Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 122
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 122.140 (2026)

Repealed, 1974

✓ 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: Contest or recount of election on public question; when, where and by whom instituted; grounds; process; pleadings; parties. History: Repealed 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 130, sec. 198. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 1596a-17, 1596a-18, 1596a-20.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1944–1985 · leading case: Howell v. Haney, 330 S.W.2d 941 (Ky. Ct. App. 1959).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Howell v. Haney, 330 S.W.2d 941 (Ky. Ct. App. 1959). · cites it 7× “KRS 122.140. The appellees (defendants) filed a motion to dismiss the action, asserting that the statute authorizing a contest of an election on a public question, KRS 122.”
Robinson v. Ehrler, 691 S.W.2d 200 (Ky. 1985). · cites it 6× “Nor is it necessary that we consider the applicability of KRS 122.140, which provides for a contest or recount of an election on any public question 3 _” 180 S.”
Durr v. Washington Cnty., 339 S.W.2d 444 (Ky. Ct. App. 1960). · cites it 7× “This action, brought pursuant to KRS 122.140, contested the election and demanded a recount of the votes.”
Forrester v. Terry, 357 S.W.2d 308 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). · cites it 2× “The circuit court indicated the view that all preliminary proceedings were terminated and merged in the favorable public referendum.”
Fletcher v. Wilson, 495 S.W.2d 787 (Ky. Ct. App. 1973). “There a voter was contesting an election on a public question (as he was authorized to do by statute, KRS 122.140). It was held that in such contest the voter could not “inquire into latent defects in the necessary steps preliminary to the calling of the election.”
Webster v. Bd. of Educ., 437 S.W.2d 956 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “The trial court granted summary judgment on the motion of the board, in which it was adjudged (1) that the election was valid in all respects and (2) that both the complaint and intervening complaint were proceedings to contest an election under KRS 122.140(1) and came too late.…”
Lyon v. Holbrook, 316 S.W.2d 862 (Ky. Ct. App. 1958). “His complaint was dismissed on the ground that the recount judgment was res judicata. We think the controlling question' is whether Lyon, as a taxpayer, has any standing in court to question the recount judgment.”
Simmons v. Taylor, 451 S.W.2d 385 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “2d 444 , it was written : “We therefore conclude that the rule should be the same under KRS 122.140 as it is under KRS 122.070, to the effect that a party may at any time amend his pleadings (subject, of course, to the civil rules of practice) so long as he does not set up a new…”
Dunn v. Marshall Cnty. Hosp. Dist., 543 S.W.2d 767 (Ky. 1976). “See KRS 122.140 (now KRS 120.250). Having failed to challenge the election within the required time, the appellants are now barred from contesting it.”
Gregory v. Franklin-Simpson Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 194 S.W.2d 961 (Ky. Ct. App. 1946). “In support of the Chancellor’s ruling, it is argued (1) that appellants did not allege they were “qualified to and did vote on” the question, *407 and (2) the action was not instituted within thirty days after the election, in accordance with KRS 122.140. This argument is…”
Ridener v. Perkins, Judge, 180 S.W.2d 83 (Ky. Ct. App. 1944). “Nor is it necessary that we consider the applicability of KRS 122.140, which provides for a contest or recount of an election on any public question other than a constitutional amendment, or a local option question submitted under Chapter 242 of the Kentucky Bevised Statutes; or…”
Peel v. Boyle Cnty., 191 S.W.2d 923 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). “120 that any qualified voter may demand a recount or may contest a local option election and that the County Board of Election Commissioners shall be named and served as contestees.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 122.140(1) — 1 case
Webster v. Bd. of Educ., 437 S.W.2d 956 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). “The trial court granted summary judgment on the motion of the board, in which it was adjudged (1) that the election was valid in all respects and (2) that both the complaint and intervening complaint were proceedings to contest an election under KRS 122.140(1) and came too late.…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 122.140(3) — 1 case
Peel v. Boyle Cnty., 191 S.W.2d 923 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). “120 that any qualified voter may demand a recount or may contest a local option election and that the County Board of Election Commissioners shall be named and served as contestees.”
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.