuit court was not barred by KRS 413.140 . Ockerman v. Wise, 274 S.W.2d 385, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1263 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).

This section is not applicable to an action that is dismissed not because of lack of jurisdiction of the court but because of the lack of capacity of the plaintiff to sue. Hoskins' Adm'r v. Kentucky Ridge Coal Co., 305 S.W.2d 308, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 303 ( Ky. 1957 ).

Although this section applies to a judicial proceeding for review of a final order of the Workers’ Compensation Board, it did not apply where there was no proper showing in circuit court of the facts or grounds for its application because facts were not alleged of record, and the court was not authorized to consider the attorney’s brief or argument unsupported by the record and presented extrinsically. Clark v. Tecon Corp., 371 S.W.2d 861, 1963 Ky. LEXIS 119 ( Ky. 1963 ).

Subsection (1) of this section was applicable to actions for review/appeal to the circuit court from administrative agencies because, under KRS 23A.010(4), an appeal to the circuit from an order of an administrative agency is not a true appeal but rather an original action. Jent v. Commonwealth, Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet, 862 S.W.2d 318, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 123 ( Ky. 1993 ).

Savings clause does not apply to save a claim filed more than two (2) years after the last benefits payment because an ALJ’s finding that an injury falls within the “coming and going rule” is not a finding of lack of jurisdiction over the action, but rather an adjudication that the employer’s affirmative defense was proven. Milby v. Wright, 952 S.W.2d 202, 1997 Ky. LEXIS 89 ( Ky. 1997 ).

Kentucky law allows a plaintiff to commence a new action in state court within 90 days after the original action was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by a federal court, regardless of any applicable statute of limitations. The statute applies to actions originally filed in any court physically located in Kentucky, whether state or federal. Poplar v. KKI, LLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24803 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 2005).

When the McCracken County Deputy Sheriff Merit Board ordered that a deputy sheriff be reinstated with back pay, and the sheriff refused to comply with the order, claims the sheriff raised in the deputy’s action to enforce the order were barred by res judicata because, when the sheriff’s appeal of the order was ultimately dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, this did not deprive him of judicial review of the order as, under the saving statute in KRS 413.270(1), the sheriff could have refiled his claims within 90 days, as he knew or should have known all the underlying facts, but he did not. Cherry v. Augustus, 245 S.W.3d 766, 2006 Ky. App. LEXIS 205 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).

Trial court erred in dismissing a case as time-barred as a dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens was a venue-based dismissal resulting in applicability of the saving statute, KRS 413.270 ; it was not error to transfer a case to another court as Kentucky had one unified Court of Justice, all trial courts and appellate courts were a part of that Court of Justice under Ky. Const. § 109, and in it was vested the judicial power of the Commonwealth. Dollar Gen. Stores, Ltd. v. Smith, 237 S.W.3d 162, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Just as KRS 452.105 mandates that a trial court transfer cases upon a determination that the venue selected is improper, a dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens results in the applicability of the saving statute, KRS 413.270 , as forum non conveniens is a venue-based dismissal. Dollar Gen. Stores, Ltd. v. Smith, 237 S.W.3d 162, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Where card holder challenged the arbitration award by timely filing in federal court, although the action was subsequently dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, the savings provision found in KRS 413.270 preserved the card holder’s right to challenge the arbitration award in state court. Fischer v. MBNA Am. Bank, N.A., 248 S.W.3d 567, 2007 Ky. App. LEXIS 83 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).

When an executor was substituted for a decedent in an action removed to federal court and remanded to state court, the time limit for seeking to revive the action was not tolled while the action was removed to federal court because (1) the tolling statute only applied to a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, (2) the executor began no new action within 90 days of remand, and (3) the revival time could not be tolled. Stone v. Dean Dairy Holdings, LLC, 2018 Ky. App. LEXIS 307 (Ky. Ct. App. Dec. 14, 2018).

Property owners’ claim against a Cabinet was properly dismissed as time-barred because, (1) while the claim did not have to be filed with the Board of Claims within one year, as a filing in the wrong forum in due time suspended the one-year period of waiver of immunity, the claim had to be filed within one year of accrual, as the savings statute’s qualifier, “If an action is commenced in due time” meant filing within the statutory period of waiver of immunity, not the five-year statute of limitations for property damage claims, since the savings statute only conferred jurisdiction, rather than waiving immunity, and (2) the claim was not filed within one year. Commonwealth v. Harmon, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 83 (Ky. Ct. App., sub. op., 2019 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 768 (Ky. Ct. App. May 10, 2019).

This statute applied to appellants’ claims because no surprise or injustice was created by a holding that their claims were timely filed in circuit court as those claims were litigated and defended during the medical review panel process; defendants knew the nature of the claims and the facts underlying those claims; and those claims were not left to slumber in a manner that placed defendants’ ability to defend the claims against them at risk. Smith v. Fletcher, 613 S.W.3d 18, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 461 ( Ky. 2020 ).

Because the supreme court struck down Kentucky’s Medical Review Panel Act as unconstitutional on November 15, 2018, but that opinion was not finalized until February 14, 2019, the 90-day period in this statute did not begin to run until February 14, 2019; appellants’ complaint filed on January 18, 2019, was timely filed; and the circuit court erred in dismissing appellants’ complaint as untimely. Smith v. Fletcher, 613 S.W.3d 18, 2020 Ky. LEXIS 461 ( Ky. 2020 ).

4.Court of This State.

A federal court in this state is a “court of this state” for the purpose of this section. Ockerman v. Wise, 274 S.W.2d 385, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1263 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).

Where, after the defendant was notified her driver’s license would be suspended for failure to satisfy a judgment, the defendant obtained an injunction in quarterly court restraining the department from suspending her driver’s license, the quarterly court came within the statute as “a court of this state” and did not lack jurisdiction. Commonwealth Dep't of Public Safety v. Nelson, 435 S.W.2d 449, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1968 ).

The phrase “in any court of this state” as used in subsection (1) of this section includes only those federal or state “courts,” as defined in subsection (2) of this section, which are physically located within the state of Kentucky. Blair v. Peabody Coal Co., 909 S.W.2d 337, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 192 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

5.Out-of-State Federal Court.

This section’s reference in subsection (1) to “any court of this state” pertains only to the place in which an action is commenced, rather than to the location of the court to which an appeal might be taken; thus, the Kentucky savings statute (this section), which applies to an appeal taken from an action originating in a Federal District Court located in Kentucky, would not similarly apply to an action which involves an out-of-state federal court. Blair v. Peabody Coal Co., 909 S.W.2d 337, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 192 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Even though a Federal District Court dismissed a wife’s personal injury action against an amusement park for lack of jurisdiction, the wife could commence a new action in a Kentucky state court provided that she did so within 90 days. The wife was permitted to bring a state action because her federal action was commenced in due time. Poplar v. KKI, LLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24803 (W.D. Ky. Oct. 21, 2005).

6.Jurisdiction.

Where Kentucky resident, in good faith and in due time, sued a foreign corporation in state Circuit Court for personal injuries and action was dismissed because of court’s lack of jurisdiction of defendant, and plaintiff then instituted an action in the Federal District Court, defendant’s contention that the action was barred by KRS 413.140 was erroneous and his motion for a judgment on the pleadings properly was denied. Fulkerson v. American Chain & Cable Co., 72 F. Supp. 334, 1947 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2510 (D. Pa. 1947).

To effect the prime purpose of this section to afford a full opportunity for a hearing on the merits, the legislative intent embodied in the phrase “no jurisdiction” must at least comprehend “lack of venue.” Shircliff v. Elliott, 384 F.2d 947, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4586 (6th Cir. Ky. 1967 ).

The judgment referred to in this section is the decision which finally determines the disputed issue over the court’s jurisdiction — the trial court’s judgment if there is no appeal, but the appellate court’s ruling if there is an appeal. Ockerman v. Wise, 274 S.W.2d 385, 1954 Ky. LEXIS 1263 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).

7.—Wrong County.

The ninety (90) day saving period provided by this section applied to an action dismissed because it was brought in the wrong county. D. & J. Leasing, Inc. v. Hercules Galion Products, Inc., 429 S.W.2d 854, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 761 ( Ky. 1968 ).

Because the savings provisions of KRS 413.270(1) applied to a dismissal based upon forum non conveniens, the Circuit Court erred by dismissing a customer’s negligence action against a store as time-barred by KRS 413.140 . Smith v. Dollar Gen. Stores, 2005 Ky. App. LEXIS 218 (Ky. Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2005), aff'd, 237 S.W.3d 162, 2007 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 2007 ).

Medical negligence action was timely under the savings statute, KRS 413.270(1), which provided an additional 90-day period to bring the action in an appropriate forum after an earlier action was dismissed for improper venue; nothing in the record suggested that the first action was not brought in good faith. Fields v. Womack, 294 S.W.3d 470, 2009 Ky. App. LEXIS 168 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).

8.—Administrative Board.

Where plaintiff’s claim was not dismissed by compensation board upon the ground that it did not have to hear and determine compensation cases in proper instances, but, rather, that plaintiff’s application did not come within such class, because of his failure to register his agreement to work under the provisions of the act, the provisions of this section were not effectual to avoid and toll the one (1) year statute of limitations for personal injuries. Sears v. Elcomb Coal Co., 253 Ky. 279 , 69 S.W.2d 382, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 652 ( Ky. 1934 ).

By failing to afford the injured party an opportunity to respond to the college’s statute of limitations defense, the board violated its own procedure; and the Circuit Court erred in affirming the board’s dismissal of the claim. Headen v. Commonwealth, 87 S.W.3d 250, 2002 Ky. App. LEXIS 2025 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).

9.—Capacity to Sue.

Where action for wrongful death brought by nonresident administrator was not maintainable because administrator had no authority to sue in Kentucky, the filing of the action did not operate to suspend the running of the statute of limitations; therefore an attempt, after the statute had run, to substitute as plaintiff an ancillary administrator appointed in Kentucky, was too late. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

This section does not permit the institution of an action after the period of limitations has expired by a Kentucky ancillary administrator to recover for the wrongful death of an Ohio resident within three (3) months (now 90 days) of the dismissal of a federal court suit which was instituted prior to the expiration of the period of limitation by the personal representative of the decedent, also an Ohio resident, when the dismissal was on the ground that a foreign personal representative does not have capacity to sue in Kentucky. Lair v. Johnson, 313 S.W.2d 272, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 249 ( Ky. 1958 ).

10.Federal Law.

The federal limitation provision under the federal employers liability act has a uniform operation and does not incorporate state saving statutes since it would produce nonuniform periods of limitation in the several states. Burnett v. New York C. R. Co., 380 U.S. 424, 85 S. Ct. 1050, 13 L. Ed. 2d 941, 1965 U.S. LEXIS 1483 (U.S. 1965).

11.Time Not to Be Counted.

Where, after it is adjudged that the original court an action is filed in lacks jurisdiction, and a new action is commenced in the proper court, the time between the commencement of the first and the last action does not count in applying any statute of limitation. Commonwealth Dep't of Public Safety v. Nelson, 435 S.W.2d 449, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 205 ( Ky. 1968 ).

12.Interpleader.

An interpleader is not entitled to have his pleading given a retroactive effect relating back to the time of the filing of the action in which he seeks to interplead, for the purpose of avoiding the plea of limitations. Vassill's Adm'r v. Scarsella, 292 Ky. 153 , 166 S.W.2d 64, 1942 Ky. LEXIS 56 ( Ky. 1942 ).

Cited in:

Sigler v. Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 61, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3823 (D. Tenn. 1957); Black v. Tichenor, 396 S.W.2d 794, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 129 ( Ky. 1965 ); Willis v. Corbin, 572 S.W.2d 610, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 601 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978); Rooks v. University of Louisville, 574 S.W.2d 923, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 639 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978); Brownsboro Rd. Restaurant, Inc. v. Jerrico, Inc., 674 S.W.2d 40, 1984 Ky. App. LEXIS 533 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984); Natural Resources & Envtl. Protection Cabinet v. Kentucky Ins. Guar. Ass’n, 972 S.W.2d 276, 1997 Ky. App. LEXIS 47 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

413.280. Person under more than one disability.

When two (2) or more disabilities exist in the same person at the time the cause of action accrues, the limitation does not attach until they are all removed.

History. 2538.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Unsound mind.

Claims under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 were time-barred because (1) the claims were not filed within one year of an employee's knowledge of the claims, and (2) the employee did not show tolling for being of unsound mind was warranted, as the employee did not show the employee was of unsound mind when the claims accrued. McCord v. Bd. of Educ., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 2374 (6th Cir. Ky. Jan. 30, 2018).

Cited in:

Commonwealth of Ky. Univ. of Ky. Hosp. v. Douglas, — S.W.3d —, 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

413.290. Limitations only to residents — Notice.

Limitations shall not begin to run in favor of persons coming temporarily into this state, but shall attach only in favor of actual residents in good faith, and after notice to the person to be affected thereby.

History. 2533.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The purpose of this section is to protect a creditor against the action of a resident debtor who leaves the state and remains away from the state temporarily for the purpose of giving the statute of limitations time to run. Boughton v. Shoulders, 116 F. Supp. 391, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2231 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

2.Application.

Where an action against a Kentucky resident motorist to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident which occurred in Kentucky was instituted by a nonresident motorist more than one (1) year after the date of the accident, such action was barred by KRS 413.140 . Boughton v. Shoulders, 116 F. Supp. 391, 1953 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2231 (D. Ky. 1953 ).

3.— Nonresidents.

Limitations run in favor of persons who were nonresidents at the time of the accrual of the cause of action. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

The limitation prescribed by KRS 378.070 runs in favor of a person who was a nonresident at the time of the voidable conveyance. Bancokentucky Co.'s Receiver v. National Bank of Kentucky's Receiver, 281 Ky. 784 , 137 S.W.2d 357, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 41 ( Ky. 1939 ).

This section does not suspend the running of the one (1) year period of limitations of KRS 413.140 as to defendants who were nonresidents of Kentucky at the time the cause of action arose. Rockwood v. Huey, 348 S.W.2d 915, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 39 ( Ky. 1961 ).

This section was not applicable where both parties were nonresidents of Kentucky. Segal v. Hart, 21 Ohio Op. 2d 347, 187 N.E.2d 650, 1961 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 357 (Ohio C.P. 1961).

Kentucky statute of limitations for personal injury claims applied to a parent's claims under 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 1983, 1985, and 1986; this section did not provide that the personal-injury statute of limitations was inapplicable to non-residents, but was designed only to effectuate Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 413.190 . Brown v. Univ. of Ky. Comprehensive Assessment & Training Servs., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 25049 (6th Cir. Ky. June 19, 2014).

413.300. Plaintiff a citizen of enemy country.

If the plaintiff is an alien and a subject or citizen of a country at war with the United States, the time of the continuance of the war shall not be counted as part of the period limited for the commencement of an action.

History. 2534.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The mere appointment of an alien property custodian under law creating the office, who may have had, if his attention had been called to it, authority to prosecute claim, did not have the effect of abolishing the principle of law that the existence of war suspends the statute of limitations as to controversies between the citizens of the countries at war, for to so hold would have the effect of repealing this section. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Vidigoj, 207 Ky. 841 , 270 S.W. 472, 1925 Ky. LEXIS 197 ( Ky. 1925 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Law Journal.

Kentucky Law Survey: Cooper, Civil Procedure, 66 Ky. L.J. 531 (1977-1978).

413.310. Plaintiff’s confinement in penitentiary. [Repealed.]

Compiler’s Notes.

This section (2536.) was repealed by Acts 1990, ch. 176, § 2, effective July 13, 1990.

413.320. Cause of action barred here if barred where it accrued.

When a cause of action has arisen in another state or country, and by the laws of this state or country where the cause of action accrued the time for the commencement of an action thereon is limited to a shorter period of time than the period of limitation prescribed by the laws of this state for a like cause of action, then said action shall be barred in this state at the expiration of said shorter period.

History. 2542: amend. Acts 1942, ch. 206, §§ 1, 2.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

Analysis

1.Construction.

This section will not serve to enlarge the limitation period for an action filed in Kentucky but will effect a curtailment of the limitation period only if the period applicable in the foreign state is less than the Kentucky period. Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), overruling Labatt v. Smith, 83 Ky. 599 , 1886 Ky. LEXIS 14 (1886), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ), questioned, 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967); John Shillito Co. v. Richardson, 102 Ky. 51 , 42 S.W. 847, 1897 Ky. LEXIS 61 (1897), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965); Smith v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 157 Ky. 113 , 162 S.W. 564, 1914 Ky. LEXIS 231 ( Ky. 1914 ), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965); Gibson v. Womack, 218 Ky. 626 , 291 S.W. 1021, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 208 , 51 A.L.R. 773 (1927), overruled, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965), criticized, Aldridge-Poage, Inc. v. Parks, 297 S.W.2d 632, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1956 ), questioned, Atkins v. Schmutz Mfg. Co., 372 F.2d 762, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. 1967), overruled on other grounds, Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 (Ky. 1965), to the extent of conflict.

This “borrowing statute,” which borrows the time limitation period of another state where a cause of action accrues when that period is shorter than Kentucky’s to bar the action from being brought in Kentucky, does not violate the fundamental right of a person to interstate travel. Ellis v. Anderson, 901 S.W.2d 46, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 121 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Court of appeals erred in concluding that the statute required the application of the Alabama statute of limitation because clients’ claims against attorneys were governed by the Kentucky statute of limitations since their causes of action accrued in Kentucky, not Alabama; because “when” a cause of action accrues is closely connected to “where” it accrues, knowing when the “final act” occurred that ripened the matter into a cause of action aids in ascertaining where the cause of action accrued. Abel v. Austin, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Stated simply, if the action accrued in a state other than Kentucky, the shortest statute of limitations applies. If the action accrued in Kentucky, Kentucky's statute of limitations applies. Tomlin v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 2368 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. June 23, 2016).

2.Longer Limitation Where Accrued.

In an action brought in this state to enforce a judgment of court of another state whose statute of limitations is for a longer period than ours under KRS 413.330 the statute of limitations of this state should govern. Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ). See Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ); Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Action to recover for personal injuries resulting from a motor vehicle collision in the state of Ohio was barred by the Kentucky statute of limitations when not filed within one (1) year, for the reason that the Kentucky statute was shorter than the Ohio statute which provided the limitation of two (2) years as to such actions. Wethington v. Griggs, 392 S.W.2d 56, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 262 ( Ky. 1965 ).

A promissory note issued in Georgia and having been negotiated before maturity was placed upon the footing of a bill of exchange and was controlled by the five-year period of limitation provided for in KRS 413.120 rather than Georgia’s six-year limitation period because this section “borrows” the Georgia statute only if it provides for a shorter limitation period. Haeberle v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 769 S.W.2d 64, 1989 Ky. App. LEXIS 10 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).

3.Federal Court.

In an action by receiver of an insolvent national bank to collect a comptroller’s assessment against stockholders, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the day fixed by the comptroller for payment. Helmers v. Anderson, 156 F.2d 47, 34 Ohio Op. 89, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3143 (6th Cir. Ohio 1946), aff'd, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

The federal statutes provided no period of limitation for actions to enforce the liability of national bank stockholders, and accordingly the statute of limitations of the state in which the action was brought was applicable. Helmers v. Anderson, 156 F.2d 47, 34 Ohio Op. 89, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3143 (6th Cir. Ohio 1946), aff'd, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

Where notice of double liability assessment on Kentucky national bank stock, mailed to stockholders by receiver pursuant to assessment order made by comptroller of currency, provided that payment was to be made at office of the receiver, which was in Kentucky, cause of action for failure to pay assessment arose in Kentucky, with result that action in Ohio, against Ohio stockholders, was governed by Kentucky statute of limitations, in view of Ohio statute making limitation statute of foreign state in which action arose applicable if providing a shorter limitation period than Ohio statute. Helmers v. Anderson, 156 F.2d 47, 34 Ohio Op. 89, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3143 (6th Cir. Ohio 1946), aff'd, 331 U.S. 461, 67 S. Ct. 1340, 91 L. Ed. 1602, 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2849 (U.S. 1947).

The Kentucky statutes of limitation, including this section, were not, in view of the inapplicability of renovi doctrine, applicable to an action brought in Indiana against an Ohio defendant for injuries sustained in an accident in Kentucky. Under the Indiana “borrowing statute,” directing the Indiana court to apply the limitation provisions of the state of residence of the nonresident defendant, the specific limitation provision of Ohio applicable to personal injury actions and not Ohio’s “borrowing statute,” which would have applied the limitation of Kentucky, the state where the injury occurred, was applicable. Hobbs v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 195 F. Supp. 56, 17 Ohio Op. 2d 13, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2780 (N.D. Ind. 1961).

To the extent that plaintiffs resided in states other than Kentucky and felt the economic impact of the bond default in their respective states of residence, those states represent the place where the economic injury was suffered; therefore, the limitation for plaintiffs’ § 10 of the Securities Act of 1934 claim was governed by Kentucky’s borrowing statute rather than the statute of limitations embodied in Kentucky’s blue sky law. Freeman v. Laventhol & Horwath, 34 F.3d 333, 1994 FED App. 0258P, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18004 (6th Cir. Ky. 1994 ).

4.—Longer Limitation Where Accrued.

Action in United States District Court in Kentucky for personal injuries arising in New York, in which the plaintiff was, at the time of the injuries, a resident, need not be brought within the period of one (1) year, as provided by Kentucky but could be brought within the three year period as provided by New York, the state in which the claim arose. Koeppe v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 250 F.2d 270, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4137 (6th Cir. Ky. 1957 ); (decision prior to) Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Where diversity action for injury in Virginia was barred by the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations it could not be maintained in federal court in Kentucky notwithstanding it was not barred by the Virginia statute. Atkins v. Schmutz Mfg. Co., 372 F.2d 762, U.S. App. LEXIS 7386 (6th Cir. Ky.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 829, 88 S. Ct. 92, 19 L. Ed. 2d 86, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 687 (U.S. 1967), limited, Miller v. Davis, 507 F.2d 308, 1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 5885 (6th Cir. Ky. 1974 ).

By application of this section, action in Kentucky federal district court for personal injuries sustained in Illinois is governed by the two (2) year statute of limitation of Illinois and not the one (1) year statute of limitation of this state. Stanley v. Bird, 85 F. Supp. 358, 1949 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2457 (D. Ky. 1949 ). But see Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ); Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

The federal district court applied the limitation statute of the foreign state and not that of Kentucky, where under Kentucky law the foreign statute of limitation applied if it was for a longer time, because the federal court was bound by the construction presently placed on the Kentucky statute by state courts even if it was satisfied that the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, when called upon to construe the statute, would embrace the law of the forum which was the prevailing law in 47 other states. Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ) (decision prior to Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

Under this section the New Jersey two (2) year statute of limitations, not the Kentucky one (1) year statute of limitations provided by KRS 413.140 , applied to action for personal injuries brought in Kentucky but arising in New Jersey between a resident of New Jersey and a resident of Kentucky. Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ). See Seat v. Eastern Greyhound Lines, Inc., 389 S.W.2d 908, 1965 Ky. LEXIS 394 ( Ky. 1965 ).

In an action challenging the transfer of trust assets, a Kentucky district court had to apply Kentucky limitation period to the trust beneficiaries’ claims, even though the cause of action arose in Illinois, since Illinois’ limitation period was not shorter than Kentucky's. Boyd v. LaMaster, 927 F.2d 237, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 3592 (6th Cir. Ky. 1991 ).

There are two (2) requirements for applications of the Kentucky borrowing statute: (1) the cause of action must have arisen outside of Kentucky; and (2) the applicable limitations period in the state where the claim arose must be shorter than Kentucky’s limitation period. Freeman v. Laventhol & Horwath, 34 F.3d 333, 1994 FED App. 0258P, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18004 (6th Cir. Ky. 1994 ).

5.Laws of Other States.

Under KRS 413.320 , the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions set forth in KRS 413.140(1)(a) applies to actions brought in Kentucky premised on the Colorado Ski Safety Act of 1979, specifically Colo. Rev. Stat. § 33-44-109(2). Stivers v. Ellington, 140 S.W.3d 599, 2004 Ky. App. LEXIS 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).

6.—Construction.

In action against Kentucky resident for personal injuries sustained in auto accident in Ohio, Ohio’s two-year limitation period which was borrowed and applied pursuant to this section was not tolled by another Ohio statute that provided that when a cause of action accrues against a person who is out of state the period of limitation does not begin to run against him until he comes into state since such statute was declared an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. Ellis v. Anderson, 901 S.W.2d 46, 1995 Ky. App. LEXIS 121 (Ky. Ct. App. 1995).

Pursuant to KRS 413.320 , since Alabama’s statute of limitations under Ala. Code § 6-5-574 is shorter than Kentucky’s statute under KRS 413.245 , it should have been used as the measuring criterion for the two Alabama law firms. Abel v. Austin, 2010 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. May 28, 2010), aff'd, 411 S.W.3d 728, 2013 Ky. LEXIS 458 ( Ky. 2013 ).

Cited in:

Sigler v. Youngblood Truck Lines, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 61, 1957 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3823 (D. Tenn. 1957); Mitchell v. Simms, 296 Ky. 312 , 177 S.W.2d 3, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 157 (1943); Jones v. Furnell, 406 S.W.2d 154, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 193 ( Ky. 1966 ).

Notes to Unpublished Decisions

1.Laws of Other States.

Unpublished decision: Applying KRS 413.320 , Kentucky’s borrowing statute, the court found that the place of injury was California where plaintiff daughter resided—the “where” for accrual purposes—and where the economic loss was “felt”; the applicable limitations period was 3 years under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 338 because the gravamen of the fiduciary action was fraud. Because plaintiff discovered the fraud over 3 years before filing suit, her claims against defendant mother for taking plaintiff’s settlement money, which was awarded to plaintiff when she was a minor, were time-barred. Swanson v. Wilson, 423 Fed. Appx. 587, 2011 FED App. 0344N, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 10321 (6th Cir. Ky. 2011 ).

Research References and Practice Aids

Kentucky Bench & Bar.

Wolff, Defending Credit Card Collection Lawsuits, Vol. 76, No. 6, November 2012, Ky. Bench & Bar 19.

413.330. Action on judgment barred here if barred where rendered — Exception.

If, by the laws of any other state or country, an action upon a judgment or decree rendered in that state or country cannot be maintained there by reason of the lapse of time, and the judgment or decree is incapable of being otherwise enforced there, an action upon it may not be maintained in this state, except in favor of a resident thereof who has had the cause of action from the time it accrued.

History. 2541.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

This section was inapplicable to case where statute of limitations of sister state is longer than statute of limitations of Kentucky. Ley v. Simmons, 249 S.W.2d 808, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 876 ( Ky. 1952 ).

2.Pleading.

Where neither this section nor the applicable Virginia statute was pleaded as a defense to an action by a receiver of a Virginia corporation against the estate of a Kentucky stockholder to collect an assessment levied on the stock, it was error to dismiss the action under this section. Otter View Land Co.'s Receiver v. Bolling's Ex'x, 70 S.W. 834, 24 Ky. L. Rptr. 1157 (1902).

Cited:

Albanese v. Ohio River-Frankfort Cooperage Corp., 125 F. Supp. 333, 1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2663 (D. Ky. 1954 ); Koeppe v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 250 F.2d 270, 1957 U.S. App. LEXIS 4137 (6th Cir. 1957).

413.340. Exceptions as to chapter. [Repealed]

History. 2543; 1998, ch. 196, § 26, effective July 15, 1998; repealed by 2015 ch. 121, § 5, effective June 24, 2015.

CHAPTER 415 Repeal or Vacation of Charters — Usurpation

415.010. Style of action to repeal charter — Prosecution.

The action to repeal or vacate a charter shall be in the name of the Commonwealth, and be brought and prosecuted by the Attorney General, or under his sanction and direction by an attorney for the Commonwealth.

History. C. C. 481: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Institution of Forfeiture.

A grant of a right of way to a corporation, with a provision of reverter, did not cease or revert and could not be reclaimed by the grantor on the ground that the corporation had committed a breach of its charter for which it might be subject to judgment of forfeiture. It was for the public to determine if there was cause for forfeiture, and if so, institute public proceedings. Harrison v. Lexington & F. R. Co., 48 Ky. 470 , 1849 Ky. LEXIS 92 ( Ky. 1849 ) (decided under prior law).

A forfeiture of charter can be had by the state only, at the instance of the Attorney General; thus, a corporation was not only in existence but possessed full power to maintain an action until actual forfeiture although it had violated the statutes and was subject to fine and forfeiture. Reichert v. Ellis Ferry Co., 184 Ky. 150 , 211 S.W. 403, 1919 Ky. LEXIS 19 ( Ky. 1919 ).

2.Cities and Towns.

Under the Constitution of Kentucky the Legislature had no authority to create a city or to convert a taxing district into a city of the fifth class, as it only had power to assign incorporated cities and towns to the class in which they belonged, and a citizen and taxpayer of the city had the right, more than two (2) years after the city was organized, to bring a suit attacking its creation as being in violation of the constitution. Hurley v. Motz, 151 Ky. 451 , 152 S.W. 248, 1913 Ky. LEXIS 495 ( Ky. 1913 ).

The failure of the incorporators of a sixth-class city to comply essentially with the statutory requirements of incorporation makes the body defective but not void, and an action to vacate its charter can be brought and prosecuted only by the Attorney General or under his sanction and direction by an attorney for the Commonwealth. Vanover v. Dunlap, 172 Ky. 679 , 189 S.W. 915, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1916 ).

In a proceeding to correct the boundaries of a town of the sixth class, that had by its judgment of incorporation, substantially exceeded the statutory limits of boundary permitted for towns of its class, the court determined that it had obtained de facto status, and the inclusion of a greater area in its boundaries than permitted by statute was a mere irregularity and could only be attacked in proceedings instituted by the Commonwealth. Saylor v. Wallins, 220 Ky. 651 , 295 S.W. 993, 1927 Ky. LEXIS 597 ( Ky. 1927 ).

3.Waterworks Corporations.

Where all the stock of a waterworks corporation had been acquired by the city, and the corporation had failed to elect a board of directors possessing the necessary qualifications, suit for forfeiture or to vacate charter can only be brought in the name of the commonwealth, and the question of forfeiture is not subject to collateral inquiry in an action by a private citizen. Kirch v. Louisville, 125 Ky. 391 , 101 S.W. 373, 30 Ky. L. Rptr. 1356 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 294 ( Ky. 1907 ).

4.Turnpikes.

Where the president and directors of a turnpike road company purchased the road at a decretal sale, the purchase must be considered as being for the use of the company composed of the stockholders and does not extinguish the corporate existence of the company or transfer to the purchasers any of the rights or interest of the stockholders.

In a proceeding by the attorney general seeking the forfeiture of a turnpike charter and alleging that the corporation had wilfully violated its charter rights in demanding and collecting tolls from patrons of its turnpike, the court in deciding that the charter should not be forfeited, stated that the processes of the criminal courts should have been invoked to remedy the evils complained of before forfeiture of charter was sought. Commonwealth v. Newport, L. & A. Turnpike Co., 97 S.W. 375, 29 Ky. L. Rptr. 1285 (Kan. Ct. App. 1906).

5.Private Corporations.

Where two (2) corporations entered into a written mutual working agreement and joint venture for the operation of the warehouses owned and operated by the two (2) parties to the agreement, and the joint supervision of the business was to be conducted by a committee of six (6) members composed of three directors of each of the corporations, the members of the committee were agents appointed by the board of directors of each corporation and, of course, were constantly subject to the orders of their respective principals, therefore, the powers of neither corporation were exceeded nor surrendered to the agreed upon committee so as to authorize a forfeiture decree. Commonwealth v. United Warehouse Co., 293 Ky. 502 , 169 S.W.2d 300, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 644 ( Ky. 1943 ).

6.Banks.

If a bank had by mismanagement forfeited its charter, the forfeiture should have been established by a direct proceeding against the bank for that purpose, and until that was done, no debtor of the bank could be allowed to absolve himself from payment of his debt by alleging the fact of forfeiture. Hughes v. Bank of Somerset, 15 Ky. 45 , 1824 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1824 ) (decided under prior law).

In a proceeding for the collection of a note debt due a bank, it was not a defense for the obligors to contend there had been a forfeiture of the bank’s charter by nonuse or misuse, for a forfeiture could only be made to appear by a direct proceeding, and not collaterally. Bank of Galliopolis v. Trimble, 45 Ky. 599 , 1846 Ky. LEXIS 74 ( Ky. 1846 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Revocation of charters, KRS 271B.18-050 .

415.020. Order of Legislature needed to repeal or vacate certain charters.

Actions to repeal or vacate the charters of municipal corporations; banks, railroad, turnpike road and internal improvement companies, shall only be instituted by order of the Legislature, unless otherwise expressly provided.

History. C. C. 482: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Municipal Corporations.

The creation of, or annexation of, new territory to a town was a matter within the sole discretion of the Legislature, and did not in any manner depend upon the will of a majority or any inhabitants living within the territory. But if the Legislature did consult their wishes, as it well could, it acted for its advice and guidance, and not in deference to any legal right of the citizen. Cheaney v. Hooser, 48 Ky. 330 , 1848 Ky. LEXIS 73 ( Ky. 1848 ) (decided under prior law).

Where the Legislature enacted a new charter for a town and provided that it should become effective only upon its acceptance by a majority of the legal voters of the town, it was determined by the court in a proceeding involving the constitutionality of the provision that the Legislature cannot delegate its powers to make laws; but, when enacted, whether or not the law shall become operative may be made to depend on the popular will of the inhabitants of the town. Clarke v. Rogers, 81 Ky. 43 , 4 Ky. L. Rptr. 929 , 1883 Ky. LEXIS 26 ( Ky. 1883 ).

A statute, under attack as being unconstitutional, enacted by the Legislature conferring upon Circuit Courts the right to establish towns in the state under certain conditions and providing that no appeal shall lie from the judgment of the lower courts, was held to be within, and not in violation of, Const., §§ 28 and 126, and the power conferred on the Circuit Courts was not legislative and not subject to appeal. Morton v. Woodford, 99 Ky. 367 , 35 S.W. 1112, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 271 , 1896 Ky. LEXIS 91 ( Ky. 1896 ).

The Legislature has the authority to grant to a city of the third class as part of its charter, provisions for the annexation of territory by ordinance, and such authority carries with it the right to annex another city, providing that the city so annexing the territory shall be bound for all debts and liabilities of the annexed municipal corporation. Pence v. Frankfort, 101 Ky. 534 , 41 S.W. 1011, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 721 , 1897 Ky. LEXIS 224 ( Ky. 1897 ).

The creation, enlargement and the dissolution of municipal corporations are exclusively legislative functions, and may be exercised alone by the legislative department of the government, and the act incorporating cities is not unconstitutional in those sections conferring upon the Circuit Courts a supervisory jurisdiction over the annexation of territory, at the suit of a citizen affected by such annexation, as conferring on the courts legislative functions. Lewis v. Brandenburg, 105 Ky. 14 , 47 S.W. 862, 20 Ky. L. Rptr. 1011 , 1898 Ky. LEXIS 238 ( Ky. 1898 ).

A dissolution of an incorporated town that has been placed in its proper class by the Legislature can only be effected by the Legislature, so in an action to enjoin ineligible officers from acting, the fact that for many years the town had decreased in size, had not exercised the powers and rights granted to it by its charter and had failed to elect officers had not worked a dissolution. Hill v. Anderson, 122 Ky. 87 , 90 S.W. 1071, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1032 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1906 ).

In a petition seeking to restrain the appointed trustee from acting or alleging that none of the rights and powers granted to the town had been exercised for 17 years, the court determined that the action would not lie to restrain disqualified officers of a town from exercising the duties of their office since there was an adequate remedy at law providing penalty for usurpation of office. Hill v. Anderson, 122 Ky. 87 , 90 S.W. 1071, 28 Ky. L. Rptr. 1032 , 1906 Ky. LEXIS 24 ( Ky. 1906 ).

A woman is a person and so is a corporation within the contemplation of section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to the federal Constitution, and a statute providing that a board of council of a city of the fourth class, by ordinance, may be complying with the statute, annex territory or reduce boundaries thereof, was not in violation of the Constitution of the United States by reason of the fact that some of the landholders affected might be women or corporations. Carrithers v. Shelbyville, 126 Ky. 769 , 104 S.W. 744, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 1166 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 92 ( Ky. 1907 ).

Where a municipal corporation was organized in good faith, under a valid statute authorizing the incorporation, and has assumed the exercise of corporate powers, the judgment of incorporation is only subject to attack by the state in a direct proceeding to forfeit its franchise. Vanover v. Dunlap, 172 Ky. 679 , 189 S.W. 915, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 255 ( Ky. 1916 ).

The power to create or dissolve a municipal corporation belongs exclusively to the Legislature and cannot be delegated to or exercised by the judiciary; however, the general assembly may enact a general law for the creation or dissolution of a municipal corporation of the sixth class which is to take effect upon the happening of an event, or the existence of certain facts, and it may authorize a court to ascertain the event or the existence of the facts upon which the statute has application, and it will not thereby delegate to the court a legislative function. Boone County v. Verona, 190 Ky. 430 , 227 S.W. 804, 1921 Ky. LEXIS 468 ( Ky. 1921 ).

2.Ferries.

Where a franchise to operate a ferry across the Ohio River was granted according to law, neglect of the owner to attend and transport passengers, or, leasing of it to another, does not forfeit the franchise, nor does it warrant the issuance of another ferry franchise within a short distance of the first franchise holder. Cotton v. Houston, 20 Ky. 288 , 1827 Ky. LEXIS 17 ( Ky. 1827 ) (decided under prior law). See (KRS ch. 280.).

415.030. Action to prevent usurpation of office or franchise.

If a person usurp an office or franchise, the person entitled thereto, or the Commonwealth, may prevent the usurpation by an ordinary action.

History. C. C. 483: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Purpose.

The courts should be slow to invoke estoppel against the state in its efforts to enforce a statute the purpose of which is to prevent “conflict of interest” situations and to prevent self-interest in the deliberation of public servants. Stringer v. Commonwealth, 428 S.W.2d 203, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1968 ).

2.Construction.

In the past the historical development of this section justified the conclusion that it was an exclusive course of procedure for removal of an official or a usurper and that concept should continue to prevail generally, but in the present case KRS 156.480 is clear and unequivocal that it the status or misconduct condemned is proven it automatically works a forfeiture of the incumbent school official’s right to the office. Arnett v. De Weese, 304 S.W.2d 784, 1957 Ky. LEXIS 281 ( Ky. 1957 ).

The courts should not be deterred in giving a “conflict of interest” statute its full measure of legislative intendment by other public school authorities who may be instrumental in invoking the statute for purely selfish reasons. Stringer v. Commonwealth, 428 S.W.2d 203, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1968 ).

3.Application.

The office meant by this section of the code is a public office, and it has no application to the office of director of private corporations. Gilchrist v. Collopy, 119 Ky. 110 , 82 S.W. 1018, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 1003 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 145 ( Ky. 1904 ).

This section which is applicable to usurpers only does not apply to owners and thus it does not provide an exclusive remedy for revoking a ferry franchise. An action to revoke a ferry franchise because of continued nonresidence of the owner for more than one year is governed by KRS 280.180 (now repealed), 280.200 , and 280.220 . Crittenden County v. McConnell, 237 Ky. 806 , 36 S.W.2d 627, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 697 ( Ky. 1931 ).

KRS, ch. 415 provides the exclusive mode for testing title to duly created city offices to which officers have been elected and only one claiming title to the office or the Attorney General may maintain an action to oust an alleged usurper. Jenkins v. Congleton, 242 Ky. 46 , 45 S.W.2d 456, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1932 ).

This section did not apply to an action by eight duly elected county magistrates to enjoin three persons elected commissioners at a void special election from interfering with their office, for the action was not an action to prevent usurpation of office since the title to magistrate was not in question. Patterson v. Lawson, 255 Ky. 781 , 75 S.W.2d 507, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 330 ( Ky. 1934 ).

If county road engineer is a usurper, then the way to remove him is that provided by this section and KRS 415.040 and not in a proceeding by the fiscal court to enjoin him from acting as county road engineer. Madison County Fiscal Court v. Cotton, 273 Ky. 508 , 117 S.W.2d 201, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 673 ( Ky. 1938 ).

This section does not apply to removal of Commonwealth’s Attorney on grounds of misbehavior for he is a constitutional officer removable under §§ 67 and 97 of the Kentucky Constitution only. Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney Gen. v. Howard, 297 Ky. 488 , 180 S.W.2d 415, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 763 ( Ky. 1944 ).

Abandonment of an office is quite different from forfeiture which may be adjudged only in a suit by the Commonwealth or a person entitled thereto under this section, and other board members may bring an action to determine if a member of county board of education has abandoned his office. Hall v. Allen, 313 Ky. 441 , 231 S.W.2d 702, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 898 ( Ky. 1950 ).

If alleged misconduct by local school board members is not considered by the superintendent of public instruction, in the exercise of a fair discretion, to be such as to warrant action by the state board of education, the local citizens may still obtain a remedy through removal proceedings by the Attorney General under this section and KRS 415.050 . Hogan v. Kentucky State Board of Education, 329 S.W.2d 563, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1958 ).

4.Usurper.

A usurper is one who intrudes himself into an office that is vacant or without color of title or right, ousts the incumbent and assumes to act as an officer by exercising some of the functions of the office. Commonwealth v. Bush, 131 Ky. 384 , 115 S.W. 249, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 37 ( Ky. 1909 ). See Broyles v. Commonwealth, 309 Ky. 837 , 219 S.W.2d 52, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 826 ( Ky. 1949 ).

5.Usurpation of Franchise.

Where corporation’s ownership of franchise was uncontroverted it was the proper party to initiate the action authorized by this section for usurpation of the franchise and it was not required that the governmental unit which granted the franchise be made a party to the action. Television Reception Corp. v. Dunbar, 426 F.2d 174, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9543 (6th Cir. Ky. 1970 ).

In an action to impose constructive trust on franchise or damages for alleged fraud in breach of agreement to secure franchise. It was not necessary that the governmental unit granting franchise should be made party where the relief counterclaimed was expressly authorized by Kentucky law, the statute did not require governmental unit to be a party, the usurpation of a franchise may be prevented by ordinary action pursuant to this section and the ownership of franchise was uncontroverted. Television Reception Corp. v. Dunbar, 426 F.2d 174, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9543 (6th Cir. Ky. 1970 ).

6.Usurpation of Office.

In a proceeding seeking mandamus against a county fiscal court to recover the office of justice of the peace that has been usurped by another, the one seeking to recover it in his own name, must, as the plaintiff in every other case must do, show legal title to that which he demands. Justices of Jefferson County v. Clark, 17 Ky. 82 , 1824 Ky. LEXIS 149 ( Ky. 1824 ) (decided under prior law).

In an action to quash the return of a summons executed by sheriff, who had entered upon his official duties without giving the bond and taking the oath required by law, it was determined that a vacancy or forfeiture of an office must be declared by a direct proceeding, and until a vacancy or forfeiture shall have been declared the official acts of the sheriff were valid as to third parties and could not be collaterally questioned. Stokes v. Kirkpatrick, 58 Ky. 138 , 1858 Ky. LEXIS 28 ( Ky. 1858 ) (decided under prior law).

While a certificate of election is conclusive of election of the one claiming the office in any collateral proceeding in which title to the office might be involved, it is not conclusive of the claimant’s eligibility when it is denied, in a direct proceeding against him involving his right to exercise the duties of the office, to prevent him from liability. Patterson v. Miller, 59 Ky. 493 , 1859 Ky. LEXIS 150 ( Ky. 1859 ) (decided under prior law).

The acceptance and continuing to hold any office of trust or profit under the United States by an incumbent thereby vacates any civil office which he holds in Kentucky or to which he may be elected. But the one who seeks to recover it from another who is in possession of it, must show a right in himself before he can recover, and a certificate of election, or even a commission, is not prima facie evidence of eligibility to the office. Hoglan v. Carpenter, 67 Ky. 89 , 1868 Ky. LEXIS 85 ( Ky. 1868 ) (decided under prior law).

A defeated candidate may bring a suit to set aside the election upon grounds specified in the statute even though the petition does not show that he himself was elected to the office. If the law were otherwise, there might be no way to void an election which had been carried by the grossest of frauds because the action of quo warranto cannot be brought for the reason that the contestee holding the election certificate is not a usurper. Scholl v. Bell, 125 Ky. 750 , 102 S.W. 248, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 335 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 328 ( Ky. 1907 ). See Hillard v. Lakes, 294 Ky. 659 , 172 S.W.2d 456, 1943 Ky. LEXIS 510 ( Ky. 1943 ).

A public officer may not be ousted, or enjoined from performance of his duties, except as the result of an action brought by a person who claims the office or, in the case of a state officer, in an ouster action brought by the Attorney General of the Commonwealth. Griffey v. Board of Education, 385 S.W.2d 319, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1964 ).

7.— Public Office.

A city attorney in a city of the fourth class is an “officer” within the meaning of Ky. Const., § 234 and is, therefore, subject to removal under the provisions of this section, if he is not a resident of the city. Hirschfeld v. Commonwealth, 256 Ky. 374 , 76 S.W.2d 47, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 416 ( Ky. 1934 ).

In an ordinary action filed by the Commonwealth on relation of its Attorney General, seeking to deprive defendant of the right to occupy and discharge the duties of the public office of manager for the state fair board because he was a member of the Legislature passing the act and was prohibited by Ky. Const., § 44, from occupying or holding any other office, the court properly held that the manager of state fair board was a public office and the defendant should be ousted from the office. Taylor v. Commonwealth, 305 Ky. 75 , 202 S.W.2d 992, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 758 ( Ky. 1947 ).

8.— Persons Not Entitled to Bring Action.

Where the charter of a city or town has been repealed by an act of the Legislature and a new act of incorporation granted, it is the creation of a new city government, with its civil and police jurisdiction and manner of electing its officers, therefore one claiming the office of city judge under an election not authorized by the city charter cannot recover it from the incumbent. Boyd v. Chambers, 78 Ky. 140 , 1879 Ky. LEXIS 76 ( Ky. 1879 ).

The fact that the candidate for county court clerk who received a majority of the votes cast at an election died before the polls closed, does not give the only surviving candidate the right to the office, and he cannot maintain an action against a usurper, because he cannot recover for want of title in another claiming the office. Howes v. Perry, 92 Ky. 260 , 17 S.W. 575, 13 Ky. L. Rptr. 483 , 1891 Ky. LEXIS 153 ( Ky. 1891 ).

Where statute provides that no person shall at the same time fill a municipal office and a county office, one who has been elected city tax collector cannot hold the office after accepting the office of deputy sheriff, nor can he maintain an action against the incumbent, under this section of the code, because he cannot show title in him. Keating v. Covington, 35 S.W. 1026, 18 Ky. L. Rptr. 245 (1896).

The county court of a county has the authority to remove a manager of the workhouse without notice or cause, and one so removed cannot maintain an action to oust another appointed by the county court to serve in his stead. Johnson v. Cavanah, 54 S.W. 853, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1246 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 346 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Although it was true members of city council had not qualified and were usurpers of the offices they held, a citizen and taxpayer of a city who did not claim he was entitled to hold any of the offices could not bring an action to oust the members of the city council from office upon the ground that they failed to take the oaths required by the Constitution and statutes. King v. Kahne, 87 S.W. 807, 27 Ky. L. Rptr. 1080 (1905).

Under the commission form of government, in a city of the second class, one is not eligible to be either voted for or elected to the office of commissioner unless he has first been nominated in the primary election provided for by the statute previous to the regular election, and his election to the office without such nomination does not give him any title to it, and he cannot recover it in an action in his own name from one who has no right to hold it. A certificate of election is no evidence of the eligibility of one to hold an office when his eligibility is denied in a direct proceeding against him. Hermann v. Lampe, 175 Ky. 109 , 194 S.W. 122, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 306 ( Ky. 1917 ).

Where election on question of adopting commission form of government for a city was void because not advertised as required by statute, persons elected commissioners and not inducted into office were not de facto officers and could not maintain an action for usurpation of city offices against persons rightfully holding the offices. Goin v. Smith, 202 Ky. 486 , 260 S.W. 10, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1924 ).

A private citizen and taxpayer has no right to maintain an action to enjoin payment of salary to fifth-class city marshal appointed by the city council according to law on the ground he was ineligible, since such marshal, although not a usurper, was at least a de facto officer and the granting of relief prayed for must necessarily involve trial of the title to the office which could only be maintained by a person entitled to the office or by the Commonwealth. Spurlock v. Lafferty, 214 Ky. 333 , 283 S.W. 124, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Members of a county school board could not maintain a declaratory judgment action against other members for if defendants were usurpers of the office, then the remedy was the one provided by this section. Marshall v. White, 287 Ky. 290 , 152 S.W.2d 945, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 531 ( Ky. 1941 ).

The term of Democratic election commissioner of a county for one year and until a successor was qualified expired when a successor was appointed, took the oath and assumed office, and it could not be said with reason that he was a holdover with sufficient title to the office to permit him to question the qualifications of his successor. Williamson v. Hughes, 303 Ky. 735 , 199 S.W.2d 125, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1947 ).

A demurrer to a counterclaim which was based on forfeiture and which was filed in an action by other board members to determine whether a member of the county board of education had abandoned his office was properly sustained. Hall v. Allen, 313 Ky. 441 , 231 S.W.2d 702, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 898 ( Ky. 1950 ).

A declaratory action by a taxpayer cannot be used as the vehicle to oust one from office without the necessity of the claimant or the Attorney General bringing the suit. Kirwan v. Speckman, 313 Ky. 578 , 232 S.W.2d 841, 1950 Ky. LEXIS 908 ( Ky. 1950 ), overruled, Cross v. Wilson, 325 S.W.2d 309, 1959 Ky. LEXIS 44 ( Ky. 1959 ).

Proceedings for usurpation of a city office for acts committed in violation of KRS 415.060 must, under this section and KRS 415.050 , be instituted by a person claiming title to the office or by the Commonwealth. Therefore, three members of a city council could not bring an action against a fourth member on the ground that he forfeited his right to his office because he sold a motor vehicle to the city utility commission. Jones v. Robinson, 351 S.W.2d 185, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 154 ( Ky. 1961 ).

9.— Actions by Persons Entitled to Office.

Where a city by its charter, impliedly had the power to, and did create the office of foreman of street repair and overseer of the poor, the person elected to fill the office may maintain an action against another who has usurped it. Collopy v. Cloherty, 95 Ky. 330 , 25 S.W. 497, 15 Ky. L. Rptr. 870 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1894 ).

A councilman, legally entitled to the office, may bring a suit for its possession against the person who is wrongfully holding it, although such person may have been elected or appointed by other members of the council believing they had authority to elect or appoint him. Powell v. Hambrick, 164 Ky. 340 , 175 S.W. 633, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 374 ( Ky. 1915 ).

A city legislative body does not have the authority to reduce the term of an office fixed by the Constitution, therefore an ordinance by the council providing for the appointment of a mayor to fill a vacancy in an unexpired term does not authorize an appointment for a full term, and the duly elected mayor has title to the office and may maintain a direct proceeding against a claimant appointed by the council. Craft v. Baker, 194 Ky. 205 , 238 S.W. 389, 1922 Ky. LEXIS 126 ( Ky. 1922 ).

A constable, in his official capacity, may maintain an action to enjoin persons who are purporting to act as deputy constables under an appointment of the county judge, since he is the chief officer and entitled to the office. Milliken v. Harrod, 275 Ky. 597 , 122 S.W.2d 148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 471 ( Ky. 1938 ).

10.— — Showing Title.

In a proceeding to recover a judicial office created by statute where the governor of the state had filled a vacancy by appointment for the whole of the unexpired term, the irregularity, alone, of the appointment, is not sufficient to grant recovery to the one seeking it in his name. He must show title to the office is vested in him. Toney v. Harris, 85 Ky. 453 , 3 S.W. 614, 9 Ky. L. Rptr. 36 , 1887 Ky. LEXIS 62 ( Ky. 1887 ).

In an action brought in the name of the Commonwealth alleging the usurpation of the office of commissioner of the sinking fund of a city by a citizen, the burden of showing his right to the office is on the one seeking to recover it. He cannot recover upon the ground that the defendant has no right to it. Tillman v. Otter, 93 Ky. 600 , 20 S.W. 1036, 14 Ky. L. Rptr. 586 , 1893 Ky. LEXIS 152 ( Ky. 1893 ).

A person elected county school superintendent and placed in possession of the office though he was a usurper could not be deprived of it at the suit of another claimant of the same office unless the latter showed himself entitled thereto. Wilson v. Tye, 126 Ky. 34 , 102 S.W. 856, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1907 ).

In an action to recover the office of city treasurer of a city of the second class by one elected to the office in his own name, the one seeking to recover the office has the burden of proving every fact essential to show his own title to the office and cannot rely upon the weakness of his adversary’s. Dorian v. Walters, 132 Ky. 54 , 116 S.W. 313, 1909 Ky. LEXIS 99 ( Ky. 1909 ).

In an action for possession of the office of police judge of a fourth-class city and to oust the incumbent, the petition must show title to the office vested in the one seeking to recover it. Sally v. Baker, 180 Ky. 833 , 203 S.W. 724, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 147 ( Ky. 1918 ).

In a proceeding to recover the office of chairman of the division board of trustees of educational division of a county from the incumbent, it was sufficient for the one seeking to recover to allege that his election was effected by his receiving the votes of a majority of the trustees of the subdistricts composing such an educational division at a meeting of the trustees attended by a quorum, which meeting was called by the county superintendent of schools, for the holding of such election, upon written notice to the trustees of the subdistricts of the educational division. Pierce v. Sullivan, 189 Ky. 193 , 224 S.W. 872, 1920 Ky. LEXIS 399 ( Ky. 1920 ).

In an action to oust a justice of the peace, the burden was on claimant to show his title to the office. Anderson v. McBrayer, 230 Ky. 93 , 18 S.W.2d 859, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 7 ( Ky. 1929 ).

Appellee, in attempting to recover office of police chief from alleged usurper, must do so on the strength of his own title to said office and not on the weakness of alleged usurper’s title to it. Cawood v. Hensley, 247 S.W.2d 27, 1952 Ky. LEXIS 661 ( Ky. 1952 ).

11.— Actions by Commonwealth.

The fact that a statute provides that the board of councilmen of a fourth-class city shall judge the eligibility and election returns of its members, does not deprive the court of jurisdiction of an election contest, and if a person usurps an office, the Commonwealth may prevent the usurpation by an action, and the burden of showing title to the office is on the one claiming it. Stack v. Commonwealth, 118 Ky. 481 , 81 S.W. 917, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 343 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 76 ( Ky. 1904 ).

An action to prevent the usurpation of the office of county attorney, where no other person is entitled thereto, can only be brought by the Commonwealth’s attorney. Anderson v. Fowler, 180 Ky. 587 , 203 S.W. 322, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 110 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Under statute requiring chief of police of second-class city to be a qualified voter of the city, one not eligible, appointed by proper officials as chief of police, was a usurper and the Commonwealth could maintain an action to forfeit the office. Leigh v. Commonwealth, 203 Ky. 752 , 263 S.W. 14, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 995 ( Ky. 1924 ).

The county school superintendent is the administrative representative of the state department of education and the superintendent of public schools and is not a county officer within the meaning of KRS 415.040 and may not be proceeded against by a Commonwealth’s attorney for usurpation of office. Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ). See Tipton v. Commonwealth, 238 Ky. 111 , 36 S.W.2d 855, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A candidate for the office of school trustee who has not received a plurality of the legal of school trustee votes cast is not entitled to the office, and cannot maintain an action to oust the candidate who received a plurality of the votes cast in the election but is for some reason ineligible. Such an action can only be maintained by the state. Morgan v. Adams, 250 Ky. 441 , 63 S.W.2d 479, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1933 ).

Where parties adversely affected by a judgment that commissioners appointed for sewer districts were residents of the districts failed to have the error reviewed by timely motion and appeal, a proceeding by the Commonwealth was then the exclusive method by which the eligibility of these commissioners could be questioned, the sewer district being a public corporation. Mahon v. Buechel Sewer Constr. Dist., 355 S.W.2d 683, 1962 Ky. LEXIS 82 ( Ky. 1962 ).

12.— — Power of Attorney General.

Only the Attorney General, Commonwealth’s attorney, or person entitled thereto may maintain an action to test the title to an office. Spurlock v. Lafferty, 214 Ky. 333 , 283 S.W. 124, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1926 ).

If the private citizen does not claim the office himself, the Attorney General is the only one who may institute an action for usurpation of offices other than county offices or franchises and a private citizen may not compel the Attorney General by a writ of mandamus or otherwise to institute ouster proceedings. Hermann v. Morlidge, 298 Ky. 632 , 183 S.W.2d 807, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 968 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The Attorney General is invested with a discretion which a private citizen may not coerce nor a court control by mandamus whatever the motives activating the private citizen. Hermann v. Morlidge, 298 Ky. 632 , 183 S.W.2d 807, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 968 ( Ky. 1944 ).

13.— — Member of County School Board.

Although activity of member of board of education in profiting from a coal contract by the board of education with a coal mining partnership in which he had an interest was not commendable and approached very close of offending the law, bare implication or inference that under the stimulus of expected profits an officer acted wrongfully, in opposition to positive testimony and several contradicting circumstances, could not prevail or justify the court in an action by the Attorney General, through local council, to have the member declared a usurper in office for the reason that he had forfeited the office as provided by KRS 415.060 . Commonwealth ex rel. Vincent v. Withers, 266 Ky. 29 , 98 S.W.2d 24, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 594 ( Ky. 1936 ).

In an action by the Attorney General to oust a member of a county school board alleging that the defendant was not eligible to serve on the board because he lacked the amount of education required by statute, the court determined that the educational requirements of the statute were mandatory and the defendant must meet those requirements. Commonwealth ex rel. Meredith v. Norfleet, 272 Ky. 800 , 115 S.W.2d 353, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1938 ).

In a proceeding by the Attorney General to oust three members of a county school board, who were ineligible to serve on the board, it was not error to join them in the proceeding where separate judgments were entered and where it was not shown that rights of the parties were prejudiced. Whittaker v. Commonwealth, 272 Ky. 794 , 115 S.W.2d 355, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 208 ( Ky. 1938 ).

In suit by the Commonwealth by Attorney General under this section to oust defendants from office as members of the county board of education on the grounds defendants were ineligible because none of them had completed the eighth grade in the common schools, affidavits of the teachers under whom two defendants completed the eighth grade stating that the defendants were in the eighth grade in the schools taught by the affiants and that they had completed the grade were sufficient and ouster was denied, but an affidavit as to one defendant was insufficient and ouster was adjudged where the affidavit was the affidavit of a substitute teacher and the regular teacher was deceased. Commonwealth by Meredith v. Moye, 273 Ky. 384 , 116 S.W.2d 952, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 647 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Where one elected to membership of county school board was disqualified to serve because of contract of employment to teach school, the Attorney General could grant authority to an attorney to institute ouster proceedings in his name against the school board member. Commonwealth v. Begley, 273 Ky. 636 , 117 S.W.2d 599, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 692 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Although an action in ordinary was maintainable by the Attorney General under this section to prevent usurpation of office of a county board of education member, there was a failure to establish his ineligibility and consequently his usurpation of the office. Richardson v. Commonwealth, 275 Ky. 486 , 122 S.W.2d 156, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A suit by the Commonwealth on the relation of the Attorney General against members of a county board of education as usurpers on the ground their election was void because of their violation of the corrupt practice act was dismissed as moot, where, when the suit was submitted for judgment, the election contest had been finally determined and the defendants had been finally adjudged not to be members of the board because their election was void. Commonwealth ex rel. Meredith v. Amburgey, 276 Ky. 805 , 125 S.W.2d 725, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 593 ( Ky. 1939 ).

In an action by the Commonwealth attacking the educational qualifications of a school board member, the burden of establishing educational statutory requirements is on the claimant to the office, and the requirements of the statute are mandatory. Commonwealth v. Mullins, 286 Ky. 242 , 150 S.W.2d 668, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 242 ( Ky. 1941 ).

In a proceeding by the Attorney General alleging a member of the county school board ineligible by reason of not meeting statutory requirement as to education, the court determined that burden of showing title to the office was on the defendant, but he could show he complied with statutory requirements by taking and passing examination after induction into office. Commonwealth ex rel. Meredith v. Bogie, 287 Ky. 103 , 152 S.W.2d 286, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 504 ( Ky. 1941 ).

Under statute prescribing qualifications of members of county boards of education and specifying disqualification which will operate as a forfeiture of office, the Attorney General may bring an action against the usurper of the office challenging his educational qualification, and the burden is on the member to show that his education meets the requirements of the statute. Chadwell v. Commonwealth, 288 Ky. 644 , 157 S.W.2d 280, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 1941 ).

In an action filed by Attorney General for the Commonwealth under this section seeking to oust a member of a county board of education from office on the sole ground that the defendant did not possess the educational qualifications of having completed at least the eighth grade in the common schools, as shown by the records of the schools or affidavits of teachers, as required by KRS 160.180 , evidence was insufficient to establish the fact that defendant at the time of his election and installation had completed the eighth grade as prescribed in the public school system. Commonwealth by Dummit v. Mullins, 307 Ky. 383 , 211 S.W.2d 133, 1948 Ky. LEXIS 741 ( Ky. 1948 ).

In an action brought by the Attorney General under this section, a decision that a person should be ousted from the physical occupancy of the office of member of the board of education because he never was eligible to hold the office, did not create a vacancy, but only directed that the person be ousted because there existed a vacancy, in law, in the position he was occupying, which vacancy occurred on the day the term began. Kash v. Day, 239 S.W.2d 959, 1951 Ky. LEXIS 917 ( Ky. 1951 ).

Where in its complaint in ouster proceedings the Commonwealth alleged that the defendant had been duly elected and sworn in as a member of the county school board, there was no issue as to the authority by which the defendant held the office and the burden was on the plaintiff to show the claimed misconduct. Commonwealth ex rel. Matthews v. Combs, 426 S.W.2d 461, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 652 ( Ky. 1968 ).

14.Judgment of Ouster.

Though a judgment of ouster may be reversed upon appeal if found erroneous, the judgment is not suspended by the appeal and the office becomes vacant when the judgment is rendered that it is held illegally and may then be filled. McClendon v. Hamilton, 277 Ky. 734 , 127 S.W.2d 605, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 723 ( Ky. 1939 ).

15.Void appointments.

An appointment to the office of commissioner of the chancery court when there was no vacancy was a void appointment and may be attacked in a proceeding by a citizen. Smith v. Cochran, 70 Ky. 154 , 1870 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1870 ).

Cited:

Noble v. Meagher, 686 S.W.2d 458, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1985 ).

415.040. Duties of Commonwealth’s attorneys.

It shall be the duty of the several Commonwealth attorneys to institute the actions mentioned in this chapter against usurpers of county offices or franchises, if no other person be entitled thereto, or if the person entitled fail to institute the same during three (3) months after the usurpation.

History. C.C. 484: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

Where the office of county attorney is held by a usurper, and no other person is entitled thereto, an action to prevent the usurpation of the office can only be brought by the Commonwealth’s Attorney, therefore it cannot be brought by a private citizen even though the Commonwealth’s Attorney refuses to sue. Anderson v. Fowler, 180 Ky. 587 , 203 S.W. 322, 1918 Ky. LEXIS 110 ( Ky. 1918 ).

Ouster proceedings against usurper of county office must be brought by one entitled to office or by Commonwealth's Attorney. Williamson v. Hughes, 303 Ky. 735 , 199 S.W.2d 125, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1947 ). See Harrison v. Commonwealth, 305 Ky. 379 , 204 S.W.2d 221, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 810 ( Ky. 1947 ).

2.County School Board or Superintendent.

Under statute fixing the tenure of the county superintendent of schools until his successor is elected and qualified, and providing, in case of contest the state superintendent may recognize one of contestants as the officer until contest is settled, the courts having decided one of contestants was elected and she having qualified, and the state superintendent having recognized her right to the office, the other contestant cannot maintain an action to remove her from office, though she be ineligible, only the Commonwealth’s Attorney has the authority to bring the action. Wilson v. Tye, 126 Ky. 34 , 102 S.W. 856, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1907 ). But see Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ).

An action brought by a Commonwealth’s Attorney, alleging that a member of the county board of education was a usurper of the office by reason of accepting free transportation from a railroad, was premature, because the statute providing forfeiture by an officer accepting a pass applied only after conviction for accepting the free pass. Commonwealth v. Hearon, 235 Ky. 681 , 32 S.W.2d 21, 1930 Ky. LEXIS 437 ( Ky. 1930 ). But see Tipton v. Commonwealth, 238 Ky. 111 , 36 S.W.2d 855, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1931 ).

A county school superintendent is not a county officer but a state officer and an action against him for usurpation of office cannot be brought against him by a Commonwealth’s Attorney but must be brought by the attorney general. Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ).

An action by a Commonwealth’s Attorney against an alleged usurper of the office of member of a county school board is subject to special demurrer because the Commonwealth’s Attorney does not have authority to maintain the action since a member of a county school board is not a county officer but a state officer. Tipton v. Commonwealth, 238 Ky. 111 , 36 S.W.2d 855, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1931 ).

3.County Road Engineer.

If county road engineer is a usurper, then the way to remove him is that provided by this section and KRS 415.030 and not in a proceeding by the fiscal court to enjoin him from acting as county road engineer. Madison County Fiscal Court v. Cotton, 273 Ky. 508 , 117 S.W.2d 201, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 673 ( Ky. 1938 ).

4.Constable.

A constable could maintain an ordinary action to prevent three deputy constables named by the county court from performing the duties of the office to which he was legally elected, qualified, and was then acting. Milliken v. Harrod, 275 Ky. 597 , 122 S.W.2d 148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 471 ( Ky. 1938 ).

5.Disbarment.

In an action brought under this section by Commonwealth’s Attorney to disbar attorney at law it was immaterial who raised the question as to the attorney’s qualifications since once the machinery of investigation was set in motion the court itself had power to institute the investigation for the attorney was an officer of the court. It was the court and not the complainant that controlled the course of the proceeding once it had commenced. Harrison v. Commonwealth, 305 Ky. 379 , 204 S.W.2d 221, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 810 ( Ky. 1947 ).

Cited:

Spurlock v. Lafferty, 214 Ky. 333 , 283 S.W. 124, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1926 ); Noble v. Meagher, 686 S.W.2d 458, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1985 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

Any justice of the peace that becomes disqualified by moving from his district would, if he refused to vacate his office by resignation, be subject to removal as a usurper by the Commonwealth’s Attorney. OAG 67-373 .

A candidate for the office of constable who has not resided in the magisterial district long enough to become qualified for the office, would, if elected, become a usurper upon entering office and would be subject to ouster under the provisions of this section. OAG 69-316 .

A candidate for the office of constable who, prior to the election, moved his legal residence outside of the magisterial district in which he was seeking office, no longer possessed the qualifications for office prescribed by Ky. Const., § 100, and if elected, would become a usurper upon taking office and would be subject to removal pursuant to this section. OAG 69-379 .

A candidate for the office of coroner, who after being elected but before qualifying for office moved his legal residence from the magisterial district in which he was elected, would no longer possess the qualifications for office prescribed by Ky. Const., § 234 and, upon assuming office, would become a usurper subject to removal under this section. OAG 69-379 .

Constables are required to live in the county from which they are elected pursuant to Ky. Const., §§ 99 and 100. If a person is elected constable and does not legally reside within the district from which he is elected, he would be subject to removal by the Commonwealth’s Attorney pursuant to this section. Once such person is removed, a vacancy is created which must be filled by the county court pursuant to KRS 63.220 . OAG 70-157 .

A convicted felon elected to a county office without having had his civil rights restored is subject to removal pursuant to this section. OAG 72-421 .

If a person is elected to the office of coroner without fulfilling the residence requirements, he would become a usurper subject to removal by the Commonwealth’s Attorney, but the failure to raise this question before his nomination in the primary precludes an opposing candidate or voter from questioning his qualifications thereafter. OAG 73-686 .

Since a magistrate is required to reside within his district, his removal from the district would subject him to removal proceedings instituted by the Commonwealth’s Attorney upon his being presented with sufficient evidence of nonresidency and the grounds that he was a usurper which could be presented by any citizen. OAG 73-809 .

If a magistrate moves from and continues to live outside of the district in which he was elected he would be subject to an ouster action by the Commonwealth’s Attorney pursuant to this section. OAG 74-691 .

A de facto member of the fiscal court and usurper of the office may be removed by the Commonwealth’s Attorney pursuant to this section since no other person is claiming his office and, as long as he occupies the office, this action would be necessary to remove him. OAG 75-26 .

If a county sheriff’s felony conviction is affirmed on appeal and the sheriff does not vacate the office, then the Commonwealth’s Attorney would have the duty to file an ouster action against him. OAG 76-232 .

Where a candidate for the office of constable properly filed notification and declaration papers in the district in which he resided, but after the books closed, and prior to the primary, he moved to another district and was subsequently nominated in his old district, he is the nominee since his qualifications were not challenged prior to the primary; however, if he won election he could be removed as a usurper pursuant to this section or, if he voluntarily resigned his nomination, his party could select someone to fill his place on the ballot pursuant to subsection (3) of KRS 118.105 . OAG 81-223 .

Although “courtesy special deputies,” who are unsalaried deputies who aid the sheriff in discharging his statutory duties, are illegal, an ouster action under this section would not be the appropriate legal remedy to their activities, since they do not pretend to hold a legal office. OAG 82-105 .

Under the literal wording of this section, the responsibility for removing a convicted felon from a county office is the Commonwealth’s Attorney of the county; the removal becomes necessary where such officer has received no pardon in terms of Ky. Const., § 150. Thus, if a former felon is elected to public office without having his civil rights restored, such person may be removed as a usurper pursuant to this section; since the jailer is a county office, the burden of instituting an ouster suit squarely falls on the Commonwealth’s Attorney. OAG 83-393 .

The position of executive director of the Office of the Ombudsman of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services is a “state office,” and one who holds that position is a “state officer,” such that one cannot hold that position and lawfully remain a member of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Council. OAG 2006-02 .

415.050. Duties of the Attorney General.

For usurpation of other than county offices or franchises, the action by the Commonwealth shall be instituted and prosecuted by the Attorney General.

History. C.C. 485: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

The language “for usurpation of other than county offices,” refers to all offices save county offices, whether state, city or town. Wheeler v. Commonwealth, 98 Ky. 59 , 32 S.W. 259, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 636 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 14 ( Ky. 1895 ).

An ouster proceeding under this section and KRS 415.040 must be brought by one who is entitled to the office by the Commonwealth’s Attorney if a county office is at stake, or by the Attorney General if a state office is at stake. Williamson v. Hughes, 303 Ky. 735 , 199 S.W.2d 125, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 540 ( Ky. 1947 ).

In deciding whether the Attorney General has authority to bring ouster proceedings for usurpation of a public office, it is the governmental level of the office, rather than the nature of the usurpation for which ouster is sought which is controlling and since county school board members are state officers it is clear that usurpation of the office is to be attacked through actions brought by the Attorney General under this section. Commonwealth ex rel. Buckman v. Mason, 284 S.W.2d 825, 1955 Ky. LEXIS 53 ( Ky. 1955 ).

Courts should be slow to invoke estoppel against the state in its efforts to enforce a statute the purpose of which is to prevent “conflict of interest” situations and to prevent self-interest in the deliberation of public servants, and fact that county school board member was re-elected to a new term after the acts complained of did not “whitewash” him or furnish a defense. Stringer v. Commonwealth, 428 S.W.2d 203, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1968 ).

Courts should not be deterred in giving “conflict of interest” statute its full measure of legislative intendment by other public school authorities who may be instrumental in invoking the statute for purely selfish reasons. Stringer v. Commonwealth, 428 S.W.2d 203, 1968 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1968 ).

2.Power of Attorney General.

The Attorney General had the power to give authority to an attorney to institute ouster proceedings, in the Attorney General’s name, against members of school board who were allegedly disqualified from holding the office. Commonwealth v. Begley, 273 Ky. 636 , 117 S.W.2d 599, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 692 ( Ky. 1938 ).

If the private citizen does not claim the office himself, the Attorney General is the only one who may institute an action for usurpation of offices other than county offices and franchises, and a private citizen may not compel the Attorney General by a writ of mandamus or otherwise to institute ouster proceedings, for the words “shall be” in this section simply provide, in essence, that if the right of action which rests in the Commonwealth is to be asserted in such a case, the Attorney General is the only one who may do so. Hermann v. Morlidge, 298 Ky. 632 , 183 S.W.2d 807, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 968 ( Ky. 1944 ).

The Attorney General is invested with a discretion which a private citizen may not coerce, nor a court control, whatever the motives activating the private citizen. Hermann v. Morlidge, 298 Ky. 632 , 183 S.W.2d 807, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 968 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A public officer may not be ousted or enjoined from the performance of his duties, except as the result of an action brought by a person who claims the office, or in the case of a state officer, in an ouster action brought by the Attorney General. Griffey v. Board of Education, 385 S.W.2d 319, 1964 Ky. LEXIS 157 ( Ky. 1964 ).

3.Usurpation of Franchise.

The Attorney General has the authority to institute proceedings, in the name of the Commonwealth, against a usurper of the offices of a private or public franchise or corporation; therefore in an action instituted by the Attorney General to prevent the exercising or usurpation of lottery privileges, if the defendants fail to plead to the merits, judgment should be rendered against them by default. Commonwealth v. Frankfort, Simmons & Dickinson, 76 Ky. 185 , 1877 Ky. LEXIS 27 ( Ky. 1877 ).

4.State Office.

An action under this section to oust usurpers of state offices, if filed in the name of the Commonwealth, must be filed on relation of, and by authority of, Attorney General; however, where the action is purportedly filed by that official as the plaintiff, and all pleadings refer to Commonwealth, on his relation, as a party to suit, there is a presumption that proper authority to file action was given, and one who would dispute that fact must come forward and affirmatively establish that no such authority was given; in no event will a party be permitted to raise the issue, for the first time on appeal, where his inaction at the trial foreclosed all opportunities to examine the facts concerning the claim. Brooks v. Commonwealth, 286 S.W.2d 913, 1956 Ky. LEXIS 436 ( Ky. 1956 ).

5.— School Board.

A member of the county board of education is not a county official but an official of the state; therefore, an action to oust a member of the county board of education, alleging he is a usurper of the office, should have been brought by the Attorney General and not by the Commonwealth’s attorney. Tipton v. Commonwealth, 238 Ky. 111 , 36 S.W.2d 855, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1931 ).

The Attorney General has the authority through local counsel to institute an action to have a member of the board of education of a county declared a usurper, alleging that he has forfeited his office because of interest in contracts entered into with school board for purchase of coal. Commonwealth ex rel. Vincent v. Withers, 266 Ky. 29 , 98 S.W.2d 24, 1936 Ky. LEXIS 594 ( Ky. 1936 ).

The Attorney General by an ordinary action may remove a member of a county board of education from office for wrongful acts. Richardson v. Commonwealth, 275 Ky. 486 , 122 S.W.2d 156, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1938 ).

A member of the county board of education is a state officer and a suit to oust him as a usurper must be brought by the Attorney General. Chadwell v. Commonwealth, 288 Ky. 644 , 157 S.W.2d 280, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 1941 ).

A superintendent of schools, not claiming office of school board member, could not bring an action to oust school board member because of illegal transactions with the board in violation of KRS 160.180 , but the Attorney General, under this section and KRS 415.060 , had to bring the action since the board of education is a state and not a county office. Jones v. Browning, 298 Ky. 467 , 183 S.W.2d 38, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 923 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A county board of education cannot declare office of one of its members vacant because of forfeiture due to the ineligibility of the member, and appoint another to serve in his stead under KRS 160.180 ; proper procedure is for an action to be brought by the Attorney General to have the office declared vacant for the office is a state office. Salyers v. Lyons, 304 Ky. 320 , 200 S.W.2d 749, 1947 Ky. LEXIS 637 ( Ky. 1947 ).

An action to prevent usurpation of office by an elected member of county board of education, based on ineligibility because he did not possess an eighth grade education as required by KRS 160.180 , which was filed after his election and oath of office but two days before the expiration of the term of his predecessor, was properly dismissed since a usurper is one who intrudes himself into an office that is vacant or without color of title or right, ousts the incumbent and assumes to act as an officer by exercising some of the functions of the office; thus, the term must have begun and the defendant have assumed, usurped or taken possession of the office prior to the filing of a petition for ouster, and the later assumption of the office and amendment of petition cannot give life to a premature petition. Broyles v. Commonwealth, 309 Ky. 837 , 219 S.W.2d 52, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 826 ( Ky. 1949 ).

If alleged misconduct by local school board members is not considered by the superintendent of public instruction, in the exercise of a fair discretion, to be such as to warrant action by the state board of education, the local citizens may still obtain a remedy through removal proceedings by the Attorney General under KRS 415.030 and this section. Hogan v. Kentucky State Board of Education, 329 S.W.2d 563, 1958 Ky. LEXIS 6 ( Ky. 1958 ).

In ouster proceeding by Attorney General under authority of this section and KRS 415.060 against school board member based on his lack of qualifications, member’s failure to respond properly to request for admission that he lacked such qualifications constituted an admission of such lack, and judgment of ouster should have been granted. Commonwealth ex rel. Matthews v. Rice, 415 S.W.2d 618, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1966 ).

The State Board for Elementary and Secondary Education, under the Kentucky Education Reform Act, has the authority to remove members from a county board of education for misconduct in office; there is no language in either KRS 156.132 or KRS 160.180 which suggests, let alone mandates, that the Attorney General has the exclusive power to remove district board members for violations of KRS 160.180 . State Bd. for Elementary & Secondary Educ. v. Ball, 847 S.W.2d 743, 1993 Ky. LEXIS 46 ( Ky. 1993 ).

6.— County School Superintendent.

A county school superintendent is not a county officer and thus an action against him for usurpation of office must be brought against him by the Attorney General, not by a Commonwealth’s attorney. Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ). See Tipton v. Commonwealth, 238 Ky. 111 , 36 S.W.2d 855, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 188 ( Ky. 1931 ).

Where a county school superintendent has accepted another state office that is incompatible with the office of school superintendent he has forfeited the office, and, since the county school superintendent is an official of the state, the Attorney General is the only one who can proceed against him for usurping the office. Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ).

7.— School Trustee.

Where one is in possession of the office of school trustee, though he be a usurper, he cannot be deprived of it at the suit of a claimant of the same office, unless the latter shows himself entitled thereto, and since petition shows on its face that plaintiff did not have title, the petition was properly dismissed. Only one who could bring action against usurper was the Attorney General or the Commonwealth’s attorney. Morgan v. Adams, 250 Ky. 441 , 63 S.W.2d 479, 1933 Ky. LEXIS 709 ( Ky. 1933 ).

8.City Offices.

Only the person entitled to the office or the Attorney General may bring an action either to remove a person usurping a municipal office or to test the claim of a potential usurper to such office. Jenkins v. Congleton, 242 Ky. 46 , 45 S.W.2d 456, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1932 ).

9.— Attorney.

Although the office of city attorney of a third-class city is filled by the action of the council, an action may be maintained in the name of the Commonwealth and by the Attorney General to prevent the usurpation of the office, it being an office other than a a county office. Wheeler v. Commonwealth, 98 Ky. 59 , 32 S.W. 259, 17 Ky. L. Rptr. 636 , 1895 Ky. LEXIS 14 ( Ky. 1895 ).

Proceeding by Attorney General under this section to oust city attorney was not authorized by the law where the council of a city of the fourth class had the power under its charter to remove the city attorney at any time, and the council prescribed by ordinance for what cause they would remove such officer, since the council and not the circuit court had the authority to remove him for a violation of the ordinance. Commonwealth v. Willis, 42 S.W. 1118, 19 Ky. L. Rptr. 962 (1897).

A city attorney in a city of the fourth class is an “officer” with the meaning of Section 234 of the Kentucky Constitution and is, therefore, subject to removal under the provisions of this section, is he is not a resident of the city. Hirschfeld v. Commonwealth, 256 Ky. 374 , 76 S.W.2d 47, 1934 Ky. LEXIS 416 ( Ky. 1934 ).

10.— Councilman.

The Attorney General has the authority to institute an action against one who is usurping the office of councilman of a city. Stack v. Commonwealth, 118 Ky. 481 , 81 S.W. 917, 26 Ky. L. Rptr. 343 , 1904 Ky. LEXIS 76 ( Ky. 1904 ).

Proceedings for usurpation of a city office under KRS 425.030 (now repealed) and this section must be instituted by a person claiming title to it or by the Commonwealth in an action instituted by the Attorney General, and some of the members of a city council could not maintain an action against another member of the council to declare his office vacant on the ground a corporation of which he was the principal stockholder sold an automobile to the utility commission, as this would have constituted a forfeiture under KRS 415.060 and not an abandonment of office which is a voluntary renouncement of the office. Jones v. Robinson, 351 S.W.2d 185, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 154 ( Ky. 1961 ).

11.— Mayor and Commissioners.

A municipal officer who accepts an incompatible office, thereby vacating his office as city commissioner, is a usurper and may be proceeded against by the Commonwealth on the relation of the Attorney General for a forfeiture of his office. Commonwealth ex rel. Steller v. Livingston, 171 Ky. 52 , 186 S.W. 916, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1916 ).

The question of eligibility of the mayor and commissioners of a second-class city to hold the offices cannot be tested in an action brought by a taxpayer and citizen; the action can only be instituted by one claiming the office or by the Commonwealth’s attorney. Jenkins v. Congleton, 242 Ky. 46 , 45 S.W.2d 456, 1932 Ky. LEXIS 209 ( Ky. 1932 ).

12.— Marshal.

An action to enjoin payment of salary to city marshal, alleging that he was ineligible to hold the office, cannot be maintained by a citizen and taxpayer. Such action can only be brought by the Commonwealth or one entitled to the office. Spurlock v. Lafferty, 214 Ky. 333 , 283 S.W. 124, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 338 ( Ky. 1926 ).

Cited:

Milliken v. Harrod, 275 Ky. 597 , 122 S.W.2d 148, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 471 ( Ky. 1938 ); Commonwealth ex rel. Stephens v. Stephenson, 574 S.W.2d 328, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 619 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978); Noble v. Meagher, 686 S.W.2d 458, 1985 Ky. LEXIS 207 ( Ky. 1985 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

Under this section it is the duty of the Attorney General to institute ouster proceedings when a vacancy is created on a county board of education by the unexcused absence of a member from three consecutive meetings. OAG 60-1135 .

Actions taken as a school board member after filing for nomination for the office of sheriff and thus disqualifying himself would be valid until the school board member resigned or was removed from office. OAG 65-211 .

The Attorney General only is authorized to remove state and municipal officers for usurpation of office, i.e., where they are not qualified or where an act on their part constitutes by law a vacation of office. OAG 67-146 .

Evidence submitted to the Attorney General considered sufficient to warrant authorization by the Attorney General to attorney representing citizens’ group to initiate ouster proceedings in the name of the Attorney General to remove a mayor from office for alleged violation of the provisions of KRS 61.270 (now repealed) by reason of his alleged interest as a stockholder in a corporation holding the contract for collection and disposal of garbage within the city. OAG 69-33 .

A school board member is a legal member of the board until he resigns or is removed in an ouster action. OAG 70-757 .

The actions of a duly elected police judge acting under color of legal title would be considered valid until an ouster proceeding is instituted challenging his statutory qualifications. OAG 73-805 ; 73-816.

Where candidate for police judge was duly elected by the people and took the oath of office knowing that he did not possess the qualifications for the office, the only remedy was an ouster action brought on relation of the Attorney General. OAG 73-805 ; 73-816.

This section provides the proper procedure for removal from office of a mayor who has ceased to qualify as such by reason of nonresidency. OAG 74-402 .

A motion to dismiss an action instituted by a citizen in the nature of an ouster proceeding was well taken, as only a claimant to the office or the Attorney General have the necessary standing to commence the action. OAG 74-794 .

The power to authorize an ouster proceeding is purely discretionary with the Attorney General. OAG 76-14 .

Failing to meet the qualifications or doing that which is proscribed in KRS 160.180 constitutes cause for consideration for removal of a board of education member from office for usurpation of that office by the Attorney General. OAG 78-159 .

The Office of Attorney General, which has the sole responsibility and authority for bringing an ouster or quo warranto action against a school board member pursuant to this section, is not required to accept as conclusive any affidavits as to eighth grade completion which are provided pursuant to subdivision (1)(c) of KRS 160.180 . OAG 82-53 .

KRS 83A.040(3) requires all members of the city legislative body as well as the mayor to reside within the city and be a qualified voter therein; the procedure for removing a person, who in fact no longer lives in the city and thus becomes a usurper, is for a request to be filed with the Attorney General. Under this section and case law, documented evidence must be presented to the Attorney General for consideration and he has discretion in authorizing an ouster proceeding to be brought in his name by an attorney designated by the requesting party or parties. OAG 83-467 .

Ouster proceedings may be taken by the Attorney General pursuant to this section and KRS 415.060 against school board members who fail to obtain the required in-service training pursuant to KRS 160.180(5). OAG 85-145 .

This section does not prevent the Attorney General from having assistance of other counsel in cases that he brings when other counsel, with his consent, volunteer their services without any expense to the state. OAG 90-141 .

Persons who are ineligible to serve on school board should resign; however, unless a private citizen is claiming the office for himself, there is no proceeding short of an Attorney General ouster complaint which could prevent such individuals from taking the oath of office. OAG 92-160 .

Where school board members were ineligible to serve on the board due to the employment of a relative by the school system and members refused to resign, the Office of the Attorney General could instigate ouster proceedings against them. OAG 92-160 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Oust Member of School Board for Conflict of Interests, Form 333.02.

415.060. Proceedings for usurpation against person holding office.

A person who continues to exercise an office after having committed an act, or omitted to do an act, the commission or omission of which, by law, creates a forfeiture of his office, may be proceeded against for usurpation thereof.

History. C.C. 486: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Construction.

This section relates to offenses and conditions which may not affect the legal eligibility to hold office defined by KRS 160.180 , and the Attorney General may bring an action to remove member of county board of education. Richardson v. Commonwealth, 275 Ky. 486 , 122 S.W.2d 156, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1938 ).

2.Application.

Where a candidate for the office of mayor of a city received a majority of the votes at an election, received a certificate of election, qualified according to law and entered upon the discharge of his duties, the question of whether he received fraudulent and illegal votes at the election cannot be determined in an action brought by another candidate alleging usurpation of the office. Stine v. Berry, 96 Ky. 63 , 27 S.W. 809, 16 Ky. L. Rptr. 279 , 1894 Ky. LEXIS 81 ( Ky. 1894 ).

The Commonwealth’s Attorney is a constitutional officer, and where removal of such officer is sought on grounds of misbehavior and the method of removal is provided in the Kentucky Constitution, such mode is exclusive and methods provided by KRS 415.030 to 415.080 will not apply in seeking a forfeiture of his office. Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney Gen. v. Howard, 297 Ky. 488 , 180 S.W.2d 415, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 763 ( Ky. 1944 ).

3.Acts Creating Forfeitures.

An officer of a city who accepts an office that is incompatible, thereby vacates his first office and is a usurper and may be proceeded against to have the office forfeited, but until such a proceeding is instituted and adjudicated he should be treated as a de facto officer. Commonwealth ex rel. Steller v. Livingston, 171 Ky. 52 , 186 S.W. 916, 1916 Ky. LEXIS 298 ( Ky. 1916 ).

Evidence was insufficient to establish wrongful conduct by school board member which would constitute him a usurper in the office although his son was named truant officer and his daughter, a teacher, was transferred from the district high school to county high school at in increased salary. Richardson v. Commonwealth, 275 Ky. 486 , 122 S.W.2d 156, 1938 Ky. LEXIS 472 ( Ky. 1938 ).

Under statute prescribing qualifications of members of county school board of education and specifying disqualification which will operate as a forfeiture of office, a member of county board of education who cannot prove his educational qualifications in the manner prescribed is a usurper of the office and a forfeiture will be declared in a direct proceeding. Chadwell v. Commonwealth, 288 Ky. 644 , 157 S.W.2d 280, 1941 Ky. LEXIS 182 ( Ky. 1941 ).

4.Person Who Must Bring Proceedings.

A superintendent of schools, not claiming office of school board member, could not bring an action to oust school board member because of illegal transactions with the board in violation of KRS 160.180 , but the Attorney General, under KRS 415.050 and this section, had to bring the action since the board of education is a state and not a county office. Jones v. Browning, 298 Ky. 467 , 183 S.W.2d 38, 1944 Ky. LEXIS 923 ( Ky. 1944 ).

A suit for forfeiture of office under this section could not be brought by three (3) of six (6) members of a city council of a fourth-class city against another member for the sale of automobile to city utility commission by a corporation in which be was the principal stockholder, because the action must be brought by the Commonwealth or a person claiming title to the office. Jones v. Robinson, 351 S.W.2d 185, 1961 Ky. LEXIS 154 ( Ky. 1961 ).

Cited:

Commonwealth ex rel. Baxter v. Burnett, 237 Ky. 473 , 35 S.W.2d 857, 1931 Ky. LEXIS 623 ( Ky. 1931 ); McClendon v. Hamilton, 277 Ky. 734 , 127 S.W.2d 605, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 723 ( Ky. 1939 ); Commonwealth ex rel. Matthews v. Rice, 415 S.W.2d 618, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 10 ( Ky. 1966 ); Commonwealth ex rel. Stephens v. Stephenson, 574 S.W.2d 328, 1978 Ky. App. LEXIS 619 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinions of Attorney General.

The Attorney General only is authorized to remove state and municipal officers for usurpation of office, i.e., where they are not qualified or where an act on their part constitutes by law a vacation of office. OAG 67-146 .

Any justice of the peace that becomes disqualified by moving from his district would, if he refused to vacate his office by resignation, be subject to removal as a usurper by the Commonwealth’s Attorney. OAG 67-373 .

Under Ky. Const., § 142, a magistrate who moves his residence from the district he was elected to serve becomes disqualified for office and, if he refuses to vacate his office by resignation, would be subject to removal as a usurper pursuant to this section. OAG 67-396 .

Evidence submitted to the Attorney General considered sufficient to warrant his authorization to attorney representing citizens’ group to initiate ouster proceedings in the name of the Attorney General to remove the mayor from office for alleged violation of the provisions of KRS 61.270 (now repealed), by reason of the mayor’s alleged interest as a stockholder in a corporation holding the contract for the collection and disposal of garbage within the city. OAG 69-33 .

Members of the city council who were duly elected were entitled to take the oath of office and enter upon the duties of office even though they may not have possessed the qualifications of office if they were not challenged before the election, and the acts of such councilmen would be valid until ouster proceedings were instituted on relation of the Attorney General. OAG 73-863 .

Ouster proceedings may be taken by the Attorney General pursuant to KRS 415.050 and this section against school board members who fail to obtain the required in-service training pursuant to KRS 160.180(5). OAG 85-145 .

Research References and Practice Aids

Treatises

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Charges for Removal of Officer, Form 10.10.

Caldwell’s Kentucky Form Book, Prac. & Proc. Forms, 5th Ed., Complaint to Oust Member of School Board for Conflict of Interests, Form 333.02.

415.070. Judgment against usurper — Enforcement.

A person adjudged to have usurped an office or franchise shall be deprived thereof by the judgment of the court, and the person adjudged entitled thereto shall be placed in possession thereof; but no one shall be adjudged entitled thereto, unless the action be instituted by him. And the court shall have power to enforce its judgment by causing the books and papers, and all other things pertaining to the office or franchise, to be surrendered by the usurper; and by preventing him from further exercising or using the same; and may enforce its orders by fine and imprisonment until obeyed.

History. C.C. 487: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Application.

Where persons were elected to office of city commissioner in a void election, there being no such office, statutes regarding actions for usurpation of office were inapplicable as a defense to suit brought by mayor, administrative officers appointed by him, and a taxpayer, to restrain the elected commissioners from assuming the management of the city’s affairs. Goin v. Smith, 202 Ky. 486 , 260 S.W. 10, 1924 Ky. LEXIS 738 ( Ky. 1924 ).

2.Claimant Must Show Title.

A superintendent of common schools of a county, in possession of the office, though he be a usurper, cannot be deprived of it at the suit of another claimant of the office who cannot show himself entitled thereto. Wilson v. Tye, 126 Ky. 34 , 102 S.W. 856, 31 Ky. L. Rptr. 491 , 1907 Ky. LEXIS 18 ( Ky. 1907 ).

One who vacates the office of commissioner of a second-class city by the acceptance of an incompatible office of employment and then continues in possession of the first office is a usurper, and may be ousted at the suit of the person who is entitled to the office, but the individual seeking to recover it must show that he is lawfully entitled to the office. Hermann v. Lampe, 175 Ky. 109 , 194 S.W. 122, 1917 Ky. LEXIS 306 ( Ky. 1917 ).

3.Judgment for Possession.

A person who was legally entitled to the office of councilman of a city of the fourth class could bring suit for its possession against the person who was wrongfully holding it, although such person was elected or appointed by the council of the city which believed it had the authority to elect or appoint him, and this section fully authorized judgment for possession. Powell v. Hambrick, 164 Ky. 340 , 175 S.W. 633, 1915 Ky. LEXIS 374 ( Ky. 1915 ).

4.Appeal.

Where judgment was entered holding that offices of members of county board of education were vacant because the members holding said offices were usurpers, the offices became immediately vacant and the judgment could not be suspended pending a final determination on appeal. McClendon v. Hamilton, 277 Ky. 734 , 127 S.W.2d 605, 1939 Ky. LEXIS 723 ( Ky. 1939 ).

A judgment in ouster proceedings against deputy sheriff who had been indicted for murder was not void but only voidable where it had jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties, and if it committed error the only remedy was by an appeal from the judgment and not by mandatory writ to compel clerk to receive, accept and file his tendered supersedeas bond and to issue a supersedeas thereon. Baker v. Wilson, 310 Ky. 692 , 221 S.W.2d 690, 1949 Ky. LEXIS 1272 ( Ky. 1949 ).

5.Indictment.

Where one elected to the office of county attorney, for which office he was ineligible, exercised the functions and received the emoluments of the office, he is guilty of usurpation of the office, and may be prosecuted by indictment to recover the fine imposed by statute. Commonwealth v. Adams, 60 Ky. 6 , 1860 Ky. LEXIS 4 ( Ky. 1860 ) (decided under prior law).

Research References and Practice Aids

Cross-References.

Official misconduct in first and second degree, KRS 522.020 , 522.030 .

415.080. Recovery of fees and emoluments from usurper.

If the usurper has received fees and emoluments arising from the office or franchise, he shall be liable therefor to the person entitled thereto, who may claim the same in the action brought to deprive him of the office or franchise; or in a separate action. If no one is entitled to them, they may be recovered by the Commonwealth, and shall be paid into the public Treasury.

History. C. C. 488: trans. Acts 1952, ch. 84, § 1, effective July 1, 1953.

NOTES TO DECISIONS

1.Pleadings and Proof.

Before one may maintain an action to recover fees and emoluments of the office of manager of the workhouse of a county against an alleged usurper of the office he must allege and prove that he was entitled to the office during the time for which he is claiming the fees and emoluments. Johnson v. Cavanah, 54 S.W. 853, 21 Ky. L. Rptr. 1246 , 1900 Ky. LEXIS 346 ( Ky. 1900 ).

Opinions of Attorney General.

Where a regular deputy jailer continued to hold her office as a deputy jailer after accepting the office of city councilman, she became a usurper of the office of deputy jailer and the salary paid to her as deputy jailer out of the county treasury should be returned to the county from the beginning date of usurpation to the present. Thus, if she refuses to return the money the county can sue in circuit court to recover the compensation paid out of the county treasury while she has been a usurper; the parties defendant should include the usurper, the jailer, and the county treasurer, provided the proof shows that the jailer and county treasury issued salary checks to the usurper after knowing that she was a usurper, a mere de facto officer. OAG 84-25 .