# Kentucky Statement of Points and Authorities: RAP 32

> Kentucky briefs use a statement of points and authorities, not a standard TOA. RAP 32 text, the appellee's counterstatement, the 1,750-word rule and an example.

*Updated: 2026-09-26*

**The short answer:** A Kentucky appellate brief does not have a categorized table of authorities. Under Ky. RAP 32(A)(2), it has a **statement of points and authorities** that sets out, “succinctly and in the order in which they are discussed in the body of the argument, the appellant's contentions with respect to each issue of law relied upon for a reversal, listing under each the authorities cited on that point and the respective pages of the brief on which the argument appears and on which the authorities are cited.” The appellee files a **counterstatement of points and authorities** in the same format (RAP 32(B)(2)). The argument must conform to it. It is excluded from the word and page limits (RAP 31(G)(5)), and since April 1, 2026 it is not required for a brief of 1,750 words or less (RAP 32(D)).

Last verified: 2026-09-26. This is formatting guidance, not legal advice; follow the current Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure.

**Fast facts**

- Rules: Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP), effective January 1, 2023 (Supreme Court of Kentucky Order 2022-49).
- Appellant: RAP 32(A)(2), the second section of the brief, after the introduction and statement concerning oral argument.
- Appellee: RAP 32(B)(2), a “counterstatement of points and authorities in the same format required for appellant's statement of authorities.”
- Other briefs permitted by the rules need “a statement of authorities conforming to paragraph (A)(2)” (RAP 32(C)(1)).
- Short briefs: not required for a brief of 1,750 words or less (RAP 32(D), as amended by Order 2026-01, effective April 1, 2026). The earlier text used a five-page threshold.
- Excluded from word and page limits with the cover, introduction, statement concerning oral argument, signature block, exhibits and appendices (RAP 31(G)(5)).
- Statutes are cited to the Kentucky Revised Statutes, which may be abbreviated “KRS” (RAP 31(E)(1)).

## What RAP 32 requires

> “A statement of points and authorities, which shall set forth, succinctly and in the order in which they are discussed in the body of the argument, the appellant's contentions with respect to each issue of law relied upon for a reversal, listing under each the authorities cited on that point and the respective pages of the brief on which the argument appears and on which the authorities are cited.” Ky. RAP 32(A)(2).

Four requirements follow from the text. The contentions appear **in the order argued**. Each contention is stated **succinctly**, not just as “Issue I.” The authorities are listed **under each contention**, so an authority cited on two points appears twice. And there are **two kinds of page references**: the pages where the argument on that point appears, and the pages where each authority is cited. RAP 32(A)(4) then requires “an argument conforming to the statement of points and authorities,” so the statement and the argument headings should match.

## How it differs from a table of authorities

**Kentucky statement of points and authorities vs. a standard table of authorities**

| Feature | Kentucky statement (RAP 32(A)(2)) | Standard table (e.g., FRAP 28(a)(3)) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Organized by | The appellant's contentions, in the order argued | Type of authority: cases, statutes, other |
| An authority cited on two points | Listed under each point | Listed once, with every page |
| Pages for the argument itself | Yes, for each point | No (the table of contents has them) |
| Alphabetical order | Not required by the rule | Cases alphabetical |
| Appellee's version | Counterstatement of points and authorities | Same table of authorities |
| Counts toward length | No (RAP 31(G)(5)) | No under FRAP 32(f) |

The format is close to [Illinois Points and Authorities](/illinois-points-and-authorities) under Ill. S. Ct. R. 341(h)(1). Kentucky adds the page references for the argument on each point and ties the argument to the statement. Neither rule asks for alphabetical order within a point.

## The appellee's counterstatement

RAP 32(B)(2) requires the appellee's response brief to contain “a counterstatement of points and authorities in the same format required for appellant's statement of authorities,” and RAP 32(B)(4) requires “an argument conforming to appellee's counterstatement of points and authorities.” The appellee states its own contentions in the order it argues them. It does not have to mirror the appellant's points, but a counterstatement that tracks them makes the response easier to follow. The Court of Appeals' attorney checklist for appellee's briefs lists the counterstatement as “Listing of arguments and cases cited in the brief with page numbers” ([checklist, PDF](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Court-of-Appeals/Documents/AppelleeBrief.pdf)).

## Reply briefs and short briefs

Reply briefs are “other briefs” under RAP 32(C)(1), which calls for “a statement of authorities conforming to paragraph (A)(2).” But RAP 32(D), as amended effective April 1, 2026, says a statement “is not required for a brief of 1,750 words or less, but is required for briefs of more than 1,750 words.” The same 2026 order set a Court of Appeals reply brief at 1,750 words or 4 pages if computer generated (RAP 31(G)(2)(b)), with more allowed when replying to more than one appellee brief. So a Court of Appeals reply within the basic limit usually needs no statement; a longer one does. Before April 1, 2026, the threshold was five pages ([Order 2026-01, PDF](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Supreme-Court/Supreme%20Court%20Orders/202601.pdf)).

## Worked example

**STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES (real Kentucky authorities; hypothetical points and page numbers)**

| Point / authority | Page(s) |
| --- | --- |
| **I. THE CIRCUIT COURT ERRED IN GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT BECAUSE GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT REMAIN** | 5-9 |
| *Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc.*, 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991) | 5, 6, 8 |
| *Lewis v. B & R Corp.*, 56 S.W.3d 432 (Ky. App. 2001) | 5 |
| CR 56.03 | 6 |
| **II. THE DEFENDANT OWED THE PLAINTIFF A DUTY OF REASONABLE CARE, AND WHETHER IT BREACHED THAT DUTY IS A QUESTION FOR THE JURY** | 10-14 |
| *Shelton v. Kentucky Easter Seals Society, Inc.*, 413 S.W.3d 901 (Ky. 2013) | 10-12 |
| *Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc.*, 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991) | 13 |

Each point carries the pages where its argument runs (5-9, 10-14), and each authority carries the pages where it is cited under that point. *Steelvest* appears under both points, each time with only that point's pages. In a standard table it would appear once, with pages 5, 6, 8, 13. The cases are real ([Steelvest](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1665643/steelvest-inc-v-scansteel-service-center-inc/); [Lewis](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1426291/lewis-v-b-r-corporation/); [Shelton](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5285996/shelton-v-kentucky-easter-seals-society-inc/)) and are used here only to show format; the points and pages are hypothetical.

## Citation forms Kentucky requires

- **Statutes:** from “the official edition of the Kentucky Revised Statutes, which may be abbreviated ‘KRS’” (RAP 31(E)(1)), e.g. KRS 413.140.
- **Kentucky cases:** Supreme Court cases as “Doe v. Roe, ___ S.W.2d ____ (Ky. [date])” and Court of Appeals cases as “Doe v. Roe, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Ky. App. [date]),” with case names italicized (RAP 31(E)(1)).
- **Unpublished opinions:** governed by RAP 41 (RAP 31(E)(2)).
- **The record:** the certified record by the clerk's page numbers, “TR __” (RAP 31(E)(3)); a video record by “VR” and the date and time, e.g. “VR 10/27/20 at 10:24:05” (RAP 31(E)(4)). Record references are not authorities and do not go in the statement; see [record citations](/record-citations-table-of-authorities).

## Common errors

- **Filing a categorized table instead.** Cases, statutes and rules sorted by type do not meet RAP 32(A)(2).
- **Listing each authority once.** An authority cited on two points belongs under both.
- **Leaving out the argument pages** for each point.
- **Points that don't match the argument headings.** RAP 32(A)(4) requires the argument to conform to the statement.
- **Relying on the old five-page threshold.** Since April 1, 2026, the test in RAP 32(D) is 1,750 words.
- **Stale pages after edits.** Rebuild the page references from the final brief.

> **Where BriefAuthority fits:** [BriefAuthority](/table-of-authorities-generator) is a free browser tool that works from your brief's final PDF or .docx. Its [table of authorities checker](/table-of-authorities-checker) reads a Kentucky “Statement of Points and Authorities” or “Counterstatement of Points and Authorities” as the brief's table and checks the listed pages against the brief. KRS and KAR citations are recognized. The generator builds a standard categorized table, so arrange a new statement by contention yourself. You can also [compare two versions](/compare-brief-versions) of the brief to see what moved. The brief is never uploaded.

## Frequently asked

**Does a Kentucky brief need a table of authorities?**

Not a standard one. RAP 32(A)(2) requires a statement of points and authorities that lists the authorities under each contention, with the pages of the argument and of each citation.

**What is a counterstatement of points and authorities?**

The appellee's version, required by RAP 32(B)(2) “in the same format required for appellant's statement of authorities.” The appellee's argument must conform to it (RAP 32(B)(4)).

**Does the statement count toward the word limit?**

No. RAP 31(G)(5) excludes the statement of points and authorities from the page and word limits.

**When is a statement of points and authorities not required?**

For a brief of 1,750 words or less, under RAP 32(D) as amended effective April 1, 2026. Before that date the threshold was five pages.

**Should the authorities under each point be alphabetical?**

RAP 32(A)(2) does not say. It requires the points in the order argued and the authorities listed under each; choose one order and use it under every point.

**Keep reading**

- [Illinois Points and Authorities](/illinois-points-and-authorities): Ill. S. Ct. R. 341(h)(1), the closest format.
- [Table of authorities rules by state](/table-of-authorities-by-state): What each state calls the table and requires.
- [North Dakota: paragraph numbers in briefs](/north-dakota-brief-paragraph-numbers): A table that cites paragraphs, not pages.
- [Michigan citation format in a table of authorities](/michigan-citation-format-table-of-authorities): Citations without periods, MCL and MCR.
- [Record citations and the table of authorities](/record-citations-table-of-authorities): Why record cites stay out of the table.

**Sources**

- [Supreme Court of Kentucky: Order 2022-49, creating the Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP 31, RAP 32), effective Jan. 1, 2023 (PDF)](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Supreme-Court/Supreme%20Court%20Orders/202249.pdf)
- [Supreme Court of Kentucky: Order 2026-01, amending the Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP 31(G), RAP 32(D)), effective Apr. 1, 2026 (PDF)](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Supreme-Court/Supreme%20Court%20Orders/202601.pdf)
- [Kentucky Court of Appeals: Attorney Checklist for Appellee's Brief (PDF)](https://www.kycourts.gov/Courts/Court-of-Appeals/Documents/AppelleeBrief.pdf)
- [Kentucky General Assembly: KRS 413.140](https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=58050)
- [Kentucky Court Rules (official Westlaw site): CR 56 Summary Judgment, CR 56.03](https://govt.westlaw.com/kyrules/Browse/Home/Kentucky/KentuckyCourtRules/KentuckyStatutesCourtRules?guid=N39DC3E90A79211DAAB1DC31F8EB14563&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=Default&contextData=%28sc.Default%29)
- [Illinois Supreme Court Rules (Rule 341(h)(1)) (PDF)](https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/7ae8a196-2a43-4484-9666-43098da60282/S_Ct_Rules_full.pdf)
- [Cornell LII: FRAP 28](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_28)
- [CourtListener: Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc., 807 S.W.2d 476 (Ky. 1991)](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1665643/steelvest-inc-v-scansteel-service-center-inc/)
- [CourtListener: Lewis v. B & R Corp., 56 S.W.3d 432 (Ky. App. 2001)](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1426291/lewis-v-b-r-corporation/)
- [CourtListener: Shelton v. Kentucky Easter Seals Society, Inc., 413 S.W.3d 901 (Ky. 2013)](https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5285996/shelton-v-kentucky-easter-seals-society-inc/)