Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.130 (2026)

Repealed, 1976

✓ 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: Damages upon affirmance. History: Repealed 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 59, sec. 3; and ch. 67, sec. 14, effective March 23, 1976. -- Amended and transferred 1952 Ky. Acts ch. 84, sec. 35, effective July 1, 1953, from C.C. sec. 764.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases, 1961–2005 · leading case: Sharp v. Comm'r, 75 T.C. 21 (Tax Ct. 1980).
Sharp v. Comm'r, 75 T.C. 21 (Tax Ct. 1980). · cites it 21× “In this respect, the key words of KRS 21.130 are, “the collection of which * * * has been superseded,” etc.”
Brown J. Sharp v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 689 F.2d 87 (6th Cir. 1983). · cites it 14× “The question presented in this appeal is whether sums paid pursuant to Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.130 1 constitute “interest” within the ambit of section 163 of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”), 26 U.”
Elk Horn Coal Corp. v. Cheyenne Resources, Inc., 163 S.W.3d 408 (Ky. 2005). · cites it 3× “59, § 3) ("Upon the affirmance of an appeal, or the dismissal of an appeal after it has been docketed in the Court of Appeals, where the appeal is from a judgment for the payment of money, the collection of which, in whole or in part, has been superseded, as provided in the…”
Solter v. Sandy Valley Grocery Co., 352 S.W.2d 816 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961). · cites it 4× “The mandate of this Court on this order contained no provision for damages under KRS 21.130. Solter’s right to recover such damages is presented by a motion in this Court to amend the mandate and by appeal from the order of the circuit court denying damages.”
Baker v. Fid. & Deposit Co. of Maryland, 355 S.W.2d 150 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). · cites it 4× “Baker and Carol Flamm filed a copy of the judgment together with a motion to dismiss the appeal! and award each of them the ten percent penalty provided by KRS 21.130. An order was entered sustaining the mo: tion to dismiss but no mention was made in that or any other order…”
Ash v. Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co., 574 S.W.2d 346 (Ky. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 2× “300(1) encompasses the petition for rehearing brought in the same court hearing the original appeal, and that the petition is, therefore, exempt from any assessment of damages.”
Sotak v. Sotak, 438 S.W.2d 490 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 3× “Michael also claims ten per cent damages allowable under KRS 21.130 upon the values of the stock, debentures, insurance policies, and the car.”
Wagoner v. Cansler, 542 S.W.2d 291 (Ky. 1976). · cites it 5× “The one and only issue is the same in each of these appeals, and we limit our consideration to the single question worded as follows in appellants’ brief: “Whether an agency of the Commonwealth is required to pay the penalty prescribed by KRS 21.130.” The Workmen’s Compensation…”
Moss v. Smith, 361 S.W.2d 511 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). · cites it 2× “In the circumstances, I believe KRS 21.130 (providing 10% damages on a superseded money judgment) a good analogy, and that judgment should go against the surety for $2,300 (2%⅜ X 20% X $12,000) plus costs incurred in the action since June, 1955.”
Rice v. Conley, 419 S.W.2d 769 (Ky. Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 2× “Although a supersedeas bond had been executed, our mandate was issued without awarding Conley 10% damages under KRS 21.130. Conley has moved to amend the mandate and to grant him 10% damages.”
Sharp v. Sharp, 516 S.W.2d 875 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974). “KRS 21.130 is quoted in full, and CR 73.04 is quoted in part, in Howard v.”
Watts v. Lab'y Corp. of Am., 139 S.W.3d 534 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Moreover, these letters are clearly outside of the record on appeal, in violation of CR 76.”
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.