Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 260
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705 (2026)

Repealed, 2002

✓ 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: Prohibited marketing practices. History: Repealed 2002 Ky. Acts ch. 31, sec. 2, effective July 15, 2002. -- Amended 1990 Ky. Acts ch. 393, sec. 11, effective July 13, 1990. -- Created 1960 Ky. Acts ch. 193, sec. 7, effective June 16, 1960.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1970–1985 · leading case: Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). · cites it 22× “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Anti-Monopoly Comm'n v. Borden Co., 456 S.W.2d 831 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 6× “That the purpose of KRS 260.705 (1) is the prevention of the destructive competition in the sale of dairy products and that this may be fulfilled by a general law, to wit, the Unfair Trade Practices Law, KRS 365.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(1) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Anti-Monopoly Comm'n v. Borden Co., 456 S.W.2d 831 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “That the purpose of KRS 260.705 (1) is the prevention of the destructive competition in the sale of dairy products and that this may be fulfilled by a general law, to wit, the Unfair Trade Practices Law, KRS 365.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(1)(a) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(1)(b) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(1)(c) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(2) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Anti-Monopoly Comm'n v. Borden Co., 456 S.W.2d 831 (Ky. Ct. App. 1970). “That the purpose of KRS 260.705 (1) is the prevention of the destructive competition in the sale of dairy products and that this may be fulfilled by a general law, to wit, the Unfair Trade Practices Law, KRS 365.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(3) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 260.705(a) — 1 case
Kentucky Milk Mktg. & Antimonopoly Comm'n v. Kroger Co., 691 S.W.2d 893 (Ky. 1985). “[1] PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 18, 1982, the Commission, following a hearing, entered an order *895 which found Kroger in violation of KRS 260.705 [2] and levied a $4,500 fine against it.”
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.