Kentucky Revised Statutes
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 100.480 (2026)
Repealed, 1966
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Catchline at repeal: Appeal from board of adjustment; summons. History: Repealed 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 172, sec. 91. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 3235f-9a.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1942–1965 · leading case: Am. Beauty Homes Corp. v. Louisville & Jefferson Cnty. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 379 S.W.2d 450 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).
Am. Beauty Homes Corp. v. Louisville & Jefferson Cnty. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 379 S.W.2d 450 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964). “872, lists three grounds but omits the substantial evidence ground, and the first and third are in substance duplications. Orders of the Public Service Commission under KRS 278.”
Bray v. Beyer, 166 S.W.2d 290 (Ky. Ct. App. 1942). “An appeal from the order was taken by interested parties in the manner prescribed by KRS 100.480. On the hearing before the Board of Adjustment several persons who owned residences located on Kentucky avenue between 17th and 19th streets and west of 19th street were introduced…”
Arrow Transp. Co. v. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n of Paducah, 299 S.W.2d 95 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957). “KRS 100.480. We held in Schloemer v. City of Louisville, 298 Ky.”
Hobbs v. Markey, 398 S.W.2d 54 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “Markey’s evidence before the board of adjustment did not show that a specific depreciation in monetary value of her farm would result from the proposed filling station, she was not a person “affected by” the order of the board of adjustment within the meaning of KRS 100.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 100.480(1): 1 case
Hobbs v. Markey, 398 S.W.2d 54 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “Markey’s evidence before the board of adjustment did not show that a specific depreciation in monetary value of her farm would result from the proposed filling station, she was not a person “affected by” the order of the board of adjustment within the meaning of KRS 100.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 100.480(2): 1 case
Am. Beauty Homes Corp. v. Louisville & Jefferson Cnty. Plan. & Zoning Comm'n, 379 S.W.2d 450 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964). “872, lists three grounds but omits the substantial evidence ground, and the first and third are in substance duplications. Orders of the Public Service Commission under KRS 278.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.