(1) Any complainant, respondent, or intervenor aggrieved by a final order of the
commission, including a final order dismissing any complaint or stating the terms of
a conciliation agreement, may obtain judicial review, and the commission may
obtain an order of the court for enforcement of its final order, in a proceeding
brought in the Circuit Court in a county in which the alleged unlawful practice
which is the subject of the final order or complaint occurs or in which a respondent
resides or has his principal place of business.
(2) Except for a discriminatory housing practice, if the commission has failed to
schedule a hearing in accordance with KRS 344.210(1) or has failed to issue a final
order within one hundred eighty (180) days after the complaint is filed, the
complainant, respondent, Attorney General, or an intervenor may petition the
Circuit Court in a county in which the alleged unlawful practice set forth in the
complaint occurs or in which the petitioner resides or has his principal place of
business for an order directing the commission to schedule a hearing or to issue its
final order. The court shall follow the procedure set forth in KRS Chapter 13B and
this section so far as applicable.
(3) If before the expiration of sixty (60) days after the date of the commission order is
entered for a discriminatory housing practice and no petition for review has been
filed under subsection (1) of this section, any person entitled to under the
discriminatory housing practice order may petition for a decree enforcing the order
in the Circuit Court for the county in which the discriminatory housing practice is
alleged to have occurred.
(4) Except for subsection (2) of this section, all provisions in this section shall apply to
orders issued in a discriminatory housing practice proceeding.
Effective: July 15, 1996
History: Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 318, sec. 320, effective July 15, 1996. --
Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 282, sec. 26, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1976
Ky. Acts ch. 62, sec. 120. -- Amended 1968 Ky. Acts ch. 167, sec. 10. -- Created
1966 Ky. Acts ch. 2, Art. 5, sec. 507.
Notes of Decisions
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 18× “230(1) and (2), the time limit for appeal of such order under KRS 344.240 is thirty days. No separate civil action by the same person based on the same grievance may be filed under KRS 344.”
Mountain Clay, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Comm'n on Human Rights, 830 S.W.2d 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 4× “In response, Mountain Clay sought judicial review by Laurel Circuit Court of the Commission’s ruling pursuant to KRS 344.240. The circuit court affirmed the Commission’s ruling and Mountain Clay appeals.”
Clifton v. Midway Coll., 702 S.W.2d 835 (Ky. 1986).
“An individual who has charges of discrimination referred by the federal agency to the state agency, but without an order issued by the Kentucky agency, is not precluded by KRS 344.240(6), from pursuing rights under KRS 344.”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “] KRS 344.240(1) in part provides: A complainant, respondent, or intervenor aggrieved by an order of the commission, including an order dismissing a complaint or stating the terms of a conciliation agreement, may obtain judicial review.”
Whispering Hills Country Club, Inc. v. Kentucky Comm'n on Human Rights, 475 S.W.2d 645 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
· cites it 6× “” Thereafter the Club filed this action in Jefferson Circuit Court pursuant to KRS 344.240, seeking to extricate the Club from the enforcement of the order of the Commission on a theory that it is a private club within the definition of KRS 344.”
Evans v. Gen. Tire & Rubber Co., 662 S.W.2d 843 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 2× “Appellants first contend that KRS 344.240 dictates that the judicial scope of review of the Commission’s findings is limited to determining whether those findings are clearly erroneous and that those findings shall be conclusive if supported by probative and substantial…”
Berry v. Gen. Elec. Co., 541 F. Supp. 800 (W.D. Ky. 1982).
“KRS 344.240. Instead of proceeding in the administrative forum, the plaintiff chose to initiate his complaint in circuit court pursuant to KRS 344.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(1) — 4 cases
Mountain Clay, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Comm'n on Human Rights, 830 S.W.2d 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).
“In response, Mountain Clay sought judicial review by Laurel Circuit Court of the Commission’s ruling pursuant to KRS 344.240. The circuit court affirmed the Commission’s ruling and Mountain Clay appeals.”
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).
“230(1) and (2), the time limit for appeal of such order under KRS 344.240 is thirty days. No separate civil action by the same person based on the same grievance may be filed under KRS 344.”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).
“] KRS 344.240(1) in part provides: A complainant, respondent, or intervenor aggrieved by an order of the commission, including an order dismissing a complaint or stating the terms of a conciliation agreement, may obtain judicial review.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(2) — 8 cases
Mountain Clay, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Comm'n on Human Rights, 830 S.W.2d 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).
“In response, Mountain Clay sought judicial review by Laurel Circuit Court of the Commission’s ruling pursuant to KRS 344.240. The circuit court affirmed the Commission’s ruling and Mountain Clay appeals.”
Evans v. Gen. Tire & Rubber Co., 662 S.W.2d 843 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
“Appellants first contend that KRS 344.240 dictates that the judicial scope of review of the Commission’s findings is limited to determining whether those findings are clearly erroneous and that those findings shall be conclusive if supported by probative and substantial…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(3) — 3 cases
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).
“230(1) and (2), the time limit for appeal of such order under KRS 344.240 is thirty days. No separate civil action by the same person based on the same grievance may be filed under KRS 344.”
Curtis v. Belden Elec. Wire & Cable, 760 S.W.2d 97 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988).
“] KRS 344.240(1) in part provides: A complainant, respondent, or intervenor aggrieved by an order of the commission, including an order dismissing a complaint or stating the terms of a conciliation agreement, may obtain judicial review.”
Whispering Hills Country Club, Inc. v. Kentucky Comm'n on Human Rights, 475 S.W.2d 645 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
“” Thereafter the Club filed this action in Jefferson Circuit Court pursuant to KRS 344.240, seeking to extricate the Club from the enforcement of the order of the Commission on a theory that it is a private club within the definition of KRS 344.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(4) — 1 case
Whispering Hills Country Club, Inc. v. Kentucky Comm'n on Human Rights, 475 S.W.2d 645 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972).
“” Thereafter the Club filed this action in Jefferson Circuit Court pursuant to KRS 344.240, seeking to extricate the Club from the enforcement of the order of the Commission on a theory that it is a private club within the definition of KRS 344.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(5) — 1 case
Mountain Clay, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Comm'n on Human Rights, 830 S.W.2d 395 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992).
“In response, Mountain Clay sought judicial review by Laurel Circuit Court of the Commission’s ruling pursuant to KRS 344.240. The circuit court affirmed the Commission’s ruling and Mountain Clay appeals.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.240(6) — 2 cases
Canamore v. Tube Turns Div. of Chemetron Corp., 676 S.W.2d 800 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).
“230(1) and (2), the time limit for appeal of such order under KRS 344.240 is thirty days. No separate civil action by the same person based on the same grievance may be filed under KRS 344.”
Clifton v. Midway Coll., 702 S.W.2d 835 (Ky. 1986).
“An individual who has charges of discrimination referred by the federal agency to the state agency, but without an order issued by the Kentucky agency, is not precluded by KRS 344.240(6), from pursuing rights under KRS 344.”
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.