Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 403
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750 (2026)

Order of protection for family member or member of unmarried couple

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

upon filing of petition or action under KRS Chapter 403. (1) Any family member or any member of an unmarried couple may file for and receive protection under this chapter from domestic violence and abuse, notwithstanding the existence of or intent to file an action under this chapter by either party. (2) (a) Any family member or member of an unmarried couple who files a petition for an order of protection based upon domestic violence or abuse shall make known to the court any custody or divorce actions involving both the petitioner and the respondent that are pending in any court. (b) If the petitioner or respondent to an order of protection initiates an action under this chapter, the party initiating the action shall make known to the court the existence and status of any orders of protection, which shall remain effective and enforceable until superseded by order of the court in which the case is filed. (3) If a family member or member of an unmarried couple files an action for dissolution of marriage, child custody, or visitation, the court hearing the case shall have jurisdiction to issue an order of protection upon the filing of a verified motion either at the commencement or during the pendency of the action. Effective: January 1, 2016 History: Repealed and reenacted 2015 Ky. Acts ch. 102, sec. 8, effective January 1, 2016. -- Amended 2010 Ky. Acts ch. 170, sec. 5, effective July 15, 2010. -- Amended 2004 Ky. Acts ch. 133, sec. 45, effective July 13, 2004. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 99, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1996. -- Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 172, sec. 8, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1990 Ky. Acts ch. 418, sec. 6, effective July 13, 1990. -- Created 1984 Ky. Acts ch. 152, sec. 8, effective July 13, 1984.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 20× “" Further, in interpreting the applicable statute, the circuit court stated that "[a] reasonable inference is that reissuance of a domestic violence order, the same as original issuance of such an order, must be predicated on the findings required by KRS 403.750(1)." Following…”
Abdur-Rahman v. Peterson, 338 S.W.3d 823 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 14× “[3] Moreover, KRS 403.750 permits the trial court to extend the protection of a DVO to a minor child of the petitioner if it finds from a preponderance of the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur.”
Kessler v. Switzer, 289 S.W.3d 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 15× “If it is true that KRS 403.750 limits the evidence to be considered by the trial court in extending a DVO to testimony before the court that domestic violence or abuse has not occurred, how is it that Switzer was able to submit an affidavit alleging additional domestic violence?…”
Baird v. Baird, 234 S.W.3d 385 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “Subsection (2) of KRS 403.750 authorizes the reissuance of a DVO, and provides: Any order entered pursuant to this section 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 an additional period of…”
Jeffrey Pettingill v. Sara Yount Pettingill, 480 S.W.3d 920 (Ky. 2015). · cites it 3× “Jeffrey asserts that KRS 403.750. and 403.720 make up the proper standard.”
Holt v. Holt, 458 S.W.3d 806 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “[[Image here]] (7) During any hearing in Circuit Court on dissolution of marriage, child custody, or visitation, at which both parties are present or represented by counsel, the Circuit Judge shall have the authority to issue a protective order pursuant to KRS 403.750 to…”
Commonwealth v. Burge, 947 S.W.2d 805 (Ky. 1997). · cites it 2× “OPINION OF THE COURT We have consolidated these appeals because they present the common issue of whether a finding of criminal contempt for violation of a domestic violence order [hereinafter DVO], issued pursuant to KRS 403.750, or for violation of a restraining order issued in…”
Gibson v. Campbell-Marletta, 503 S.W.3d 186 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Michael next argues that Shelby was required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur under KRS 403.750. In support of this, Michael argues that he was in Louisville on the day of the…”
Gomez v. Gomez, 254 S.W.3d 838 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “*842 Before issuing a domestic violence order, the trial court must first conduct a hearing and find by a preponderance of the evidence “that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur-” KRS 403.750(1). The preponderance of the evidence…”
Rupp v. Rupp, 357 S.W.3d 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “]” KRS 403.750(1). The preponderance of the evidence standard requires sufficient evidence to establish “that the alleged victim ‘was more likely than not to have been a victim of domestic violence.”
Benson v. Lively, 544 S.W.3d 159 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “Accordingly, the Court held that "there must be, at a minimum, proof that *165 the petitioner seeking a DVO shares or has shared living quarters with the respondent before a finding can be made that the two are an 'unmarried couple' under [ KRS 403.750 ]." 5 Id. at 20-21 .…”
Commonwealth v. Anderson, 934 S.W.2d 276 (Ky. 1996). · cites it 2× “KRS 403.750(1) discusses court determinations of whether domestic violence has occurred in the context of a petition for an emergency protective order under KRS 403.”
Show all 61 citing cases →
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(1) — 40 cases
Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “" Further, in interpreting the applicable statute, the circuit court stated that "[a] reasonable inference is that reissuance of a domestic violence order, the same as original issuance of such an order, must be predicated on the findings required by KRS 403.750(1)." Following…”
Gomez v. Gomez, 254 S.W.3d 838 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*842 Before issuing a domestic violence order, the trial court must first conduct a hearing and find by a preponderance of the evidence “that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur-” KRS 403.750(1). The preponderance of the evidence…”
Holt v. Holt, 458 S.W.3d 806 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “[[Image here]] (7) During any hearing in Circuit Court on dissolution of marriage, child custody, or visitation, at which both parties are present or represented by counsel, the Circuit Judge shall have the authority to issue a protective order pursuant to KRS 403.750 to…”
Commonwealth v. Anderson, 934 S.W.2d 276 (Ky. 1996). “KRS 403.750(1) discusses court determinations of whether domestic violence has occurred in the context of a petition for an emergency protective order under KRS 403.”
Caudill v. Caudill, 318 S.W.3d 112 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(1)(a) — 2 cases
Kessler v. Switzer, 289 S.W.3d 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). “If it is true that KRS 403.750 limits the evidence to be considered by the trial court in extending a DVO to testimony before the court that domestic violence or abuse has not occurred, how is it that Switzer was able to submit an affidavit alleging additional domestic violence?…”
Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “" Further, in interpreting the applicable statute, the circuit court stated that "[a] reasonable inference is that reissuance of a domestic violence order, the same as original issuance of such an order, must be predicated on the findings required by KRS 403.750(1)." Following…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(1)(d) — 1 case
Abdur-Rahman v. Peterson, 338 S.W.3d 823 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). “[3] Moreover, KRS 403.750 permits the trial court to extend the protection of a DVO to a minor child of the petitioner if it finds from a preponderance of the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(1)(e) — 1 case
Thompson v. Thompson, 172 S.W.3d 379 (Ky. 2005).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(1)(f) — 1 case
Thompson v. Thompson, 172 S.W.3d 379 (Ky. 2005).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(2) — 8 cases
Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “" Further, in interpreting the applicable statute, the circuit court stated that "[a] reasonable inference is that reissuance of a domestic violence order, the same as original issuance of such an order, must be predicated on the findings required by KRS 403.750(1)." Following…”
Kessler v. Switzer, 289 S.W.3d 228 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). “If it is true that KRS 403.750 limits the evidence to be considered by the trial court in extending a DVO to testimony before the court that domestic violence or abuse has not occurred, how is it that Switzer was able to submit an affidavit alleging additional domestic violence?…”
Baird v. Baird, 234 S.W.3d 385 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007). “Subsection (2) of KRS 403.750 authorizes the reissuance of a DVO, and provides: Any order entered pursuant to this section 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 an additional period of…”
Rupp v. Rupp, 357 S.W.3d 207 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). “]” KRS 403.750(1). The preponderance of the evidence standard requires sufficient evidence to establish “that the alleged victim ‘was more likely than not to have been a victim of domestic violence.”
Cottrell v. Cottrell, 571 S.W.3d 590 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(2)(a) — 1 case
Robert D. Jones v. Kelli Lynne Schmidt (Ky. Ct. App. 2022).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(3) — 4 cases
Abdur-Rahman v. Peterson, 338 S.W.3d 823 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). “[3] Moreover, KRS 403.750 permits the trial court to extend the protection of a DVO to a minor child of the petitioner if it finds from a preponderance of the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur.”
Erwin v. Cruz, 423 S.W.3d 234 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).
Stinson v. Stinson, 381 S.W.3d 333 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
Nathan Brooks v. C.J., a Minor Child (Ky. Ct. App. 2026).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(l)(a) — 1 case
Kingrey v. Whitlow, 150 S.W.3d 67 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “" Further, in interpreting the applicable statute, the circuit court stated that "[a] reasonable inference is that reissuance of a domestic violence order, the same as original issuance of such an order, must be predicated on the findings required by KRS 403.750(1)." Following…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(l)(d) — 2 cases
Abdur-Rahman v. Peterson, 338 S.W.3d 823 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011). “[3] Moreover, KRS 403.750 permits the trial court to extend the protection of a DVO to a minor child of the petitioner if it finds from a preponderance of the evidence that an act or acts of domestic violence and abuse have occurred and may again occur.”
Copas v. Copas, 699 S.W.2d 758 (Ky. Ct. App. 1985).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(l)(e) — 1 case
Thompson v. Thompson, 172 S.W.3d 379 (Ky. 2005).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(l)(f) — 1 case
Thompson v. Thompson, 172 S.W.3d 379 (Ky. 2005).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 403.750(l)(h) — 1 case
Manning v. Willett, 221 S.W.3d 394 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).
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.