Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 422
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 422.150 (2026)

Repealed, effective July 1, 1992

✓ 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: Testimony taken at trial -- Use at subsequent trial. History: Repealed 1990 Ky. Acts ch. 88, secs. 92 and 93, effective July 1, 1992. -- Amended 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 14, sec. 424, effective January 2, 1978. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. secs. 1019a-6, 4643, 4645a-5. Note: Repeal of this section became effective July 1, 1992, in compliance with 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 324, secs. 30 and 33.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1942–2000 · leading case: Ruppee v. Commonwealth, 821 S.W.2d 484 (Ky. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ruppee v. Commonwealth, 821 S.W.2d 484 (Ky. 1991). · cites it 2× “KRS 422.150 provides: The testimony of any witness taken by a stenographic reporter may, in the discretion of the court in which it is taken, be used as evidence in any subsequent trial of the same issue between the same parties, where the testimony of such witness cannot be…”
Wells v. Commonwealth, 562 S.W.2d 622 (Ky. 1978). · cites it 2× “At the second trial, when she claimed the veil of privilege as his wife, the trial court, over objection of counsel for Morris, permitted the Commonwealth to read into the evidence her testimony given at the first trial.”
Hodge v. Commonwealth, 17 S.W.3d 824 (Ky. 2000). “Appellant relies on former KRS 422.150, which was repealed contemporaneously with the adoption of the Kentucky Rules of Evidence, 3 and which provided: The testimony of any witness taken by a stenographic reporter may, in the discretion of the court in which it is taken, be used…”
Commonwealth v. Bugg, 514 S.W.2d 119 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 4× “Testimony of the witness was crucial to the Commonwealth’s side of the case, but the trial court ruled that the testimony could not be used as evidence-in-chief in behalf of the Commonwealth, and cited KRS 422.150 and RCr 7.22 in support of its ruling.”
Noe v. Commonwealth, 396 S.W.2d 808 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “22 and KRS 422.150 the rule prevails. At the same time the defendant’s right of discovery and inspection was amplified considerably by new RCr 7.”
Croley v. Huddleston, 202 S.W.2d 637 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). · cites it 2× “Richardson on June 8th to appear in court on June 11th to testify in his behalf; that the Doctor was in court on the first day of the trial and promised appellee to return to court the next day, but he failed to do so; that appellee had the sheriff and several other people…”
Louisville Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Johnson, 224 S.W.2d 639 (Ky. Ct. App. 1949). “med doctors; that he had been advised that Doctor Schweitzer was out of the jurisdiction of the court being somewhere in the state of West Virginia but the exact location could not be learned; that Doctor Crawford was out of the jurisdiction of the court having located somewhere…”
Alexander v. Commonwealth, 463 S.W.2d 334 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971). “The strictures of KRS 422.150 and RCr 7.20 and 7.22 are not applicable, because the recording was introduced not for the purpose of proving the truth of what was said, but only to prove that it was said, rebutting Alexander’s suggestion that it had not been said.”
Letcher Cnty. Coal & Improvement Co. v. Marlowe, 398 S.W.2d 870 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “It was started about three months after the mineral rights under said surface, and now claimed by appellant, had been severed and conveyed to appellant’s predecessor in title.”
Callihan v. Luster, 305 S.W.2d 530 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957). “The lower court undoubtedly relied upon KRS 422.150 in disposing of the motion. This statute reads: “The testimony of any witness taken by a stenographic reporter pursuant to KRS 28.”
Armstrong v. McGuire, 317 S.W.2d 902 (Ky. Ct. App. 1958). · cites it 2× “The ruling of the trial court in this respect did not disregard the provisions of KRS 422.150 and CR 80, as contended by appellants.”
Coca Cola Bottling Works of Lexington v. Seale, 185 S.W.2d 685 (Ky. Ct. App. 1945). “KRS 422.150 reads as follows: “The testimony of any witness taken by a stenographic reporter pursuant to KRS 28.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.