cities.
(1) No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his
custody, to run at large.
(2) If any damage is committed by cattle permitted to run at large, the owner of the
cattle shall be liable for all damages, whether the place where the damages occurred
is inclosed by lawful fence or not. The person damaged shall have a lien on the
cattle committing the damage for the amount of the damage and cost of suit.
(3) The sheriff or any other peace officer shall impound any cattle found running at
large in the county, and the owner or bailee of the cattle shall pay to the officer
impounding, for each head impounded, one dollar ($1) and the cost of feeding and
taking care of the cattle, but the cost of impounding any number of cattle shall not
exceed three dollars ($3) and the cost of feeding. The sheriff or any other peace
officer shall have a lien on the cattle impounded for his fees and expenses, which he
may enforce in the same manner in which mortgage liens are enforced.
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting any powers possessed by cities
to regulate cattle running at large.
History: Created 1950 Ky. Acts ch. 20, secs. 1 to 4.
Notes of Decisions
Rankin v. Blue Grass Boys Ranch, Inc., 469 S.W.2d 767 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971).
“Cowgill’s right to a fair and impartial trial; (4) the trial court erroneously excluded from evidence the fact that Rankin had lost no wages from the date of the accident to the day of the trial; and (5) the verdict is excessive.”
Massie v. Salmon, 277 S.W.2d 49 (Ky. Ct. App. 1955).
“Their separate suits were based on the claim that the defendants permitted cattle to run at large in violation of the stock law, KRS 259.210. The jury found that the occurrence was an unavoidable accident and denied recovery on the plaintiffs’ claims and on the defendants’…”
Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Faulkner, 307 S.W.2d 196 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957).
“Chapter 20, Acts of 1950, KRS 259.210(1). The present statute which places the duty upon a railroad company to prove it was free from negligence in killing an animal upon its track is an act of 1893.”
Sparks v. Doe, 379 S.W.2d 252 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).
“Doe was to the effect that it was her duty “not to permit any cattle owned by her, or under her control, or in her custody, to run at large,” and that if she “did negligently permit any such cattle * * * to run at large, and * * * as a direct and consequent result of her so…”
Woodford v. Hall, 257 S.W.2d 902 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).
“This argument overlooks the fact that the General Assembly of 1950 passed an act which became effective June 15, 1950, and which has been codified as KRS 259.210. It reads in part as follows: *903 “(1) No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his…”
Campbell v. White, 357 S.W.2d 849 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962).
“KRS 259.210(1) provides: “No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his custody, to run at large.”
Oliver Trucking Co. v. Harris, 441 S.W.2d 775 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).
“Appellant relies upon KRS 259.210(1) and (2) which provide as follows : “(1) No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his custody, to run at large.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 259.210(1) — 5 cases
Rankin v. Blue Grass Boys Ranch, Inc., 469 S.W.2d 767 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971).
“Cowgill’s right to a fair and impartial trial; (4) the trial court erroneously excluded from evidence the fact that Rankin had lost no wages from the date of the accident to the day of the trial; and (5) the verdict is excessive.”
Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Faulkner, 307 S.W.2d 196 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957).
“Chapter 20, Acts of 1950, KRS 259.210(1). The present statute which places the duty upon a railroad company to prove it was free from negligence in killing an animal upon its track is an act of 1893.”
Sparks v. Doe, 379 S.W.2d 252 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).
“Doe was to the effect that it was her duty “not to permit any cattle owned by her, or under her control, or in her custody, to run at large,” and that if she “did negligently permit any such cattle * * * to run at large, and * * * as a direct and consequent result of her so…”
Campbell v. White, 357 S.W.2d 849 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962).
“KRS 259.210(1) provides: “No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his custody, to run at large.”
Oliver Trucking Co. v. Harris, 441 S.W.2d 775 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).
“Appellant relies upon KRS 259.210(1) and (2) which provide as follows : “(1) No person shall permit any cattle owned by him or under his control or in his custody, to run at large.”
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.