Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 355
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102 (2026)

Scope of article

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

This article applies to a transaction to the extent that it is governed by another article of the Uniform Commercial Code. Effective: July 12, 2006 History: Repealed and reenacted 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 242, sec. 2, effective July 12, 2006. -- Created 1958 Ky. Acts ch. 77, sec. 1-102, effective July 1, 1960.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1964–2022 · leading case: A & a Mech., Inc. v. Thermal Equip. Sales, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 505 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
A & a Mech., Inc. v. Thermal Equip. Sales, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 505 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “KRS 355.1-102; KRS 355.1-203. Parties wishing to disclaim UCC provisions may, to a limited extent, do so, but deviations from the Code and from the presumptions underlying it should be clearly expressed.”
J.S. v. Berla, 456 S.W.3d 19 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “” The problem with the father’s argument is that he ignores an earlier section within KRS Chapter 355, Article 1: “This article [Uniform Commercial Code— General Provisions] applies to a transaction to the extent that it is governed by another article of the Uniform Commercial…”
Riley v. Miller, 549 S.W.2d 314 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 2× “9-402(1) & (6) in conjunction with KRS 355.1-102. KRS 355.9-402(1) and (6) provide as follows: (1) A financing statement is sufficient if it is signed by the debtor and the secured party, gives an address of the secured party from which information concerning the security…”
Banque Worms v. Davis Const. Co., Inc., 831 S.W.2d 921 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “Appellant argues, however, that KRS 355.1-102 requires us to construe the provisions of the code liberally and in a manner which promotes its underlying policies and purposes, including those of protecting secured creditors from unauthorized transfers of collateral and providing…”
Kentucky Utils. Co. v. South East Coal Co., 836 S.W.2d 392 (Ky. 1992). · cites it 2× “KRS 355.1-102(3). [1] The coal supply agreement provides for the risk allocation agreed to by the parties.”
Ditch Witch Trenching Co. of Kentucky v. C & S Carpentry Servs., Inc., 812 S.W.2d 171 (Ky. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “" The court in *173 Horn relied in part on § 1-102 of the code identical to that found in our act at KRS 355.1-102, which provides: (1) This Chapter shall be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies.”
Hertz Com. Leasing Corp. v. Joseph, 641 S.W.2d 753 (Ky. Ct. App. 1982). “KRS 355.1-102. In order to bring that uniformity to the law governing lease agreements, we now hold that the Uniform Commercial Code is applicable to such transactions.”
Foley v. Prod. Credit Ass'n of Fourth Dist., 753 S.W.2d 876 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “That section and its subparts provide that a person with voidable title has power to transfer a good title to a good faith purchaser for value.”
Nat'l Cash Register Co. v. K. W. C., Inc., 432 F. Supp. 82 (E.D. Ky. 1977). “355 are set out in KRS 355.1-102(2) which provides: (2) Underlying purposes and policies of this chapter are (a) to simplify, clarify and modernize the law governing commercial transactions; (b) to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and…”
Star Bank, Kenton Cnty., Inc. v. Parnell, 992 S.W.2d 189 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998). “KRS 355.1-102(2)(c). In Fulton v. Anchor Savings Bank, FSB, 215 Ga.”
First Bancorp, Inc. v. United States, 945 F. Supp. 2d 802 (W.D. Ky. 2013). · cites it 2× “22, 2011) (recognizing that because the purpose of the UCC is uniformity, “non-Kentucky cases which interpret parallel UCC provisions are also persuasive”).”
Alloway v. Stuart, 385 S.W.2d 41 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964). “KRS 355.1-102 provides that the Commercial Code be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies, among them being: “to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and agreement of the parties.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102(1): 3 cases
Banque Worms v. Davis Const. Co., Inc., 831 S.W.2d 921 (Ky. Ct. App. 1992). “Appellant argues, however, that KRS 355.1-102 requires us to construe the provisions of the code liberally and in a manner which promotes its underlying policies and purposes, including those of protecting secured creditors from unauthorized transfers of collateral and providing…”
Foley v. Prod. Credit Ass'n of Fourth Dist., 753 S.W.2d 876 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). “That section and its subparts provide that a person with voidable title has power to transfer a good title to a good faith purchaser for value.”
In Re Grieb Printing Co., 230 B.R. 539 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1999).
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102(2): 1 case
Nat'l Cash Register Co. v. K. W. C., Inc., 432 F. Supp. 82 (E.D. Ky. 1977). “355 are set out in KRS 355.1-102(2) which provides: (2) Underlying purposes and policies of this chapter are (a) to simplify, clarify and modernize the law governing commercial transactions; (b) to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and…”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102(2)(a): 1 case
Foley v. Prod. Credit Ass'n of Fourth Dist., 753 S.W.2d 876 (Ky. Ct. App. 1988). “That section and its subparts provide that a person with voidable title has power to transfer a good title to a good faith purchaser for value.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102(2)(c): 3 cases
A & a Mech., Inc. v. Thermal Equip. Sales, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 505 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999). “KRS 355.1-102; KRS 355.1-203. Parties wishing to disclaim UCC provisions may, to a limited extent, do so, but deviations from the Code and from the presumptions underlying it should be clearly expressed.”
Star Bank, Kenton Cnty., Inc. v. Parnell, 992 S.W.2d 189 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998). “KRS 355.1-102(2)(c). In Fulton v. Anchor Savings Bank, FSB, 215 Ga.”
First Bancorp, Inc. v. United States, 945 F. Supp. 2d 802 (W.D. Ky. 2013). “22, 2011) (recognizing that because the purpose of the UCC is uniformity, “non-Kentucky cases which interpret parallel UCC provisions are also persuasive”).”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 355.1-102(3): 2 cases
A & a Mech., Inc. v. Thermal Equip. Sales, Inc., 998 S.W.2d 505 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999). “KRS 355.1-102; KRS 355.1-203. Parties wishing to disclaim UCC provisions may, to a limited extent, do so, but deviations from the Code and from the presumptions underlying it should be clearly expressed.”
Kentucky Utils. Co. v. South East Coal Co., 836 S.W.2d 392 (Ky. 1992). “KRS 355.1-102(3). [1] The coal supply agreement provides for the risk allocation agreed to by the parties.”
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.