small claims division.
(1) An action shall be removed from the small claims division to the regular docket of District or Circuit Court as appropriate whenever the defendant's counterclaim exceeds the jurisdictional limit of the division or the District Court.
(2) An action shall be removed from the division to the District Court if a party defendant would otherwise have a right to a jury trial and gives notice to the division requesting a jury trial as provided in KRS 24A.320(2).
(3) An action may be removed from the division to the District Court if the judge, in his discretion, deems the action too complex for the simplified procedure of the division.
(4) An action originally filed in the District or Circuit Courts may be transferred to the small claims division on motion of the defendant if the claim is within the jurisdictional limit of, and otherwise could have been brought originally in, the division, unless the plaintiff demands a jury trial. No action transferred to the division shall be counted in the maximum number of claims that the plaintiff may bring under KRS 24A.250(1). History: Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 9. sec. 13.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2024 · leading case:
Miller v. Jones, 658 S.W.2d 888 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
Miller v. Jones, 658 S.W.2d 888 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “It also extended to the defendant the privilege of a trial by jury (KRS 24A.310) and the means to accomplish this (KRS 24A.”
Campbell v. Crager, 167 S.W.3d 669 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
“Based on Campbell’s failure to comply with the statutory removal procedures, we do not believe the district court’s actions can be considered “clearly erroneous,” nor do we believe the judge abused his discretion.”
Barry A. Saturday v. Ashwood Townhouses of Laredo Ass'n, Inc. (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 2× “His primary issue on appeal is: “[w]hen the relief requested in a small claims case exceeds the jurisdictional limits of the District Court, upon removal to Circuit Court pursuant to KRS 24A.310, does a new circuit complaint need to be filed?” For the following reasons, we…”
N. Tool & Equip., Inc. v. Durbin, 392 S.W.3d 424 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
“” 1 If Northern Tool desired to have this claim litigated in a forum where civil procedural rules are applicable, it could have sought removal to district court pursuant to KRS 24A.310. However, it did not. Whether the judgment was based on the theory of warranty, contract, or…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 24A.310(2) — 2 cases
Miller v. Jones, 658 S.W.2d 888 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
“It also extended to the defendant the privilege of a trial by jury (KRS 24A.310) and the means to accomplish this (KRS 24A.”
Campbell v. Crager, 167 S.W.3d 669 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
“Based on Campbell’s failure to comply with the statutory removal procedures, we do not believe the district court’s actions can be considered “clearly erroneous,” nor do we believe the judge abused his discretion.”
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.