Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 64
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 64.710 (2026)

Expense accounts and contingent funds prohibited -- Exceptions

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No public officer or employee shall receive or be allowed or paid any lump sum expense allowance, or contingent fund for personal or official expenses, except where such allowance or fund either is expressly provided for by statute or is specifically appropriated by the General Assembly. History: Created 1950 Ky. Acts ch. 123, sec. 30.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1955–1974 · leading case: Bd. of Educ. of Graves Cnty. v. De Weese, 343 S.W.2d 598 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bd. of Educ. of Graves Cnty. v. De Weese, 343 S.W.2d 598 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961). · cites it 4× “KRS 64.710 provides: "No public officer or employe shall receive or be allowed or paid any lump sum expense allowance, or contingent fund for personal or official expenses, except where such allowance or fund either is expressly provided for by statute or is specifically…”
Matthews v. Ward, 350 S.W.2d 500 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961). · cites it 2× “KRS 64.710 provides as follows: “No public officer or employe shall receive or be allowed or paid any lump sum expense allowance, or contingent fund for personal or official expenses, except where such allowance or fund either is expressly provided for by statute or is…”
Smith v. Campbell, 286 S.W.2d 532 (Ky. Ct. App. 1955). · cites it 2× “In 1950 the General Assembly enacted KRS 64.710, which provides: “No public officer or employe shall receive or be allowed or paid any lump sum expense allowance, or contingent fund for personal or official expenses, except where such allowance or fund either is expressly…”
Funk v. Milliken, 317 S.W.2d 499 (Ky. Ct. App. 1958). “” This does not mean a lump sum, blanket allowance, because KRS 64.710 prohibits such allowances except where expressly provided for by .”
Glass v. Van Zant, 307 S.W.2d 175 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957). “Moreover, the order appealed from only requires the parties in the future to conform to the statute which prohibits the payment to any public officer or employee of lump sum expense allowances, KRS 64.710, and the statute which requires that all persons in filing claims against…”
Hall v. Noplis, 367 S.W.2d 456 (Ky. Ct. App. 1963). “In 1950, however, a statute (KRS 64.710) had been enacted barring lump sum expense payments.”
Burchett v. Leslie, 311 S.W.2d 551 (Ky. Ct. App. 1957). “It appears that early in April 1953, in violation of KRS 64.710 and 67.080, and contrary to a prior ruling of the court in this proceeding, the fiscal court allowed Burchett substantial claims for lump sum expenses allegedly incurred by him in past years.”
McWhorter v. City of Richmond, 514 S.W.2d 678 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974). “” KRS 64.710. The judgment is affirmed. All concur except REED, J.”
Fleischer v. Jefferson Cnty., 390 S.W.2d 895 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “The General Assembly of Kentucky, in 1950, enacted KRS 64.710, which was interpreted, perhaps incorrectly, by the county attorney of Jefferson County to authorize the Jefferson Fiscal Court to discontinue these monthly payments to the appellants.”
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.