Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 277.320 (2026)

Contributory negligence -- Assumption of risk

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In any action brought against a common carrier by railroad under KRS 277.310 to recover damages for injury to or death of any employee, the employee shall not be held to have assumed the risk of his employment nor to have been guilty of contributory negligence in any case where the violation by the carrier of any state or federal statute enacted for the safety of employees contributed to the injury or death of the employee. In a case where a safety statute has not been violated, the fact that the employee was guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery, but the damages shall be diminished by the jury in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to the employee. Effective: October 1, 1942 History: Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 820b-2, 820b-3.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1945–1984 · leading case: Hilen v. Hays, 673 S.W.2d 713 (Ky. 1984).
Hilen v. Hays, 673 S.W.2d 713 (Ky. 1984). · cites it 4× “320 which provides that contributory negligence is a defense to a product liability action; and (3) KRS 277.320 which adopts comparative negligence as the rule for railroad employees in actions against their employers, extending the same provision as found in the Federal…”
Louisville N. R. Co. v. Chapman's Adm'x, 190 S.W.2d 542 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). · cites it 4× “If, however, such negligence on its part contributes to the accident, then it becomes liable even though its negligence may not be the sole proximate cause of the accident — the extent or degree of such liability being fixed by the last sentence in section 277.320. In fine,…”
Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. Lilly, 188 S.W.2d 105 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). “310 and KRS 277.320, he was awarded damages in the amount of $1,250.”
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.