policy -- Prisoner's status not employment.
(1) (a) As used in this section, "community-service-related project" means a project involving work for:
1. The Commonwealth or an agency of the Commonwealth;
2. A county, urban-county, charter county, city, special district, or an agency of any of these entities; or
3. A nonprofit, charitable, or service organization in projects that serve a public purpose.
(b) Work on a community-service-related project shall not confer private benefit on a person except as may be incidental to the public benefit.
(2) Each jailer shall write a policy governing prisoners working on community-service- related projects, which shall be submitted to the fiscal court for approval. The written policy shall state at a minimum:
(a) Which type of prisoner, if any, shall be assigned to which type of work, taking into account the physical and mental abilities of prisoners and security of the jail and the general public;
(b) That no prisoner shall be assigned to unduly hazardous work that would endanger the life or health of the prisoner or others; and
(c) That any prisoner may, for a valid medical reason, decline to work on community-service-related projects. No prisoner shall be punished or otherwise penalized for this refusal.
(3) A prisoner shall not begin work on a particular community-service-related project without the approval of the director of the relevant entity referred to in subsection (1)(a) of this section, or the director's designee.
(4) Participation in community-service-related projects shall not be deemed employment for any purpose, and a prisoner shall not be deemed an employee or agent of the entity for which he or she performs the community service work. Effective: July 14, 2018 History: Amended 2018 Ky. Acts ch. 103, sec. 1, effective July 14, 2018. -- Amended 2000 Ky. Acts ch. 384, sec. 1, effective July 14, 2000. -- Created 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 428, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1982. Formerly codified as KRS 441.068.
Notes of Decisions
Rowan Cnty. v. Sloas, 201 S.W.3d 469 (Ky. 2006).
· cites it 26× “Here, in reversing the trial court's summary judgment, the Court of Appeals asserted "there are genuine issues of material fact with regard to whether Sloas' statutory rights [under KRS 441.125] were violated in a manner that would tend to show `bad faith' on the part of Hall…”
Rayburn v. Blue, 154 F. Supp. 3d 523 (W.D. Ky. 2015).
· cites it 2× “State-Law Claims To the extent that - Plaintiff has alleged state law claims under Ky. Rev. Stat. § 441.125, the .Court will allow them to go forward-against all Defendants.”
Commonwealth v. Russell, 578 S.W.3d 747 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).
“Finally, given our resolution of the issues set out above, we find no reversible error in the circuit court's conclusion that KRS 441.125(2)(b) is applicable under the facts of this case.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 441.125(2) — 1 case
Rowan Cnty. v. Sloas, 201 S.W.3d 469 (Ky. 2006).
“Here, in reversing the trial court's summary judgment, the Court of Appeals asserted "there are genuine issues of material fact with regard to whether Sloas' statutory rights [under KRS 441.125] were violated in a manner that would tend to show `bad faith' on the part of Hall…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 441.125(2)(6) — 1 case
Rowan Cnty. v. Sloas, 201 S.W.3d 469 (Ky. 2006).
“Here, in reversing the trial court's summary judgment, the Court of Appeals asserted "there are genuine issues of material fact with regard to whether Sloas' statutory rights [under KRS 441.125] were violated in a manner that would tend to show `bad faith' on the part of Hall…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 441.125(2)(b) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Russell, 578 S.W.3d 747 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).
“Finally, given our resolution of the issues set out above, we find no reversible error in the circuit court's conclusion that KRS 441.125(2)(b) is applicable under the facts of this case.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 441.125(3) — 1 case
Rowan Cnty. v. Sloas, 201 S.W.3d 469 (Ky. 2006).
“Here, in reversing the trial court's summary judgment, the Court of Appeals asserted "there are genuine issues of material fact with regard to whether Sloas' statutory rights [under KRS 441.125] were violated in a manner that would tend to show `bad faith' on the part of Hall…”
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.