Expiration and reissuance.
(1) Following a hearing ordered under KRS 403.730, if a court finds by a
preponderance of the evidence that domestic violence and abuse has occurred and
may again occur, the court may issue a domestic violence order:
(a) Restraining the adverse party from:
1. Committing further acts of domestic violence and abuse;
2. Any unauthorized contact or communication with the petitioner or other
person specified by the court;
3. Approaching the petitioner or other person specified by the court within
a distance specified in the order, not to exceed five hundred (500) feet;
4. Going to or within a specified distance of a specifically described
residence, school, or place of employment or area where such a place is
located; and
5. Disposing of or damaging any of the property of the parties;
(b) Authorizing, at the request of the petitioner:
1. Limited contact or communication between the parties that the court
finds necessary; or
2. The parties to remain in a common area, which may necessitate them
being closer than five hundred (500) feet under limited circumstances
with specific parameters set forth by the court.
Nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to place any restriction or
restraint on the petitioner;
(c) Directing or prohibiting any other actions that the court believes will be of
assistance in eliminating future acts of domestic violence and abuse, except
that the court shall not order the petitioner to take any affirmative action;
(d) Directing that either or both of the parties receive counseling services
available in the community in domestic violence and abuse cases; and
(e) Additionally, if applicable:
1. Directing the adverse party to vacate a residence shared by the parties to
the action;
2. Utilizing the criteria set forth in KRS 403.270, 403.320, and 403.822,
grant temporary custody, subject to KRS 403.315;
3. Utilizing the criteria set forth in KRS 403.211, 403.212, 403.2122, and
403.213, award temporary child support; and
4. Awarding possession of any shared domestic animal to the petitioner.
(2) In imposing a location restriction described in subsection (1)(a)4. of this section, the
court shall:
(a) Afford the petitioner and respondent, if present, an opportunity to testify on
the issue of the locations and areas from which the respondent should or
should not be excluded;
(b) Only impose a location restriction where there is a specific, demonstrable
danger to the petitioner or other person protected by the order;
(c) Specifically describe in the order the locations or areas prohibited to the
respondent; and
(d) Consider structuring a restriction so as to allow the respondent transit through
an area if the respondent does not interrupt his or her travel to harass, harm, or
attempt to harass or harm the petitioner.
(3) When temporary child support is granted under this section, the court shall enter an
order detailing how the child support is to be paid and collected. Child support
ordered under this section may be enforced utilizing the same procedures as any
other child support order.
(4) A domestic violence order shall be effective for a period of time fixed by the court,
not to exceed three (3) years, and may be reissued upon expiration for subsequent
periods of up to three (3) years each. The fact that an order has not been violated
since its issuance may be considered by a court in hearing a request for a reissuance
of the order.
Effective: July 15, 2024
History: Amended 2024 Ky. Acts ch. 219, sec. 7, effective July 15, 2024. -- Amended
2022 Ky. Acts ch. 122, sec. 7, effective July, 14, 2022; ch. 143, sec. 1, effective July
14, 2022; and ch. 158, sec. 2, effective July 14, 2022. -- Amended 2018 Ky. Acts ch.
198, sec. 6, effective July 14, 2018. -- Repealed and reenacted 2015 Ky. Acts ch.
102, sec. 6, effective January 1, 2016. -- Amended 2010 Ky. Acts ch. 170, sec. 2,
effective July 15, 2010. -- Amended 2004 Ky. Acts ch. 133, sec. 44, effective July
13, 2004. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 99, sec. 16, effective July 15, 1996. --
Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 172, sec. 6, effective July 14, 1992. -- Created 1984 Ky.
Acts ch. 152, sec. 6, effective July 13, 1984.
Notes of Decisions
Daugherty v. TELEK (2012)
ky · cites it 54×
“Our construction of that version of KRS 403.740 has little applicability for the issuance of future EPOs and DVOs.”
Guenther v. Guenther (2012)
kyctapp · cites it 13×
“Keith argues that KRS 403.740 imposes a strict fourteen-day window during which a trial court must conduct an EPO hearing or lose its jurisdiction to enter a DVO thereafter.”
Castle v. Castle (2019)
kyctapp · cites it 3×
“KRS 403.740. A DVO may be sought by "a victim of domestic violence and abuse" or by an adult on behalf of a minor qualifying for such relief.”
Walker v. Walker (2017)
kyctapp · cites it 5×
“735(l)(a) becomes all the more persuasive when examining KRS 403.740, which does not exclude prior orders from consideration.”
Wright v. Wright (2005)
kyctapp · cites it 3×
“In his brief, Nathan argues that the family court did not hold a hearing prior to entering the DVO, in violation of KRS 403.740 and 403.745, and made its decision based on its knowledge or belief of events occurring outside of the record.”
Cottrell v. Cottrell (2019)
kyctapp · cites it 3×
“]" KRS 403.740(4) 3 further provides for the reissuance of a DVO as follows: *592 A domestic violence order shall be effective for a period of time fixed by the court, not to exceed three (3) years, and may be reissued upon expiration for subsequent periods of up to three (3)…”
Abdur-Rahman v. Peterson (2011)
kyctapp · cites it 4×
“735, KRS 403.740, KRS 403.745, KRS 403.750 and any other relevant statute.”
Masters v. Masters (2013)
ky · cites it 3×
“[Thus,] while a failure to comply with KRS 403.740 would not have divested the family court of subject matter jurisdiction to enter a DVO, [Appellee] still may be afforded relief from the DVO if its entry after the expiration of the time constraints identified in KRS 403.”
Commonwealth v. Anderson (1996)
ky · cites it 2×
“750(1) discusses court determinations of whether domestic violence has occurred in the context of a petition for an emergency protective order under KRS 403.740. The court in such a proceeding is authorized to act if, following a hearing, “it finds from a prepondei’ance of the…”
Wood v. Commonwealth (2005)
ky · cites it 2×
“See KRS 403.740; KRS 403.750. This distinction, however, does not compel the conclusion that an EPO violation may not serve as the basis for the aggravating circumstance, simply because the EPO is issued ex parte.”
Dunn v. Thacker (2018)
kyctapp
“" KRS 403.740(1). The preponderance of the evidence standard is satisfied when sufficient evidence establishes the alleged victim was more likely than not to have been a victim of domestic violence.”
Jeffrey Pettingill v. Sara Yount Pettingill (2015)
ky
“A court may issue a DVO if, “Hollowing the hearing provided , for under KRS 403.740 and 403.745, [it] , finds from a preponderance of -the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse [has] occurred and may again occurKRS 403.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1) — 65 cases
Daugherty v. TELEK (2012)
ky
“Our construction of that version of KRS 403.740 has little applicability for the issuance of future EPOs and DVOs.”
Castle v. Castle (2019)
kyctapp
“KRS 403.740. A DVO may be sought by "a victim of domestic violence and abuse" or by an adult on behalf of a minor qualifying for such relief.”
Walker v. Walker (2017)
kyctapp
“735(l)(a) becomes all the more persuasive when examining KRS 403.740, which does not exclude prior orders from consideration.”
Dunn v. Thacker (2018)
kyctapp
“" KRS 403.740(1). The preponderance of the evidence standard is satisfied when sufficient evidence establishes the alleged victim was more likely than not to have been a victim of domestic violence.”
Wright v. Wright (2005)
kyctapp
“In his brief, Nathan argues that the family court did not hold a hearing prior to entering the DVO, in violation of KRS 403.740 and 403.745, and made its decision based on its knowledge or belief of events occurring outside of the record.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a) — 4 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a)(1) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a)(2) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a)(3) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a)(4) — 2 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(a)(5) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(b) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(c) — 3 cases
Daugherty v. TELEK (2012)
ky
“Our construction of that version of KRS 403.740 has little applicability for the issuance of future EPOs and DVOs.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(d)(2) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(1)(e) — 3 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(2) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(2)(b) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(2)(d) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(4) — 13 cases
Daugherty v. TELEK (2012)
ky
“Our construction of that version of KRS 403.740 has little applicability for the issuance of future EPOs and DVOs.”
Cottrell v. Cottrell (2019)
kyctapp
“]" KRS 403.740(4) 3 further provides for the reissuance of a DVO as follows: *592 A domestic violence order shall be effective for a period of time fixed by the court, not to exceed three (3) years, and may be reissued upon expiration for subsequent periods of up to three (3)…”
Guenther v. Guenther (2012)
kyctapp
“Keith argues that KRS 403.740 imposes a strict fourteen-day window during which a trial court must conduct an EPO hearing or lose its jurisdiction to enter a DVO thereafter.”
Wood v. Commonwealth (2005)
ky
“See KRS 403.740; KRS 403.750. This distinction, however, does not compel the conclusion that an EPO violation may not serve as the basis for the aggravating circumstance, simply because the EPO is issued ex parte.”
Masters v. Masters (2013)
ky
“[Thus,] while a failure to comply with KRS 403.740 would not have divested the family court of subject matter jurisdiction to enter a DVO, [Appellee] still may be afforded relief from the DVO if its entry after the expiration of the time constraints identified in KRS 403.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(l)(c) — 1 case
Daugherty v. TELEK (2012)
ky
“Our construction of that version of KRS 403.740 has little applicability for the issuance of future EPOs and DVOs.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.740(l)(f) — 1 case
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.