 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Farha v. City of Wichita, No. 95,445,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a class action suit brought by litigants challenging the City's assessment and collection of court costs in municipal cases, the City was not prevented from exercising its home rule authority to charter out of Kan. Stat. Ann. § 12-4112 of the Kansas Code of Procedure for Municipal Courts as the Code was not applicable uniformly to all cities.
|
|||||
| Graham v. Dokter Trucking Group, No. 95,650,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court erred in reversing the workers' compensation board's permanent partial general disability award to an employee for lack of support by a physician's opinion as Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-510e(a) required a physician's opinion to support only task loss, not wage loss, and the employee's average post-injury wage justified the board's award.
|
|||||
| In re Appeal of the Dir. of Property Valuation, No. 96,986,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Kansas Board of Tax Appeals correctly concluded that taxpayers' (non-Kansas utilities and marketing companies) natural gas inventory was exempt from ad valorem taxation as the taxpayers did not "control and hold for resale" stored natural gas and, therefore, did not meet the modified definition of public utilities in Kan. Stat. Ann. § 79-5a01(a).
|
|||||
| In re McClintock, Bar Docket No. 06761,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Surrender of an attorney's license was accepted and the attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Kansas where it was alleged that the attorney violated Kan. R. Prof. Conduct 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4 in connection with the handling of an estate. The attorney had been informally admonished in previous disciplinary proceedings.
|
|||||
| Jeremiah 29:11, Inc. v. Seifert, No. 94,224,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 58-2221, 58-2222, 58-2223, constructive notice of restrictive covenant barring commercial enterprise had to be drawn from recorded document itself or from other recorded documents it referenced, and absence of grantees' signatures on deed made it insufficient to provide necessary constructive notice to subsequent landowner.
|
|||||
| Kiekel v. Four Colonies Homes Ass'n, No. 95,306,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Community association's bylaw amendment, which virtually eliminated owners' right to rent property in a subdivision, was void because the amendment placed a significant restriction on the use of the property and was in conflict with the declaration. Such a change could only be made through proper amendment to the declaration.
|
|||||
| Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., L.L.C., No. 94,999,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court improperly admitted at trial purchase price of property condemned for Interstate highway because it was too remote in time and did not reflect intervening economic changes to be relevant to current fair market value under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 26-513(e), but the error was harmless, as the jury award fell within range of experts' valuations.
|
|||||
| Ninemire v. Kan. Dep't of Soc. And Rehab. Servs., No. 96,461,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision of Secretary of Social and Rehabilitation Services that adopted child was special needs child eligible for federal adoption assistance and setting monthly subsidy at $ 0 was upheld because State was not required to provide subsidy to eligible child under 42 U.S.C.S. § 673(a)(1)(B)(ii), and child had no disabilities at time of adoption.
|
|||||
| State v. Harris, No. 95,723,
SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Two of defendant's convictions for three counts of capital murder were improper because the allowable unit of prosecution for capital murder under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-3439(a)(6) was the intentional and premeditated killing of more than one person. There was a valid capital conviction and sentence on Count II; that conviction stood.
|
|||||
| State v. Lewis, No. 94,837,
COURT OF APPEALS OF KANSAS, July 13, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant could not support a claim of jury selection discrimination by contending that a trial court's failure to impose sanctions, as required by Kan. Stat. Ann. § 43-165, on jurors who did not appear for service resulted in a racial disparity, as this failure applied equally to the entire community.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
