written statement hearing (Kansas) · Go Syfert
← Kansas issues

written statement hearing in Kansas

5 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1961–2026 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Washington v. Robertsgreen
kanctapp · 2007 · cited in 3 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2022
2 sentences

2022Washington, 37 Kan.

2011Pierpoint, 271 Kan. at 627-28 , 24 P.3d 128 ; see Washington v. Roberts, 37 Kan.App.2d 237 , Syl. ¶ 3, 152 P.3d 660 (2007).

13

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
In Re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint green
kan · 2001
2 sentences

2026In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620, 627 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001) (citing Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L.

2026In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620, 627 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001) (citing Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L.

22011–2026
Wolff v. McDonnell green
scotus · 1974
2 sentences

2026In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620, 627 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001) (citing Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L.

2026In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620, 627 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001) (citing Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 563-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L.

12026–2026
Cole v. City of Kansas City green
kan · 1935
2 sentences

1961It is clear from the decision that where a plaintiff sustains injury for which he claims damages, regardless of their nature, against a city, recovery is limited to such damages as are sustained within the period of three months under 12-105, supra, immediately preceding the filing of the written statement of claim with the city. ( Jeakins v. City of El Dorado, supra; Cole v. Kansas City, 141 Kan. 633 , 42 P.2d 940 ; Steifer v. City of Kansas City, supra; and Watkins v. City of El Dorado, supra.) However, it was held in Avery v. City of Lyons, 183 Kan. 611 , 331 P.2d 906 , the statute makes no

1961It is clear from the decision that where a plaintiff sustains injury for which he claims damages, regardless of their nature, against a city, recovery is limited to such damages as are sustained within the period of three months under 12-105, supra, immediately preceding the filing of the written statement of claim with the city. ( Jeakins v. City of El Dorado, supra; Cole v. Kansas City, 141 Kan. 633 , 42 P.2d 940 ; Steifer v. City of Kansas City, supra; and Watkins v. City of El Dorado, supra.) However, it was held in Avery v. City of Lyons, 183 Kan. 611 , 331 P.2d 906 , the statute makes no

11961–1961
Avery v. City of Lyons green
kan · 1958
2 sentences

1961It is clear from the decision that where a plaintiff sustains injury for which he claims damages, regardless of their nature, against a city, recovery is limited to such damages as are sustained within the period of three months under 12-105, supra, immediately preceding the filing of the written statement of claim with the city. ( Jeakins v. City of El Dorado, supra; Cole v. Kansas City, 141 Kan. 633 , 42 P.2d 940 ; Steifer v. City of Kansas City, supra; and Watkins v. City of El Dorado, supra.) However, it was held in Avery v. City of Lyons, 183 Kan. 611 , 331 P.2d 906 , the statute makes no

1961It is clear from the decision that where a plaintiff sustains injury for which he claims damages, regardless of their nature, against a city, recovery is limited to such damages as are sustained within the period of three months under 12-105, supra, immediately preceding the filing of the written statement of claim with the city. ( Jeakins v. City of El Dorado, supra; Cole v. Kansas City, 141 Kan. 633 , 42 P.2d 940 ; Steifer v. City of Kansas City, supra; and Watkins v. City of El Dorado, supra.) However, it was held in Avery v. City of Lyons, 183 Kan. 611 , 331 P.2d 906 , the statute makes no

11961–1961

Statutes the citing opinions construe

KS § K.S.A. § 60-1501 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IN 12 (1996–2025) NY 8 (1903–2004) OH 7 (1999–2017) TX 6 (1915–2015) KS 5 (1961–2026) CO 5 (2007–2026) UT 5 (2004–2022) IL 4 (1970–2024) NE 3 (1995–2021) PA 3 (2016–2022) FL 3 (1995–2024) CA 3 (2003–2025) AL 3 (1996–2005) AZ 2 (1996–2011) WA 2 (2010–2010) KY 2 (2010–2023) MD 2 (1987–1996) CT 2 (1938–2021) AR 2 (1943–2014) NJ 2 (1987–1995) DC 2 (1972–1986)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check