Request By:
Mr. Thomas C. Smith
Taliaferro, Smith, Wolnitzek & Schachter
Suite 400
General Savings Building
1 West Sixth Street
Covington, Kentucky 41011
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By William S. Riley, Assistant Attorney General
In your recent letter to the Attorney General, it is stated that you represent a Japanese citizen who is presently in the United States for business purposes but has not delcared his intention to States for business purposes but has not declared his intention to become a United States citizen. He recently purchased real property in Kentucky which he uses as his place of residence. KRS 381.300(1) provides as follows:
"Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the real estate of an alien may be escheated to the state at anytime after the expiration of eight years after the time he acquires title thereto."
"Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the real estate of an alien may be escheated to the state at anytime after the expiration of eight years after the time he acquires title thereto."
It is pointed out that KRS 381.320 seems to modify this statute to some extent. That statute provides that any alien who is not an enemy may take and hold personal property except chattels real. If such alien resides within this state he may take and hold any lands for the purposes of residence, or of occupation by him or his servants, or for the purpose of any business, trade, or manufacture, for a term not exceeding twenty-one (21) years. An alien so taking and holding shall have like rights, remedies and exemptions concerning such property as if he were a citizen of the United States.
The question is whether the above statutes are constitutional and whether they will be enforced by the state. As to the consitutionality of the statutes see Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney General v. Tamer, 293 Ky. 357, 169 S.W.2d 19 (1942) where the court said that a board of education of the school district in which property owned by an alien is situated may institute an action in the name of the Commonwealth to escheat the property. If the board has authorized the action, it is proper for the action to be brought by the Attorney General as relator.
As to the enforcibility of the statutes see OAG 76-332 which points out that there is no automatic reversion to the state. An action would be required to be filed in circuit court to escheat real property of an alien to the Commonwealth.
We are unaware at this time of any policy to file such actions by the Attorney General's office.