Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 411.180 (2026)

Actions against joint obligors -- Death of joint obligors -- Effect of

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

judgment against some. If two (2) or more persons be jointly bound by contract, the action thereon may be brought against all or any of them, at the plaintiff's option. If any of the persons so bound be dead, the action may be brought against any or all of the survivors with the representatives of all or any of the decedents, or against the latter or any of them. If all the persons so bound be dead, the action may be brought against the representatives of all or any of them. An action or judgment against any one (1) or more of several persons jointly bound shall not be a bar to proceedings against the others. Effective: July 1, 1953 History: Transferred 1952 Ky. Acts ch. 84, sec. 1, effective July 1, 1953, from C.C. sec. 27.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Robertson v. Vinson, 58 S.W.3d 432 (Ky. 2001).
Robertson v. Vinson, 58 S.W.3d 432 (Ky. 2001). “Hence, the UM carrier stands in the wrongdoer’s shoes for purposes of paying damages under KRS 411.180. The wrongful death statute provides that when “the death of a person results from an injury inflicted by the negligence or wrongful act of another, damages may be recovered…”
Steel Tech., Inc. v. Congleton, 234 S.W.3d 920 (Ky. 2007). “” KRS 411.180. Gross negligence requires “a finding of failure to exercise reasonable care, and then an additional finding that this negligence was accompanied by ‘wanton or reckless disregard for the lives, safety or property of others.”
Stith Funeral Home of Danville Inc. v. Raul Kazee (Ky. Ct. App. 2021). “Under its theory of joint and several liability under the promissory note, Stith had the option in the circuit court to seek relief only from Kazee pursuant to KRS 411.180; but, once it sought relief from both Kazee and Holder in the circuit court under a joint and several…”
Nikola Jajic v. Jennifer Sainato (Ky. Ct. App. 2025). “1 determined that Jajic was the lone tortfeasor and Sainato was the victim of the battery.10 After this determination, no fault could legally be apportioned to Sainato because she was not a tortfeasor.”
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.