Request By:
Mr. James S. Secrest
Allen County Attorney
Box 35
Scottsville, Kentucky 42164
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
You present a jurisdictional problem relating to the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement Act found in KRS Chapter 407. Your question is as follows: "Does the district court have jurisdiction in URESA actions where there is an attempt to enforce support arrearage in excess of $ 1,500, notwithstanding the provisions of KRS 24A.120?" The answer is "yes".
KRS 407.100(4) defines "court", concerning the court of jurisdiction, as the circuit or district court of Kentucky, whether as the initiating or responding court. That definition suggests that there is a concurrent jurisdiction on the part of the district and circuit courts in such support actions.
However, KRS 24A.120(1)(a) provides that the district court has exclusive jurisdiction in civil cases in which the amount in controversy does not exceed one thousand and five hundred dollars ($ 1,500), exclusive of interest and costs, except matters affecting title to real estate and matters of equity, and matters involving probate, etc.
Dispositive of this question is KRS 407.170, which provides in part that "Jurisdiction of all proceedings hereunder shall be vested in the circuit or district court. " (Emphasis added). This is a classic statement of concurrent jurisdiction. It is consistent with the above definition of "court" [KRS 407.100(4)].
At this point it can be seen that the general jurisdictional statute, KRS 24A.120, is in direct conflict with KRS 407.100(4) and KRS 407.170.
In order to give effect to the three statutes, it is our opinion that KRS 24A.120 generally governs, except that in the specific matter of uniform support actions, KRS 407.100(4) and 407.170 will control. That simply means that regardless of the amount of support money sued for, the district and circuit courts have concurrent jurisdiction of such actions. Thus the court in which such action is first filed may assume jurisdiction.
It is well established that where two statutes deal with the same subject matter [here, civil jurisdiction], the one dealing with the subject in a specific or minute way will prevail over the general statute. Morton v. Auburndale Realty Company, Ky., 340 S.W.2d 445 (1960) 446; and City of Bowling Green v. Board of Education, Ky., 443 S.W.2d 243 (1969) 247.