Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200 (2026)

Complaints of discrimination -- Procedure -- Conciliation agreements --

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

Enforcement. (1) An individual claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful practice other than a discriminatory housing practice, a member of the commission, or the Attorney General may file with the commission a written sworn complaint stating that an unlawful practice has been committed, setting forth the facts upon which the complaint is based, and setting forth facts sufficient to enable the commission to identify the persons charged (referred to as the respondent in this section, KRS 344.210, 344.230, and 344.240). The commission shall make reasonable accommodations to assist persons with disabilities in filing a written sworn complaint. The commission staff or a person designated pursuant to its administrative regulations shall promptly investigate the allegations of unlawful practice set forth in the complaint and shall within five (5) days furnish the respondent with a copy of the complaint. The complaint must be filed within one hundred eighty (180) days after the alleged unlawful practice occurs. (2) The commission or an individual designated pursuant to its administrative regulations shall determine within thirty (30) days after the complaint has been filed whether there is probable cause to believe the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice. If it is determined that there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice, the commission shall issue an order dismissing the complaint and shall furnish a copy of the order to the complainant, the respondent, the Attorney General, and any other public officers and persons that the commission deems proper. (3) The complainant, within ten (10) days after receiving a copy of the order dismissing the complaint, may file with the commission an application for reconsideration of the order. Upon receiving a reconsideration application, the commission or an individual designated pursuant to administrative regulation shall make a new determination within ten (10) days whether there is probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice. If it is determined that there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice, the commission shall issue an order dismissing the complaint and furnishing a copy of the order to the complainant, the respondent, the Attorney General, and any other public officers and persons that the commission deems proper. (4) If the staff determines, after investigation, or if the commission determines after the review provided for in subsection (3) of this section that there is probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice, the commission staff shall endeavor to eliminate the alleged unlawful practice by conference, conciliation, and persuasion. The terms of a conciliation agreement reached with a respondent may require him to refrain from the commission of unlawful discriminatory practices in the future and make any further provisions as may be agreed upon between the commission or its staff and the respondent. If a conciliation agreement is entered into, the commission shall issue and serve on the complainant an order stating its terms. A copy of the order shall be delivered to the respondent, the Attorney General, and any other public officers and persons that the commission deems proper. Except for the terms of the conciliation agreement, neither the commission nor any officer or employee thereof shall make public, without the written consent of the complainant and the respondent, information concerning efforts in a particular case to eliminate an unlawful practice by conference, conciliation, or persuasion whether or not there is a determination of probable cause or a conciliation agreement. (5) At the expiration of one (1) year from the date of a conciliation agreement, and at other times in its reasonable discretion, the commission staff may investigate whether the terms of the agreement have been and are being complied with by the respondent. Upon a finding that the terms of the agreement are not being complied with by the respondent, the commission shall take whatever action it deems appropriate to assure compliance. (6) At any time after a complaint is filed, the commission may file an action in the Circuit Court in a county in which the subject of the complaint occurs, or in a county in which a respondent resides or has his principal place of business, seeking appropriate temporary relief against the respondent, pending final determination of proceedings including an order or decree restraining him from doing or procuring any act tending to render ineffectual any order the commission may enter with respect to the complaint. The court shall have power to grant temporary relief or a restraining order as it deems just and proper. (7) Nothing in this section shall apply to any discriminatory housing practice. Effective: June 24, 2015 History: Amended 2015 Ky. Acts ch. 40, sec. 1, effective June 24, 2015. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 318, sec. 317, effective July 15, 1996. -- Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 282, sec. 14, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 311, sec. 2. - - Amended 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 187, sec. 2. -- Amended 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 255, sec. 11. -- Amended 1968 Ky. Acts ch. 167, sec. 9. -- Created 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 2, Art. 5, sec. 503.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Kentucky Comm'n on Human Rights v. Fraser, 625 S.W.2d 852 (Ky. 1981).
Kentucky Comm'n on Human Rights v. Fraser, 625 S.W.2d 852 (Ky. 1981). · cites it 4× “KRS 344.200, et seq. Written complaints of alleged discrimination are investigated by the staff of the Commission on Human Rights, after which, if "probable cause" is found, resolution is sought through conference and conciliation.”
Owen v. Univ. of Kentucky, 486 S.W.3d 266 (Ky. 2016). · cites it 2× “KRS 344.200. . Antonin Scalia and Bryan A- Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts 56 (2012).”
Pyro Mining Co. v. Kentucky Comm'n On Human Rights, 678 S.W.2d 393 (Ky. 1984). · cites it 9× “KRS 344.200, Procedure etc., provides that “an individual” .”
Democratic Party of Kentucky v. Graham, 976 S.W.2d 423 (Ky. 1998). · cites it 4× “360(1) (Board of Accountancy-accountant discipline); KRS 344.200(2) (Comm'n on Human Rights-civil rights violations); and, KRS 344.”
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 6× “Such an order is required by KRS 344.200 to be issued within thirty days of the filing of the complaint with the commission “[i]f it is determined that there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice.”
Brown v. Diversified Decorative Plastics, LLC, 103 S.W.3d 108 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “We noted that a discrimination complaint could be filed with the Commission pursuant to KRS 344.200 or, alternatively, a complaint alleging discrimination could be filed as a civil action for damages in circuit court pursuant to KRS 344.”
Dep't of Corr. v. Furr, 23 S.W.3d 615 (Ky. 2000). · cites it 2× “KRS 344.200; KRS 344.230(2), (3). The civil remedy is set forth in KRS 344.”
Wilson v. Lowe's Home Ctr., 75 S.W.3d 229 (Ky. Ct. App. 2001). “A party claiming discrimination may file a complaint with the KCHR pursuant to KRS 344.200. The complainant may be awarded damages, which include “compensation for humiliation and embarrassment,” under KRS 344.”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 5× “Appellant argued below and on appeal that the trial court erred by not finding that the Commission had violated KRS 344.200(2). That statute requires the Commission to make a determination within thirty days from the date a complaint is filed whether there is probable cause to…”
Clifton v. Midway Coll., 702 S.W.2d 835 (Ky. 1986). · cites it 2× “The only time limitation is the 180 days for filing complaints found in KRS 344.200(1). This limitation is obviously a procedural requirement only for invoking the administrative process.”
Vaezkoroni v. Domino's Pizza, Inc., 914 S.W.2d 341 (Ky. 1995). · cites it 2× “For example, 190-83 § 2-32(1) states: The Commission shall follow the same procedures as the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights as set forth in KRS 344.200(6), pending final determination of proceedings hereunder; 344.”
Founder v. Cabinet for Human Resources, Dep't for Emp. Servs., Div. of Unemployment Ins., 23 S.W.3d 221 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “On February 18, 1994, Founder also filed a sworn complaint of racial discrimination with the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights (the “Commission”) pursuant to KRS 344.200. By order dated December 8, 1994, this complaint was withdrawn at Founder’s request.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(1) — 4 cases
Clifton v. Midway Coll., 702 S.W.2d 835 (Ky. 1986). “The only time limitation is the 180 days for filing complaints found in KRS 344.200(1). This limitation is obviously a procedural requirement only for invoking the administrative process.”
Brown v. Diversified Decorative Plastics, LLC, 103 S.W.3d 108 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). “We noted that a discrimination complaint could be filed with the Commission pursuant to KRS 344.200 or, alternatively, a complaint alleging discrimination could be filed as a civil action for damages in circuit court pursuant to KRS 344.”
Day v. Alcan Aluminum Corp., 675 F. Supp. 1508 (W.D. Ky. 1987).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(2) — 4 cases
Democratic Party of Kentucky v. Graham, 976 S.W.2d 423 (Ky. 1998). “360(1) (Board of Accountancy-accountant discipline); KRS 344.200(2) (Comm'n on Human Rights-civil rights violations); and, KRS 344.”
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984). “Such an order is required by KRS 344.200 to be issued within thirty days of the filing of the complaint with the commission “[i]f it is determined that there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice.”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). “Appellant argued below and on appeal that the trial court erred by not finding that the Commission had violated KRS 344.200(2). That statute requires the Commission to make a determination within thirty days from the date a complaint is filed whether there is probable cause to…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(3) — 2 cases
Owen v. Univ. of Kentucky, 486 S.W.3d 266 (Ky. 2016). “KRS 344.200. . Antonin Scalia and Bryan A- Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts 56 (2012).”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). “Appellant argued below and on appeal that the trial court erred by not finding that the Commission had violated KRS 344.200(2). That statute requires the Commission to make a determination within thirty days from the date a complaint is filed whether there is probable cause to…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(4) — 2 cases
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984). “Such an order is required by KRS 344.200 to be issued within thirty days of the filing of the complaint with the commission “[i]f it is determined that there is no probable cause to believe that the respondent has engaged in an unlawful practice.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(6) — 2 cases
Vaezkoroni v. Domino's Pizza, Inc., 914 S.W.2d 341 (Ky. 1995). “For example, 190-83 § 2-32(1) states: The Commission shall follow the same procedures as the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights as set forth in KRS 344.200(6), pending final determination of proceedings hereunder; 344.”
Pyro Mining Co. v. Kentucky Comm'n On Human Rights, 678 S.W.2d 393 (Ky. 1984). “KRS 344.200, Procedure etc., provides that “an individual” .”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.200(7) — 1 case
Pyro Mining Co. v. Kentucky Comm'n On Human Rights, 678 S.W.2d 393 (Ky. 1984). “KRS 344.200, Procedure etc., provides that “an individual” .”
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.