judgment or report -- Certification of reason when delay occurs.
(1) Every Circuit and District Judge shall, when at all possible, issue a written
judgment or order in all civil actions which have been submitted for final
adjudication within ninety (90) days from the date the action was taken under
submission.
(2) Where a report, findings, or recommendations of a commissioner or hearing officer
are required by statute or rule as a prerequisite to an order or judgment by the
Circuit or District Court the same shall be filed within ninety (90) days of the
conclusion of the trial or hearing at which the commissioner or hearing officer
presided.
(3) Every Circuit and District Judge shall at the end of every month certify in writing to
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court all cases which have been submitted for
final adjudication for longer than ninety (90) days and have not been adjudicated
and certify in writing to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court the reason for the
delay.
(4) Any District or Circuit Judge who knowingly violates any of the provisions of this
section shall be subject to removal by the Judicial Retirement and Removal
Commission.
History: Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 11, sec. 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1983–2008 · leading case: Dubick v. Dubick, 653 S.W.2d 652 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983).
Dubick v. Dubick, 653 S.W.2d 652 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 3דBy what we say here we mean that if KRS 454.350 is violated, any late judgment or report is not void because of tardiness.”
Thomas v. Thomas, 248 S.W.3d 564 (Ky. 2008). · cites it 4דAnalysis The ultimate issue is what effect KRS 454.350 has on the validity of the filing of the DRC’s recommendations more than ninety days subsequent to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing.”
Ratliff v. Phillips, 746 S.W.2d 405 (Ky. 1988). “Dubick, supra, construing KRS 454.350. While that statute differs from the statute before us now, the reasoning of the Court in arriving at its decision is sound.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 454.350(2) — 1 case
Dubick v. Dubick, 653 S.W.2d 652 (Ky. Ct. App. 1983). “By what we say here we mean that if KRS 454.350 is violated, any late judgment or report is not void because of tardiness.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 454.350(4) — 1 case
Thomas v. Thomas, 248 S.W.3d 564 (Ky. 2008). “Analysis The ultimate issue is what effect KRS 454.350 has on the validity of the filing of the DRC’s recommendations more than ninety days subsequent to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing.”
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.