(1) In an administrative hearing, findings of fact shall be based exclusively on the evidence on the record. The hearing officer shall exclude evidence that is irrelevant, immaterial, unduly repetitious, or excludable on constitutional or statutory grounds or on the basis of evidentiary privilege recognized in the courts of this Commonwealth. Hearsay evidence may be admissible, if it is the type of evidence that reasonable and prudent persons would rely on in their daily affairs, but it shall not be sufficient in itself to support an agency's findings of facts unless it would be admissible over objections in civil actions.
(2) All testimony shall be made under oath or affirmation. Any part of the evidence may be received in written form if doing so will expedite the hearing without substantial prejudice to the interests of any party. The hearing officer may make a recommended order in an administrative hearing submitted in written form if the hearing officer determines there are no genuine issues of material fact in dispute and judgment is appropriate as a matter of law.
(3) Any party shall have the right to inspect, at least five (5) days prior to the hearing, a list of all witnesses every other party expects to call at the hearing, and the available documentary or tangible evidence relating to an administrative hearing either in person or by counsel. Copies of documentary evidence may be obtained upon the payment of a fee, except documents protected from disclosure by state or federal law. Nothing in this section shall be construed as giving a party the right to examine or copy the personal notes, observations, or conclusions of the agency staff, unless exculpatory in nature, nor shall it be construed as allowing access to the work product of counsel for the agency. Conditions for examining and copying agency records, fees to be charged, and other matters pertaining to access to these records shall be governed by KRS 61.870 to 61.884. To the extent required by due process, the hearing officer may order the inspection of any records excluded from the application of KRS 61.870 to 61.884 under KRS 61.878 that relate to an act, transaction, or event that is a subject of the hearing, and may order their inclusion in the record under seal.
(4) Objections to evidentiary offers may be made by any party and shall be noted in the record.
(5) The hearing officer may take official notice of facts which are not in dispute, or of generally-recognized technical or scientific facts within the agency's specialized knowledge. The hearing officer shall notify all parties, either before or during the hearing, or in preliminary reports or otherwise, of any facts so noticed and their source. All parties shall be given an opportunity to contest facts officially noticed.
(6) The agency shall cause all testimony, motions, and objections in a hearing to be accurately and completely recorded. Any person, upon request, may receive a copy of the recording or a copy of the transcript, if the hearing has been transcribed, at the discretion of the agency, unless the hearing is closed by law. The agency may prepare a transcript of a hearing or a portion of a hearing upon request but the party making the request shall be responsible for the transcription costs. The form of all requests and fees charged shall be consistent with KRS 61.870 to 61.884.
(7) In all administrative hearings, unless otherwise provided by statute or federal law, the party proposing the agency take action or grant a benefit has the burden to show the propriety of the agency action or entitlement to the benefit sought. The agency has the burden to show the propriety of a penalty imposed or the removal of a benefit previously granted. The party asserting an affirmative defense has the burden to establish that defense. The party with the burden of proof on any issue has the burden of going forward and the ultimate burden of persuasion as to that issue. The ultimate burden of persuasion in all administrative hearings is met by a preponderance of evidence in the record, except when a higher standard of proof is required by law. Failure to meet the burden of proof is grounds for a recommended order from the hearing officer. Effective: July 14, 2018 History: Amended 2018 Ky. Acts ch. 188, sec. 4, effective July 14, 2018. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 318, sec. 9, effective July 15, 1996. -- Created 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 382, sec. 9, effective July 15, 1996.
Notes of Decisions
City of Louisville, Div. of Fire v. Fire Serv. Managers Ass'n Ex Rel. Kaelin, 212 S.W.3d 89 (Ky. 2006).
· cites it 9× “As this case involves the review of an administrative decision, we look to KRS 13B.090(7), which reads in part as follows: In all administrative hearings, unless otherwise provided by statute or federal law, the party proposing the agency take action or grant a benefit has the…”
Schaffer Ex Rel. Schaffer v. Weast, 546 U.S. 49 (2005).
· cites it 2× “1:340, § 7(4) (2004) (incorporating by reference Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13B.090(7) (Lexis 2003)) (same); Ga.”
McManus v. Kentucky Ret. Sys., 124 S.W.3d 454 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 4× “For instance, KRS 13B.090, part of the Administrative Procedure Act, addresses burdens of proof in connection with administrative proceedings.”
Kentucky Ret. Sys. v. Brown, 336 S.W.3d 8 (Ky. 2011).
· cites it 3× “Because the scholarly article was hearsay, and stood alone as the only evidence tending to show the pre-existing nature of Sizemore’s condition, it must comply with KRS 13B.090(1), which states that, though hearsay evidence is admissible, “it shall not be sufficient in itself to…”
Z.H. v. Ky. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 359 F. Supp. 3d 514 (W.D. Ky. 2019).
· cites it 6× “KHSAA Due Process Rule Section 2(f)(1) notes that the KHSAA must comply with KRS 13B.090. Thus, the only real question is whether the KHSAA was required to disclose the Paducah Sun article to Z prior to the hearing.”
Andrew Cooperrider v. Maggie Woods, 127 F.4th 1019 (6th Cir. 2025).
“” Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(1). The hearing officer then drafts a recommended order, including her findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended disposition of the hearing, which she submits to the agency head within sixty days of receiving an official record of the…”
Se. United Medigroup, Inc. v. Hughes, 952 S.W.2d 195 (Ky. 1997).
· cites it 2× “" An amendment to Chapter 13B, enacted in 1996 and codified as KRS 13B.090(3), provides: . . . To the extent required by due process, the hearing officer may order the inspection of any records excluded from the application of KRS 61.”
Kentucky Ret. Sys. v. West, 413 S.W.3d 578 (Ky. 2013).
· cites it 3× “KRS 13B.090(7). To be sure, the pre-existing condition requirement contained in KRS 61.”
Drummond v. Todd Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 349 S.W.3d 316 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “In presiding over an administrative proceeding, the hearing officer is permitted to accept hearsay evidence which is reliable, but which would not be admissible in court.”
Mollette v. Kentucky Pers. Bd., 997 S.W.2d 492 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 3× “KRS 13B.090(1). This is true even though the hearsay evidence alone is not sufficient in itself to support an agency’s findings of fact unless it would be admissible over objections in civil actions.”
Revenue Cabinet v. Comcast Cablevision of the South, 147 S.W.3d 743 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).
“” Further, the KBTA concluded that Comcast had met its burden of proof under KRS 13B.090(7). Finally, the KBTA held that the Revenue Cabinet’s assessments included the blue sky nonoperating values.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(1) — 15 cases
McManus v. Kentucky Ret. Sys., 124 S.W.3d 454 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).
“For instance, KRS 13B.090, part of the Administrative Procedure Act, addresses burdens of proof in connection with administrative proceedings.”
Kentucky Ret. Sys. v. Brown, 336 S.W.3d 8 (Ky. 2011).
“Because the scholarly article was hearsay, and stood alone as the only evidence tending to show the pre-existing nature of Sizemore’s condition, it must comply with KRS 13B.090(1), which states that, though hearsay evidence is admissible, “it shall not be sufficient in itself to…”
Andrew Cooperrider v. Maggie Woods, 127 F.4th 1019 (6th Cir. 2025).
“” Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(1). The hearing officer then drafts a recommended order, including her findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended disposition of the hearing, which she submits to the agency head within sixty days of receiving an official record of the…”
Drummond v. Todd Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 349 S.W.3d 316 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).
“In presiding over an administrative proceeding, the hearing officer is permitted to accept hearsay evidence which is reliable, but which would not be admissible in court.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(2) — 5 cases
McManus v. Kentucky Ret. Sys., 124 S.W.3d 454 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).
“For instance, KRS 13B.090, part of the Administrative Procedure Act, addresses burdens of proof in connection with administrative proceedings.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(3) — 2 cases
Se. United Medigroup, Inc. v. Hughes, 952 S.W.2d 195 (Ky. 1997).
“" An amendment to Chapter 13B, enacted in 1996 and codified as KRS 13B.090(3), provides: . . . To the extent required by due process, the hearing officer may order the inspection of any records excluded from the application of KRS 61.”
Z.H. v. Ky. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 359 F. Supp. 3d 514 (W.D. Ky. 2019).
“KHSAA Due Process Rule Section 2(f)(1) notes that the KHSAA must comply with KRS 13B.090. Thus, the only real question is whether the KHSAA was required to disclose the Paducah Sun article to Z prior to the hearing.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.090(7) — 33 cases
City of Louisville, Div. of Fire v. Fire Serv. Managers Ass'n Ex Rel. Kaelin, 212 S.W.3d 89 (Ky. 2006).
“As this case involves the review of an administrative decision, we look to KRS 13B.090(7), which reads in part as follows: In all administrative hearings, unless otherwise provided by statute or federal law, the party proposing the agency take action or grant a benefit has the…”
Kentucky Ret. Sys. v. West, 413 S.W.3d 578 (Ky. 2013).
“KRS 13B.090(7). To be sure, the pre-existing condition requirement contained in KRS 61.”
Kentucky Ret. Sys. v. Brown, 336 S.W.3d 8 (Ky. 2011).
“Because the scholarly article was hearsay, and stood alone as the only evidence tending to show the pre-existing nature of Sizemore’s condition, it must comply with KRS 13B.090(1), which states that, though hearsay evidence is admissible, “it shall not be sufficient in itself to…”
Revenue Cabinet v. Comcast Cablevision of the South, 147 S.W.3d 743 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).
“” Further, the KBTA concluded that Comcast had met its burden of proof under KRS 13B.090(7). Finally, the KBTA held that the Revenue Cabinet’s assessments included the blue sky nonoperating values.”
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.