Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 123.050 (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Repealed, 1966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: Purposes for which candidates may make expenditures -- Amount limited. History: Repealed 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 216, sec. 14. -- Amended 1946 Ky. Acts ch. 28, sec. 1. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 1565b-3, 1565b-13 to 1565b-18.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1945–1960 · leading case: Pickard v. Jones, 243 S.W.2d 46 (Ky. Ct. App. 1951).
Pickard v. Jones, 243 S.W.2d 46 (Ky. Ct. App. 1951). · cites it 4× “KRS 123.050 limits the amount for a county office to $1,000 except in counties "having" a city of any of the first three classes within their boundaries.”
Britton v. Garland, 335 S.W.2d 329 (Ky. Ct. App. 1960). · cites it 2× “The maximum lawful campaign expenditure for the office in question, under KRS 123.050, is $500. Within the time specified in KRS 123.”
Peel v. Boyle Cnty., 191 S.W.2d 923 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). · cites it 2× “08 when KRS 123.050 limits the expenditure to $500 by a person seeking an office other than the ones enumerated therein, that the Corrupt Practices Act was violated, and under KRS 122.”
Reed v. Conway, 223 S.W.2d 180 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949). “On August 15, Keesee filed a contest suit against Conway on the grounds that he had violated the provisions of KRS 123.050 by (1) spending in excess of $1,000 to secure his nomination, and (2) by corrupting and bribing voters to vote for him.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 123.050(2) — 1 case
Pickard v. Jones, 243 S.W.2d 46 (Ky. Ct. App. 1951). “KRS 123.050 limits the amount for a county office to $1,000 except in counties "having" a city of any of the first three classes within their boundaries.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 123.050(2)(i) — 1 case
Pickard v. Jones, 243 S.W.2d 46 (Ky. Ct. App. 1951). “KRS 123.050 limits the amount for a county office to $1,000 except in counties "having" a city of any of the first three classes within their boundaries.”
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.