Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 120

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 120.165

Procedure in contest of regular election -- Trial -- Judgment

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) A contest instituted under KRS 120.155 shall proceed as equity actions. Upon return of the summons properly executed to the office of the circuit clerk, he or she shall immediately docket the case and notify the presiding judge of the court that the contest has been filed. The judge shall proceed to a trial of the cause without delay. In courts having more than one (1) judge, the judge who shall try the case shall be determined by lot. The court shall complete the case as soon as practicable. The action shall have precedence over all other cases. (2) The evidence in chief for the contestant shall be completed within thirty (30) days after service of summons; the evidence for the contestee shall be completed within twenty-five (25) days after filing of answer, and evidence for contestant in rebuttal shall be completed within seven (7) days after the contestee has concluded; provided that for cause the court may grant a reasonable extension of time to either party. (3) All voting machines, voting equipment, or voting systems, ballots, stub books, and other papers concerning which there is any ground for contest may be removed to the court in which the action is pending. (4) If it appears from an inspection of the whole record that there has been such fraud, intimidation, bribery, or violence in the conduct of the election that neither contestant nor contestee can be judged to have been fairly elected, the Circuit Court, or an appellate court, on appeal, may adjudge that there has been no election. In that event the office shall be deemed vacant, with the same legal effect as if the person elected had refused to qualify. If one (1) of the parties is adjudged by the court to be elected to the office, he or she shall, on production of a copy of the final judgment, be permitted to qualify or be commissioned. Effective: June 29, 2021 History: Amended 2021 Ky. Acts ch. 197, sec. 68, effective June 29, 2021. -- Amended 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 14, sec. 136, effective January 2, 1978. -- Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 130, sec. 164.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1977–2017 · leading case: Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 7× “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err.”
McClendon v. Hodges (2008) ky · cites it 4× “KRS 120.165 governs election contests. Subsection (4) of the statute states: If it appears from an inspection of the whole record that there has been such fraud, intimidation, bribery or violence in the conduct of the election that neither contestant nor contestee can be judged…”
Wood v. Kirby (1978) ky · cites it 5× “Did the trial court have jurisdiction under KRS 120.165(4) to declare that there had been no election in the present case where it appeared from the record that a number of votes sufficient to affect the outcome of the election were not counted because of the failure of a voting…”
Mary E. McCann Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. The Sullivan University System, Inc., D/B/ (2017) ky “055), a general election (KRS 120.165), as well as procedures for contesting an election on a public question (KRS 120.”
Kirby v. Wood (1977) kyctapp · cites it 3× “The next question presented in this case concerns the jurisdiction of the trial court under KRS 120.165(4) to declare there had been no election due to the apparent failure of a voting machine.”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 9× “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 7× “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 7× “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 3× “LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY TIMING REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICITY OF PLEADINGS , Appellants first contend that the trial court erred by permitting an extended period of time for proof-taking ln violation of KRS 120.165(2),8 and 8 KRS 120.165(2) provides as follows: The…”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky · cites it 3× “LACK_ OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY TIMING REQUIREMENTS AND SP_ECIFICITY OF PLEADINGS Appellants first contend that the trial court erred by permitting an extended period of time for proof-taking in violation of KRS 120.165(2),8 and 8 KRS 120.165(2) provides as follows: The…”
Stearns v. Davis (1985) kyctapp “065 and KRS 120.165) make no provision for such post-judgment motions.”
Washington Vaughn v. Board of Elections of Green County (2010) ca6 · cites it 2× “” Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 120.165 (4). No. 09-5265 Warf et al.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 120.165(1) — 4 cases
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 120.165(2) — 6 cases
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err.”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY TIMING REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICITY OF PLEADINGS , Appellants first contend that the trial court erred by permitting an extended period of time for proof-taking ln violation of KRS 120.165(2),8 and 8 KRS 120.165(2) provides as follows: The…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 120.165(4) — 9 cases
Wood v. Kirby (1978) ky “Did the trial court have jurisdiction under KRS 120.165(4) to declare that there had been no election in the present case where it appeared from the record that a number of votes sufficient to affect the outcome of the election were not counted because of the failure of a voting…”
McClendon v. Hodges (2008) ky “KRS 120.165 governs election contests. Subsection (4) of the statute states: If it appears from an inspection of the whole record that there has been such fraud, intimidation, bribery or violence in the conduct of the election that neither contestant nor contestee can be judged…”
Magoffin County Board of Elections v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err.”
Kirby v. Wood (1977) kyctapp “The next question presented in this case concerns the jurisdiction of the trial court under KRS 120.165(4) to declare there had been no election due to the apparent failure of a voting machine.”
Charles Hardin M.D. v. John Montgomery (2016) ky “We agree that the time line established by KRS 120.165 was not followed, but we are persuaded that the trial court did not err in permitting the parties additional time to conduct discovery.”
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.