Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 394
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 394.380 (2026)

Repealed, 1972

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

Catchline at repeal: Pretermitted child -- Provisions concerning. History: Repealed 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 168, sec. 17. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 4847, 4848.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1953–1962 · leading case: Mann Ex Rel. Elliott v. Peoples-Liberty Bank & Trust Co., 256 S.W.2d 489 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mann Ex Rel. Elliott v. Peoples-Liberty Bank & Trust Co., 256 S.W.2d 489 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953). · cites it 5× “, is a preter-mitted child who, under the provisions of KRS 394.380(2), shall succeed to the portion of -his father’s estate “that he would *492 have been entitled to- if the testator had died intestate; toward Raising which portion the devisees and legatees shall, out of what…”
Schultz v. Schultz, 332 S.W.2d 253 (Ky. Ct. App. 1959). “A declaratory judgment was rendered on November 22, 1941, that Ann Schultz, then three years of age, was not entitled as a pretermitted child (KRS 394.380) to any interest in the estate of Jacob Schultz, deceased, who had devised his entire estate to his widow.”
Schultz v. Schultz, 361 S.W.2d 107 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962). “-110 seeking to set aside a judgment rendered on November 22, 1941, which declared that she was not entitled as a pretermitted child (KRS 394.380) to any interest in her foster father’s estate.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 394.380(2) — 1 case
Mann Ex Rel. Elliott v. Peoples-Liberty Bank & Trust Co., 256 S.W.2d 489 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953). “, is a preter-mitted child who, under the provisions of KRS 394.380(2), shall succeed to the portion of -his father’s estate “that he would *492 have been entitled to- if the testator had died intestate; toward Raising which portion the devisees and legatees shall, out of what…”
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.