11 Kentucky opinions name it 3 courts 1899–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bloemer v. Turnergreen2 sentences2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d | 2 | 2 |
Robinson v. Ehrlergreen2 sentences2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 2008See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a "primary rule of statutory construction", and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832 , 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 200, 204 (Ky. 1985) ("The rule of ejusdem generis applies. | 2 | 2 |
Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Courtgreen2 sentences2011Our conclusion finds support in the venerable doctrine of ejusdem generis, which we explained in Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court, 312 Ky. 614 , 229 S.W.2d 319, 320 (1950): [WJhere, in a statute, general words follow or precede a designation of particular subjects or classes of persons, the meaning of the general words ordinarily will be presumed to be restricted by the particular designation, and to include only things or persons of the same kind, class, or nature as those specifically enumerated, unless there is a clear manifestation of a contrary purpose. 1998Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court, 312 Ky. 614 , 229 S.W.2d 319 (1950). | 1 | 2 |
Nancy J. McCarty v. Covol Fuels No. 2, LLC a Utah Corporationgreen2 sentences2022Harper, relying on McCarty v. Covol Fuels No. 2, LLC, 476 S.W.3d 224, 235 (Ky. 2015), stated: Our interpretation of the meaning of that phrase is guided by the traditional rules of statutory construction, including the ejusdem generis doctrine. 2022Harper, relying on McCarty v. Covol Fuels No. 2, LLC, 476 S.W.3d 224, 235 (Ky. 2015), stated: Our interpretation of the meaning of that phrase is guided by the traditional rules of statutory construction, including the ejusdem generis doctrine. | 1 | 1 |
True v. Rainesgreen1 sentence2014True v. Raines, 99 S.W.3d 439, 443 (Ky.2003). . | 1 | 1 |
Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County Ex Rel. Graumangreen2 sentences2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d | 1 | 1 |
Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Bradygreen2 sentences2008The last two centuries of Kentucky jurisprudence unequivocally demonstrate that the doctrine of ejusdem generis is, and has always been, a fundamental canon of statutory construction in this Commonwealth, See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a “primary rule of statutory construction”, and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832, 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 2008See e.g., Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Brady, 885 S.W.2d 681, 685 (Ky.1994) (in which Justice Leibson explains and applies ejusdem generis as a "primary rule of statutory construction", and refers the reader to Bloemer v. Turner, 281 Ky. 832 , 137 S.W.2d 387 (1939) and Jefferson County Fiscal Court v. Jefferson County, 278 Ky. 68 , 128 S.W.2d 230 (1939)); Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 200, 204 (Ky. 1985) ("The rule of ejusdem generis applies. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court
green
2 sentences2011Our conclusion finds support in the venerable doctrine of ejusdem generis, which we explained in Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court, 312 Ky. 614 , 229 S.W.2d 319, 320 (1950): [WJhere, in a statute, general words follow or precede a designation of particular subjects or classes of persons, the meaning of the general words ordinarily will be presumed to be restricted by the particular designation, and to include only things or persons of the same kind, class, or nature as those specifically enumerated, unless there is a clear manifestation of a contrary purpose. 1998Steinfeld v. Jefferson County Fiscal Court, 312 Ky. 614 , 229 S.W.2d 319 (1950). | 2 | 1998–2011 |
Bell v. Bell
green
1 sentence2022Because KRS 61.102(1) does not define what exactly qualifies as an administrative regulation, UK suggests, citing Bell v. Bell, 423 S.W.3d 219 , 223 n.12 (Ky. 2014), that the ejusdem generis doctrine is the statutory construction rule to resolve any ambiguity in the statute’s text. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Harper v. Univ. of Louisville
green
2 sentences2022Harper relied upon the ejusdem generis doctrine to address whether the news media qualified as a recipient of whistleblower information under the generic provision “or any other appropriate body or authority.” 559 S.W.3d at 811 . 2022Ejusdem generis is a rule providing that where a generalization within a statute follows a list of specifically designated subjects or classes of persons, the meaning of the general words will be presumed to be restricted by the particular designation and to include only things or persons of the same kind, class, or nature as those specifically enumerated, unless there is a clear manifestation of a contrary purpose. 559 S.W.3d at 811 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Molloy v. Molloy
neutral
1 sentence1988Because the general words “personal articles and effects” were preceded by a list of very specific items, we found the doctrine of ejusdem generis to apply and that the stock was not “in the same class as bedspreads and tablecloths.” Id. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Ruh's Executors v. Ruh
green
2 sentences1971Cf. Ruh’s Ex’rs v. Ruh, 270 Ky. 792 , 110 S.W.2d 1097 . 1971Cf. Ruh’s Ex’rs v. Ruh, 270 Ky. 792 , 110 S.W.2d 1097 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Tuggle v. Marsee
green
2 sentences1949In Tuggle v. Marsee, 231 Ky. 650 , 21 S.W.2d 1022 , the Willis case was cited with approval and it was there pointed out that although it was decided in 1897 and there had been many meetings of the General Assembly since then, there had been no changes in the statute relating to the subject. 1949In Tuggle v. Marsee, 231 Ky. 650 , 21 S.W.2d 1022 , the Willis case was cited with approval and it was there pointed out that although it was decided in 1897 and there had been many meetings of the General Assembly since then, there had been no changes in the statute relating to the subject. | 1 | 1949–1949 |
Brent v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1925Although it is true that the general rule for the construction of a statute, is that when any general words follow an enumeration of particular things or objects set out in the statute, the general words will be construed as applicable only to *323 the persons or things of the same general nature or class as those enumerated, Brent v. Commonwealth, 194 Ky. 504 , 240 S. W. 45 ; yet, as pointed out in 36 Cyc. 1121, this doctrine is only a rule of construction to be applied as an aid in ascertaining the legislative intent, and it does not control where it clearly appears from the statute as a who 1925Although it is true that the general rule for the construction of a statute, is that when any general words follow an enumeration of particular things or objects set out in the statute, the general words will be construed as applicable only to *323 the persons or things of the same general nature or class as those enumerated, Brent v. Commonwealth, 194 Ky. 504 , 240 S. W. 45 ; yet, as pointed out in 36 Cyc. 1121, this doctrine is only a rule of construction to be applied as an aid in ascertaining the legislative intent, and it does not control where it clearly appears from the statute as a who | 1 | 1925–1925 |
Moore v. Settle
neutral
1 sentence1899A number of cases are cited illustrating «the application of the ejusdem generis rule; special reliance being placed upon the construction given to the statutes against gaming in Com. v. Kammerer 11 Ky. Law Rep., 777 , [ 13 S. W., 108 ], and Moore v. Settle, 82 Ky., 187 [56 Am. | 1 | 1899–1899 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.