Kentucky Revised Statutes
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 118.300 (2026)
Repealed, 1972
✓ 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: Voting by illiterate, blind or disabled voter. History: Repealed 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 188, sec. 69, effective December 1, 1972. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 1475.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1943–1962 · leading case: Stabile v. Osborne, 217 S.W.2d 980 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949).
Stabile v. Osborne, 217 S.W.2d 980 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949). “972, 974 , we construed the statute, now KRS 118.300(5), declaring that where a ballot was exposed by a voter to any person it should not be deposited in the box as contemplating a willful exposure and held that it did not refer to the exposure by one of the officers of the…”
Sizemore v. Henson, 264 S.W.2d 865 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954). “It cannot be said to be marked for an illiterate voter as provided in KRS 118.300(1). Exhibit No. 1, Manchester Precinct No.”
Mills v. Broughton, 365 S.W.2d 315 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). “The question arises: Is the making and signing of an oath mandatory before a voter may obtain the help described in KRS 125.”
Grauman, Co. Atty. v. Jefferson Co. Fiscal Court, 171 S.W.2d 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1943). “140 make such a person’s vote practically secret and about as much so as does KRS 118.300 when the machine is not used by one so handicapped.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 118.300(1) — 2 cases
Sizemore v. Henson, 264 S.W.2d 865 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954). “It cannot be said to be marked for an illiterate voter as provided in KRS 118.300(1). Exhibit No. 1, Manchester Precinct No.”
Mills v. Broughton, 365 S.W.2d 315 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). “The question arises: Is the making and signing of an oath mandatory before a voter may obtain the help described in KRS 125.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 118.300(5) — 1 case
Stabile v. Osborne, 217 S.W.2d 980 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949). “972, 974 , we construed the statute, now KRS 118.300(5), declaring that where a ballot was exposed by a voter to any person it should not be deposited in the box as contemplating a willful exposure and held that it did not refer to the exposure by one of the officers of the…”
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.