The toll of about 20,000,000 motor vehicle accidents nationally and comparable
experience in Kentucky upon the interests of victims, the public, policyholders and others
require that improvements in the reparations provided for herein be adopted to effect the
following purposes:
(1) To require owners, registrants and operators of motor vehicles in the
Commonwealth to procure insurance covering basic reparation benefits and legal
liability arising out of ownership, operation or use of such motor vehicles;
(2) To provide prompt payment to victims of motor vehicle accidents without regard to
whose negligence caused the accident in order to eliminate the inequities which
fault-determination has created;
(3) To encourage prompt medical treatment and rehabilitation of the motor vehicle
accident victim by providing for prompt payment of needed medical care and
rehabilitation;
(4) To permit more liberal wage loss and medical benefits by allowing claims for
intangible loss only when their determination is reasonable and appropriate;
(5) To reduce the need to resort to bargaining and litigation through a system which can
pay victims of motor vehicle accidents without the delay, expense, aggravation,
inconvenience, inequities and uncertainties of the liability system;
(6) To help guarantee the continued availability of motor vehicle insurance at
reasonable prices by a more efficient, economical and equitable system of motor
vehicle accident reparations;
(7) To create an insurance system which can more adequately be regulated; and
(8) To correct the inadequacies of the present reparation system, recognizing that it was
devised and our present Constitution adopted prior to the development of the
internal combustion motor vehicle.
Effective: July 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 385, sec. 1, effective July 1, 1975.
Notes of Decisions
Mitchell v. Allstate Ins. Co., 244 S.W.3d 59 (Ky. 2008).
· cites it 12× “" KRS § 304.39-010. Specific purposes for the act include: 3) To encourage prompt medical treatment and rehabilitation of the motor vehicle accident victim by providing for prompt payment of needed medical care and rehabilitation; 5) To reduce the need to resort to bargaining…”
McGrew v. Stone, 998 S.W.2d 5 (Ky. 1999).
· cites it 16× “" KRS 304.39-010. See also Crenshaw v. Weinberg, Ky.”
York v. Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 156 S.W.3d 291 (Ky. 2005).
· cites it 8× “Appellants also argued that the public policy behind the Motor Vehicles Reparations Act (MRVA), KRS 304.39-010, required a finding in favor of insurance coverage for innocent third parties.”
Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., 326 S.W.3d 803 (Ky. 2010).
· cites it 5× “Because we find that Shelter, the vehicle’s and vehicle owner’s insurer, was the primary insurer as mandated by the spirit and intent of the Kentucky Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), KRS 304.39-010, et seq., we hold that the Court of Appeals erred when it reversed the…”
Troxell v. Trammell, 730 S.W.2d 525 (Ky. 1987).
· cites it 4× “This approach presupposes the need for a longer statute of limitations .”
Auto Acceptance Corp. v. T.I.G. Ins. Co., 89 S.W.3d 398 (Ky. 2002).
· cites it 5× “010(1): An automated motor vehicle and trailer registration and titling system shall be developed and implemented as expeditiously as practicable in all counties of the Commonwealth. The automated motor vehicle and trailer registration system shall be designed to enable…”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hodgkiss-Warrick, 413 S.W.3d 875 (Ky. 2013).
· cites it 3× “Indeed, although Hodgkiss-Warrick refers broadly to our Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), KRS 304.39-010 et seq., as somehow implying the “policies” upon which she relies, neither she nor the Court of Appeals panel has identified any specific provision of the MVRA as…”
Beacon Ins. Co. of Am. v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 795 S.W.2d 62 (Ky. 1990).
· cites it 4× “KRS 304.39-010. The act is obviously directed more strongly toward effective reparations for victims of motor vehicle mishaps occurring on public ways, streets and thoroughfares; an exclusion applying to activities on race tracks or similar facilities is patently less offensive…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(1) — 23 cases
Auto Acceptance Corp. v. T.I.G. Ins. Co., 89 S.W.3d 398 (Ky. 2002).
“010(1): An automated motor vehicle and trailer registration and titling system shall be developed and implemented as expeditiously as practicable in all counties of the Commonwealth. The automated motor vehicle and trailer registration system shall be designed to enable…”
Beacon Ins. Co. of Am. v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 795 S.W.2d 62 (Ky. 1990).
“KRS 304.39-010. The act is obviously directed more strongly toward effective reparations for victims of motor vehicle mishaps occurring on public ways, streets and thoroughfares; an exclusion applying to activities on race tracks or similar facilities is patently less offensive…”
Mitchell v. Allstate Ins. Co., 244 S.W.3d 59 (Ky. 2008).
“" KRS § 304.39-010. Specific purposes for the act include: 3) To encourage prompt medical treatment and rehabilitation of the motor vehicle accident victim by providing for prompt payment of needed medical care and rehabilitation; 5) To reduce the need to resort to bargaining…”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hodgkiss-Warrick, 413 S.W.3d 875 (Ky. 2013).
“Indeed, although Hodgkiss-Warrick refers broadly to our Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), KRS 304.39-010 et seq., as somehow implying the “policies” upon which she relies, neither she nor the Court of Appeals panel has identified any specific provision of the MVRA as…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(2) — 14 cases
York v. Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 156 S.W.3d 291 (Ky. 2005).
“Appellants also argued that the public policy behind the Motor Vehicles Reparations Act (MRVA), KRS 304.39-010, required a finding in favor of insurance coverage for innocent third parties.”
Kentucky Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., 326 S.W.3d 803 (Ky. 2010).
“Because we find that Shelter, the vehicle’s and vehicle owner’s insurer, was the primary insurer as mandated by the spirit and intent of the Kentucky Motor Vehicle Reparations Act (MVRA), KRS 304.39-010, et seq., we hold that the Court of Appeals erred when it reversed the…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(3) — 4 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(4) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(5) — 7 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(6) — 2 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 304.39-010(8) — 1 case
McGrew v. Stone, 998 S.W.2d 5 (Ky. 1999).
“" KRS 304.39-010. See also Crenshaw v. Weinberg, Ky.”
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.