Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 96.260 (2026)

Powers of board

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The board of waterworks shall be vested with all the authority and privileges, exercise all the franchises, and have possession, control, and management of all the property, of the corporation of which the consolidated local government or city owns all the stock. It may make contracts and sue and be sued, but only in the name of the corporation. Effective: July 15, 2002 History: Amended 2002 Ky. Acts ch. 346, sec. 110, effective July 15, 2002. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 3024a-5.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1946–2005 · leading case: Phelps v. Louisville Water Co., 103 S.W.3d 46 (Ky. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Phelps v. Louisville Water Co., 103 S.W.3d 46 (Ky. 2003). · cites it 2× “260 vests the Board of Waterworks with the control and management of the LWC and its properties: The board of waterworks shall be vested with all the authority and privileges, exercise all the franchises, and have possession, control, and management of all the property, of the…”

Louisville Metro Hous. Auth. v. Burns Ex Rel. Burns, 198 S.W.3d 147 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005). “This statute stands in stark contrast to KRS 96.260 which, after vesting in the board of waterworks all authority and privileges to “exercise all the franchises, and have possession, control, and management of all the property, of the corporation of which the consolidated local…”

Veail v. Louisville & Jefferson Cnty. Metro. Sewer Dist., 197 S.W.2d 413 (Ky. Ct. App. 1946). “’ ’ KRS 96.260. That Act further provides that the commission operating the water plant may charge the users of water for such use.”

Barber v. City of Louisville, 777 S.W.2d 919 (Ky. 1989). “In support of this argument, the City cites KRS 96.260 as giving the Louisville Water Company corporate powers and enabling it to sue and be sued.”

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.