Catchline at repeal: Hearings -- Publication of determination -- Revisions --
Prevailing wage review boards attached to Labor Cabinet for administrative
purposes.
History: Repealed 2017 Ky. Acts ch. 3, sec. 14, effective January 9, 2017. --
Amended 2010 Ky. Acts ch. 24, sec. 1744, effective July 15, 2010. -- Amended
1996 Ky. Acts ch. 48, sec. 3, effective July 15, 1996 -- Amended 1984 Ky. Acts
ch. 414, sec. 15, effective July 13, 1984. -- Amended 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 341,
sec. 6. -- Amended 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 275, sec. 1. -- Created 1962 Ky. Acts ch.
173, sec. 2(5) to (7). -- Formerly codified as part of KRS 337.520.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases, 1964–1969 · leading case:
Young v. Neale, 457 S.W.2d 358 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).
Young v. Neale, 457 S.W.2d 358 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).
· cites it 8× “The parties have practiced this case on the theory that the intial “public” hearing by the Commissioner under subsection (1) of KRS 337.522 and the “additional” hearing by the Board prescribed in subsection (2) thereof are similar in character and are governed by the same…”
Cabe v. City of Campbellsville, 385 S.W.2d 51 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).
“On September 10, 1963, the Commissioner published his findings as to the prevailing wages (higher than the 1961 schedule), whereupon the present appellees requested the additional hearing authorized by KRS 337.522(2). This hearing we shall refer to as the review hearing.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 337.522(2): 2 cases
Cabe v. City of Campbellsville, 385 S.W.2d 51 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964).
“On September 10, 1963, the Commissioner published his findings as to the prevailing wages (higher than the 1961 schedule), whereupon the present appellees requested the additional hearing authorized by KRS 337.522(2). This hearing we shall refer to as the review hearing.”
Young v. Neale, 457 S.W.2d 358 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969).
“The parties have practiced this case on the theory that the intial “public” hearing by the Commissioner under subsection (1) of KRS 337.522 and the “additional” hearing by the Board prescribed in subsection (2) thereof are similar in character and are governed by the same…”
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.