(1) Except as provided in KRS 452.005, all final orders of an agency shall be
subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. A
party shall institute an appeal by filing a petition in the Circuit Court of venue,
as provided in the agency's enabling statutes, within thirty (30) days after the
final order of the agency is mailed or delivered by personal service. If venue for
appeal is not stated in the enabling statutes, a party may appeal to Franklin
Circuit Court or the Circuit Court of the county in which the appealing party
resides or operates a place of business. Copies of the petition shall be served
by the petitioner upon the agency and all parties of record. The petition shall
include the names and addresses of all parties to the proceeding and the
agency involved, and a statement of the grounds on which the review is
requested. The petition shall be accompanied by a copy of the final order.
(2) A party may file a petition for judicial review only after the party has exhausted
all administrative remedies available within the agency whose action is being
challenged, and within any other agency authorized to exercise administrative
review.
(3) Within twenty (20) days after the service of the petition, or within further time
allowed by the court, the agency shall transmit to the reviewing court the
original or a certified copy of the official record of the proceeding under review.
By stipulation of all parties to the review proceedings, the record may be
shortened. The court may require or permit subsequent correction or additions
to the official record. If the court requests a transcript of proceedings that have
not been transcribed, the cost of the transcription shall be paid by the party
initiating the appeal, unless otherwise agreed to by all parties.
(4) A petition for judicial review shall not automatically stay a final order pending
the outcome of the review, unless:
(a) An automatic stay is provided by statute upon appeal or at any point in
the administrative proceedings;
(b) A stay is permitted by the agency and granted upon request; or
(c) A stay is ordered by the Circuit Court of jurisdiction upon petition.
Effective:February 2, 2021
History: Amended 2021 Ky. Acts ch. 2, sec. 2, effective February 2, 2021. --
Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 318, sec. 13, effective July 15, 1996. -- Created
1994 Ky. Acts ch. 382, sec. 14, effective July 15, 1996.
Notes of Decisions
Gary West v. Ky. Horse Racing Comm'n, 972 F.3d 881 (6th Cir. 2020).
· cites it 3× “Second, they argue on the merits that the stewards’ decision was not supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary and capricious, or was otherwise deficient as a matter of law. Third, they argue that the stewards violated the Wests’ right to procedural due process.”
Rapier v. Philpot, 130 S.W.3d 560 (Ky. 2004).
· cites it 5× “") Thus, when a party fails to file exceptions, the issues the party can raise on judicial review under KRS 13B.140 are limited to those findings and conclusions contained in the agency head's final order that differ from those contained in the hearing officer's recommended…”
Andrew Cooperrider v. Maggie Woods, 127 F.4th 1019 (6th Cir. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(1). This function— issuing final orders in administrative adjudications following the issuance of a recommended order by an inferior adjudicator—is analogous to that of a judge reviewing a report and recommendation issued by a magistrate judge and making…”
Benningfield v. Pettit Env't, Inc., 183 S.W.3d 567 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “270 provides as follows: The provisions of KRS 13B.140 notwithstanding, commission shall not take jurisdiction over any claim of an unlawful practice under this chapter while a claim of the same person seeking relief for the same grievance under KRS 344.”
Exec. Branch Ethics Comm'n v. Stephens, 92 S.W.3d 69 (Ky. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies KRS 13B.140(1) states in part as follows: All final orders of an agency shall be subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.”
Baker v. Webb, 127 S.W.3d 622 (Ky. 2004).
· cites it 2× “We also note that we have previously held that KRS 13B.140 provides a party adversely affected by a final order of the Cabinet the right to file a petition for judicial review if all administrative remedies have been exhausted.”
Taylor v. Kentucky Unemployment Ins. Comm'n, 382 S.W.3d 826 (Ky. 2012).
· cites it 2× “450(1) as amended because his attorney signed the petition which pursuant to CR 11 suffices to qualify as a verification; and (4) that KRS 13B.140 grants the circuit court subject matter jurisdiction and supersedes KRS 341.”
W.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 388 S.W.3d 108 (Ky. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Section 10(3) of the regulation further provides, if necessary, for an additional appeal to the circuit court pursuant to the normal administrative appeals provisions of KRS 13B.140 and KRS 13B.150. The administrative proceedings, however, are now in abeyance pending conclusion…”
Kentucky State Police v. Terry Scott, 529 S.W.3d 711 (Ky. 2017).
· cites it 3× “Those Recoipmended Orders set out Scott’s1 and Fleming’s Exception and Appeal rights under KRS 13B.140 and KRS 18A10Ó. Apparently, no exceptions were filed and the Personnel Board entered its Final Orders in conformity with the Hearing Officer’s recommendations on October 16,…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(1) — 29 cases
Gary West v. Ky. Horse Racing Comm'n, 972 F.3d 881 (6th Cir. 2020).
“Second, they argue on the merits that the stewards’ decision was not supported by substantial evidence, was arbitrary and capricious, or was otherwise deficient as a matter of law. Third, they argue that the stewards violated the Wests’ right to procedural due process.”
Andrew Cooperrider v. Maggie Woods, 127 F.4th 1019 (6th Cir. 2025).
“Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(1). This function— issuing final orders in administrative adjudications following the issuance of a recommended order by an inferior adjudicator—is analogous to that of a judge reviewing a report and recommendation issued by a magistrate judge and making…”
Exec. Branch Ethics Comm'n v. Stephens, 92 S.W.3d 69 (Ky. 2002).
“Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies KRS 13B.140(1) states in part as follows: All final orders of an agency shall be subject to judicial review in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.”
Rapier v. Philpot, 130 S.W.3d 560 (Ky. 2004).
“") Thus, when a party fails to file exceptions, the issues the party can raise on judicial review under KRS 13B.140 are limited to those findings and conclusions contained in the agency head's final order that differ from those contained in the hearing officer's recommended…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(2) — 6 cases
W.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 388 S.W.3d 108 (Ky. 2012).
“Section 10(3) of the regulation further provides, if necessary, for an additional appeal to the circuit court pursuant to the normal administrative appeals provisions of KRS 13B.140 and KRS 13B.150. The administrative proceedings, however, are now in abeyance pending conclusion…”
Rapier v. Philpot, 130 S.W.3d 560 (Ky. 2004).
“") Thus, when a party fails to file exceptions, the issues the party can raise on judicial review under KRS 13B.140 are limited to those findings and conclusions contained in the agency head's final order that differ from those contained in the hearing officer's recommended…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(3) — 2 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 13B.140(4)(c) — 1 case
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.