Request By:
Mr. William R. Young
Lyon County Attorney
Box 472
Eddyville, Kentucky 42038
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Charles W. Runyan, Assistant Deputy Attorney General
A prisoner under indictment for a felony in Lyon Circuit Court was being held in the Lyon County Jail. Upon advice of the Kentucky State Prison doctor, the prisoner was placed in the Caldwell County Hospital. The Lyon Circuit Judge, in ordering his removal to the hospital, indicated the expenses would be taken care of.
You ask whether the Fiscal Court of Lyon County is responsible for the prisoner's medical bills.
As we concluded in OAG 77-690, the county in which an indigent county jail prisoner resides is primarily responsible for the payment of necessary medical expenses for the sick prisoner.
You ask what statutes pinpoint such responsibility of the county.
The court, in
City of Richmond v. Madison County Fiscal Court, 290 Ky. 293, 161 S.W.2d 58 (1942), held that the fiscal court of the county in which paupers reside has an affirmative duty to provide funds for hospitalization and medical aid. On page 61 of that opinion, the court pointed out that "The duty of providing for the care, treatment, and maintenance of the sick and poor of the entire county is imposed upon the fiscal court, Kentucky statutes, section 1840 . . . ." (Emphasis added). Now Carroll's Kentucky Statutes § 1840 was merely the earlier fiscal court powers and duties statute which today is KRS 67.080. An indigent prisoner is a poor prisoner or a pauper prisoner, even though he does not reside in a poor house. The relevancy of KRS 67.080 is inescapable.
In the later case of
City of Paducah v. McCracken County, 305 Ky. 539, 204 S.W.2d 942 (1947), the court again held that the primary responsibility for caring for the poor and sick [which includes a poor sick person] rests on the county in which the poor sick person resides. In addition the court specifically relied upon KRS 67.080 at page 944. In addition the court relied on KRS 204.010, which statute provides that "The fiscal courts shall provide for the support of the paupers of their respective counties."
Your contention is that the legislative intent in KRS 64.150(3) was to impose upon the state the cost of keeping and maintaining prisoners in that category. However, that subsection relates to jailer's fees for keeping and dieting prisoners, etc. It contains nothing on the subject of payment for medical expenses of prisoners. The language of the subsection is unambiguous and it should be interpreted literally, nothing more nothing less. The courts are bound by the plain meaning of language used in a statute.
H.O. Hurley Co. v. Martin, 267 Ky. 182, 101 S.W.2d 657 (1937).
If the prisoner in question is a resident of Lyon County, then the Lyon County Fiscal Court has the primary responsibility in paying for the necessary medical expenses while a prisoner in Lyon County jail. In order to determine legally if a particular prisoner is indigent, the county attorney could ask the circuit judge having jurisdiction of the prisoner to determine in a proceeding for this purpose whether or not he is indigent. If the court finds him not indigent, then the prisoner must pay the medical costs.
Obviously, Lyon County has no responsibility for sick prisoners incarcerated in Lyon County jail who are actually residents of another county.
Finally, the county's responsibility for paying medical bills of its resident indigent county jail prisoners is subject to its ability to pay. There must be an item in the county budget to cover such expenses. See KRS Chapter 68. However, the fiscal court and budget commission must set up an item in the county budget for the sick and poor, based upon available revenue.
If the prisoner had been in the constructive custody of the Department of Corrections, then the state would have paid the bill out of pertinent appropriations for that department. But this prisoner was merely awaiting trial.