Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 242.250 (2026)

Distributing, soliciting or receiving contracts or orders in dry territory

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

prohibited, when -- Same prohibition on contracts or orders to any moist territory unless sale of alcoholic beverages specifically authorized under limited local option election -- Immunity for licensed common carriers -- Absolute defense. (1) No person, while representing either the buyer or seller, shall distribute, solicit, or receive contracts, proposals, or orders for the purchase or sale of any alcoholic beverages, or distribute any handbills or posters advertising them in dry territory. (2) Each act of distributing, soliciting, or receiving contracts, proposals, or orders as denounced in subsection (1), and each day in which advertising matter is distributed, shall constitute a separate offense. (3) This chapter shall not prevent any manufacturer of or wholesale dealer in alcoholic beverages, or any authorized agent of either from making contracts of barrel, case, or package lots in any dry or moist territory, if his or her distilleries, breweries, wineries, or warehouses are located in that territory and his or her products are to be shipped into territory, either within or without the state, where alcoholic beverages may lawfully be sold. (4) Subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall also apply to moist territory unless the sale of the alcoholic beverage in question has been specifically authorized in that moist territory under a limited local option election. (5) No properly licensed common carrier or any of its employees acting on behalf of a consignor shall be liable for a violation of this section. (6) Proof that the purchaser represented in writing that the delivery address is located in wet territory shall be an absolute defense to a violation of this section on behalf of a retailer, winery, small farm winery, or distillery in connection with the delivery or shipment of alcoholic beverages purchased at retail. Effective: April 13, 2018 History: Amended 2018 Ky. Acts ch. 164, sec. 9, effective April 13, 2018. -- Amended 2013 Ky. Acts ch. 121, sec. 24, effective June 25, 2013. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2554c-19.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1942–1949 · leading case: Franklin Cnty. Distilling Co., Inc. v. Crowder, 202 S.W.2d 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Franklin Cnty. Distilling Co., Inc. v. Crowder, 202 S.W.2d 1015 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). “That part of the section follows: ‘It shall be unlawful for any person, while representing either the buyer or seller, to distribute, solicit or receive contracts, proposals or orders for the purchase or sale of any intoxicating liquors, or to distribute any handbills or posters…”

Crowder v. Schlitz Brewing Co. Etc., 175 S.W.2d 1003 (Ky. Ct. App. 1943). “That part of the section follows: “It shall be unlawful for any person, while representing either the buyer or seller, to distribute, solicit or receive contracts, proposals or orders for the purchase or sale of any intoxicating liquors, or to distribute any handbills or posters…”

Crowder, Judge v. Franklin Cnty. Distilling Co., 178 S.W.2d 928 (Ky. Ct. App. 1944). “Each of the penal actions contained five counts charging- violations on specified *36 days of KRS 242.250 (Carroll’s Kentucky Statutes, section 2554c-19), which, provides that it shall be unlawful for any person, while representing either the buyer or' seller, to distribute,…”

Schlitz Brewing Co. v. Crowder, Etc., 166 S.W.2d 274 (Ky. Ct. App. 1942). “Acting upon the theory that the signs constituted a distribution of handbills or posters in violation of KRS 242.250 (K. S. 2554c-19), the Commonwealth filed in the *142 quarterly court 71 penal actions against Schiltz and 373 penal actions against Sterling.”

Commonwealth v. Whitlow, 223 S.W.2d 1003 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949). “Thereafter the grand jury of Graves County returned a bill charging that in Graves County, local option territory, Whitlow had within twelve months “while representing himself as seller, solicited Ed Duffy to purchase from the said Whitlow, whiskey in violation of KRS 242.250.”…”

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.