Could a Kentucky sheriff use county license plates on a privately owned vehicle and receive mileage pay?

Plain-English summary

Kentucky's Attorney General said in 1995 that vehicles personally owned by a sheriff or deputy could not be registered in the county's name or carry official county license plates. The opinion cited statutes requiring registration and title in the owner's name and barring official plates on vehicles not exclusively owned by a governmental unit.

The AG described the county itself as probably immune from liability for an accident involving such a vehicle, while noting that fiscal court members might face personal liability claims if they negligently failed to stop unauthorized operation. On monthly mileage payments, the AG expressly declined a definitive answer because the request did not say whether payments covered documented actual mileage on official business. It said such mileage in a personally owned vehicle could be reimbursed subject to budgeting and general requirements, but rejected a mileage allowance for a county owned vehicle whose operating costs the county already paid.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Historical summary

Sheriffs and deputies using personal vehicles

The opinion said the privately owned vehicles described in the request could not lawfully use county registration or official plates. KRS 186.060(4), as quoted by the AG, limited governmental plates to vehicles exclusively owned by the specified public bodies. The AG also identified a vehicle titling problem when the recorded owner differed from the actual owner.

County liability and fiscal court members

For accidents involving a former deputy or other unauthorized driver of a county-plated vehicle, the AG said the county would probably be protected by sovereign immunity. It separately said fiscal court members could face a personal liability claim where steps were not taken to stop unauthorized use, but that a finding of liability probably would require negligence. The opinion did not decide an actual lawsuit or set out particular facts proving negligence.

Mileage expense

The AG could not definitively assess the proposed monthly payment because it lacked facts about actual documented official mileage. Its conditional conclusion allowed payment for such mileage in an employee's personally owned vehicle, subject to budgeting and general requirements. It did not allow a mileage allowance for using a county owned vehicle when the county paid its general operating and maintenance costs.

Common questions

Could a sheriff put official county plates on a personally owned car?

The AG answered no under the 1995 statutes it cited. It said private ownership did not meet the statutory condition for official plates.

Did county registration make the county liable for a private driver's crash?

The AG said the county itself would probably be immune. It did not give a final liability ruling for an actual accident and separately discussed possible negligence claims against fiscal court members.

Could the county pay a sheriff or deputy a monthly mileage amount?

The opinion declined a definitive answer without knowing whether the proposed amount reflected documented actual mileage on official business. It said properly budgeted payment for that mileage in a personal vehicle could be lawful, while a mileage allowance for a county owned vehicle whose costs the county paid was not.

Background and statutory framework

The request described personally owned vehicles licensed in Muhlenberg County's name. The AG applied KRS 186.060(1) and (4) to registration and official plates and KRS 186A.065 to titling. For the liability issue, it cited Carr v. Jefferson County and Cullinan v. Jefferson County on county immunity. Its mileage discussion turned on the distinction between documented use of a personal vehicle for public business and a county owned vehicle with county paid operating costs.

Citations and references

• KRS 186.060(1) and (4): registration and official license plates.
• KRS 186A.065: vehicle registration and titling in the owner's name.
• Carr v. Jefferson County, 275 Ky. 685, 122 S.W.2d 482 (1938), and Cullinan v. Jefferson County, Ky., 418 S.W.2d 407 (1967): county immunity examples cited by the AG.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.ky.gov/Resources/Opinions/Opinions/OAG95-001.htm

Original opinion text

OAG 95-1

January 3, 1995

Hon. Rodney Kirtley

County Judge/Executive, Muhlenberg County Kentucky

P.O. Box 137

Greenville, Kentucky 42345

Re: Vehicles Licensed in County's Name Although Personally Owned by Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff Liability Concerns; Whether County May pay Monthly Mileage Expense in Such Circumstance.

Dear Judge Kirtley:

By letter of April 16, 1994, you explain, in substance, that vehicles personally owned by the Muhlenberg County Sheriff and his deputies have been licensed with official plates. You ask, in substance, whether the county would be liable should one other than the sheriff or a deputy sheriff (as, for example, a member of the family of the sheriff or a deputy sheriff, or other person other than the sheriff or a deputy, or one who was a deputy sheriff, but was dismissed from such capacity) operate a vehicle registered in the name of the county and become involved in a traffic accident. You also ask, again in substance, whether the county can pay monthly mileage expense in connection with such vehicles.

Privately Owned Vehicle Under Official Registry

First, Kentucky law does not provide for a vehicle owned by a private party to be registered in the name of a governmental unit. See KRS 186.060(1).

Second, KRS 186.060(4) provides:

No person shall use on a motor vehicle, not exclusively owned by a county, city, urban-county, board of education, or emergency and ambulance vehicles operated by non-profit corporations organized by units of government in the state, or the state or federal government, any license plate that has been issued for use on a motor vehicle owned by such a governmental unit.

(Emphasis added.)

The above quoted statutory provision makes it illegal to equip a privately owned vehicle with an official license plate.

We note also that registration and titling of a vehicle in other than the name of the owner would violate KRS 186A.065.

Additional problems, in licensing a privately owned vehicle in the name of a county or governmental unit, arise in connection with likely exemption of a privately owned vehicle, registered and titled in the name of a county, from requisite taxes.

Liability of County

As we understand your letter, you ask about potential liability of the county under two circumstances involving a vehicle licensed in the name of the county being involved in a traffic accident. One circumstance is that of a former deputy operating a vehicle licensed in the county's name. The other circumstance is where a member of the sheriff's family, or member of a deputy sheriff's family, or person other than the sheriff or a deputy, operates a vehicle licensed in the county's name.

The county itself would probably be immune from liability under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. See, for example, Carr v. Jefferson County, 275 Ky. 685, 122 S.W.2d 482 (1938), and, Cullinan v. Jefferson County, Ky., 418 S.W.2d 407 (1967).

Members of the fiscal court might be exposed to a claim of personal liability where proper steps are not taken to stop operation of a vehicle licensed in the name of the county by one other than an authorized county employee. For liability to be found, however, negligence probably would have to be shown on the part of members of the fiscal court. See, for example, Shearer v. Hall, Ky., 399 S.W.2d 701 (1966), and, Hall v. Midwest Bottled Gas Distributors Inc., Ky., 532 S.W.2d 449, 453 (1976).

Monthly Mileage Expense

You ask whether the county can pay “these employees” (sheriff and deputies) “monthly mileage expense.” Under the facts as we understand them as related in your letter, the “monthly mileage expense” you ask about would be paid for mileage incurred by a vehicle registered in the name of the county. Your letter does not indicate whether such expense payment would be for documented actual mileage in the course of official business. Because of the absence of specific facts we cannot provide a definitive answer to this question.

In our experience, “mileage expense” is a payment to a government employee for the use of his or her privately owned vehicle for actual documented mileage in the course of official business. We do not know if the “monthly mileage expense” asked about in your letter would be payment for documented actual mileage incurred by an employee in the course of using his or her personally owned vehicle for official business.

Subject to proper budgeting, and any general requirements, the county could lawfully pay “monthly mileage expense” for documented actual mileage incurred by a county employee in the course of official business in the employee's personally owned vehicle. See for example, although related to expenses that may be credited against fees, Funk v. Milliken, Ky., 3317 S.W.2d 499, 509 (1958), “reasonable and necessary mileage expenses may be allowed . . . upon presentation of a properly itemized and documented claim.”

A county employee, in our view, cannot lawfully be paid a “monthly mileage allowance” in connection with use of a county owned vehicle for which the county pays the general expenses of operation and maintenance.

Sincerely,

A. B. Chandler

Attorney General

Gerard R. Gerhard

Assistant Attorney General