Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
37 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2026 4 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Prager v. Kansas Dept. of Revenuegreen2 sentences2016See Prager v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 271 Kan. 1, 14-15 , 20 P.3d 39 (2001) (citing United States Supreme Court decisions holding that a state cannot rely on a rule of procedure or an exhaustion rule that would "'frequently and predictably'" produce different outcomes in federal civil rights litigation based solely on whether that litigation takes place in state or federal court). 2016See Prager v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 271 Kan. 1, 14-15 , 20 P.3d 39 (2001) (citing United States Supreme Court decisions holding that a state cannot rely on a rule of procedure or an exhaustion rule that would "'frequently and predictably'" produce different outcomes in federal civil rights litigation based solely on whether that litigation takes place in state or federal court). | 2 | 2 |
Coleman v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2007See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731 , 115 L. 2007See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 731 , 115 L. | 2 | 2 |
Dean v. Stategreen2 sentences2011In so ruling, we pointed out that this court has “specifically rejected the notion that a party may circumvent the KJRA’s exhaustion requirement by claiming that an issue of statutory construction may be more authoritatively determined by the district court.” 287 Kan. at 754 (citing Dean v. State, 250 Kan. 417, 422-23 , 826 P.2d 1372 , cert. denied 504 U.S. 973 [1992]). 2011In so ruling, we pointed out that this court has “specifically rejected the notion that a party may circumvent the KJRA’s exhaustion requirement by claiming that an issue of statutory construction may be more authoritatively determined by the district court.” 287 Kan. at 754 (citing Dean v. State, 250 Kan. 417, 422-23 , 826 P.2d 1372 , cert. denied 504 U.S. 973 [1992]). | 1 | 4 |
CHELF v. Stategreen2 sentences2026See, e.g., Chelf v. State, 46 Kan. App. 2d 522, 533 , 263 P.3d 852 (2011) (finding "the exhaustion requirement set forth in K.S.A. 75-52,138 is a mandatory, but nonjurisdictional, prerequisite . . . that must be strictly enforced by the court"). 2026See, e.g., Chelf v. State, 46 Kan. App. 2d 522, 533 , 263 P.3d 852 (2011) (finding "the exhaustion requirement set forth in K.S.A. 75-52,138 is a mandatory, but nonjurisdictional, prerequisite . . . that must be strictly enforced by the court"). | 1 | 3 |
Laubach v. Robertsgreen2 sentences2026See Sperry v. McKune, 305 Kan. 469 , 482-83, 384 P.3d 1003 (2016); Laubach v. Roberts, 32 Kan. App. 2d 863, 868-69 , 90 P.3d 961 (2004). 4 Moreover, many of Masterson's arguments—which we characterize as equitable grounds to excuse the exhaustion requirement—are conclusory, and are premised on an assumption that his substantive complaints actually amount to a violation of constitutional stature. 2026See Sperry v. McKune, 305 Kan. 469 , 482-83, 384 P.3d 1003 (2016); Laubach v. Roberts, 32 Kan. App. 2d 863, 868-69 , 90 P.3d 961 (2004). 4 Moreover, many of Masterson's arguments—which we characterize as equitable grounds to excuse the exhaustion requirement—are conclusory, and are premised on an assumption that his substantive complaints actually amount to a violation of constitutional stature. | 1 | 2 |
Turner & Boisseau v. Kansas State Board of Healing Artsgreen2 sentences2009App. 2d at 257 (citing Turner & Boisseau, Chtd., 26 Kan. 2004See Turner & Boisseau Chtd., v. Kansas Bd. of Healing Arts, 26 Kan. | 1 | 2 |
Sperry v. McKunegreen2 sentences2026See Sperry v. McKune, 305 Kan. 469 , 482-83, 384 P.3d 1003 (2016); Laubach v. Roberts, 32 Kan. App. 2d 863, 868-69 , 90 P.3d 961 (2004). 4 Moreover, many of Masterson's arguments—which we characterize as equitable grounds to excuse the exhaustion requirement—are conclusory, and are premised on an assumption that his substantive complaints actually amount to a violation of constitutional stature. 2026See Sperry v. McKune, 305 Kan. 469 , 482-83, 384 P.3d 1003 (2016); Laubach v. Roberts, 32 Kan. App. 2d 863, 868-69 , 90 P.3d 961 (2004). 4 Moreover, many of Masterson's arguments—which we characterize as equitable grounds to excuse the exhaustion requirement—are conclusory, and are premised on an assumption that his substantive complaints actually amount to a violation of constitutional stature. | 1 | 1 |
Hoover v. Westgreen1 sentence2016See Hinton v. Corrections Corp. of America, 623 F. Supp. 2d 61 , 63 n.1 (D.D.C. 2009) (collecting cases and concluding "[t]he law is unsettled . . . on the question of the extent to which waiver, equitable estoppel or tolling can apply to defeat the affirmative defense of non-exhaustion under the PLRA"); Hoover v. West, 93 Fed. | 1 | 1 |
Ross v. Blakegreen2 sentences2016See Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ , 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1856-57 , 195 L. 2016See Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ , 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1856-57 , 195 L. | 1 | 1 |
Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Beshearsgreen1 sentence2016See, e.g., Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Beshears, 18 Kan. | 1 | 1 |
Hinton v. Corrections Corp. of Americagreen1 sentence2016See Hinton v. Corrections Corp. of America, 623 F. Supp. 2d 61 , 63 n.1 (D.D.C. 2009) (collecting cases and concluding "[t]he law is unsettled . . . on the question of the extent to which waiver, equitable estoppel or tolling can apply to defeat the affirmative defense of non-exhaustion under the PLRA"); Hoover v. West, 93 Fed. | 1 | 1 |
Friedman v. Kansas State Board of Healing Artsgreen1 sentence2012See Friedman, 287 Kan. at 753-54 (“The KJRA codified the [common-law] exhaustion of remedies requirement and, arguably, reduced the court’s discretion to circumvent its employment by setting forth very limited, statutorily defined exceptions.”). | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Bockgreen2 sentences2011Although acknowledging that “exhaustion is mandatory under the PLRA and that unexhausted claims cannot be brought in court,” the parties in Jones agreed that exhaustion is “typically regard[ed] ... as an affirmative defense,” and the Court agreed, noting that it consistently “referred to exhaustion in these terms.” 549 U.S. at 211, 212 . 2011In Jones, the Court was presented with an exhaustion requirement under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) strikingly similar to the one here: “No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under [ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ], or any other Federal law, by a prisoner . . . until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a).” 549 U.S. at 204 . | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See Jones, 279 Kan. at 365 (plaintiff did not exhaust available administrative remedies because she filed no administrative claim at all but instead sought a declaratory judgment in district court); Dean, 250 Kan. at 420-21 (no jurisdiction to consider petition for judicial review in a tax case where petitioners made no attempt to request an administrative hearing to resolve their claims and thus did not exhaust their administrative remedies); W.S. | 1 | 1 |
Williams Natural Gas Co. v. State Corporation Commissiongreen1 sentence1998See Williams Natural Gas Co. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 22 Kan. | 1 | 1 |
Goodwin v. City of Kansas Citygreen2 sentences1993See Goodwin v. City of Kansas City, 244 Kan. 28, 29-30 , 766 P.2d 177 (1988). 1993See Goodwin v. City of Kansas City, 244 Kan. 28, 29-30 , 766 P.2d 177 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
| cluster 384395red | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights
green
2 sentences1994The exhaustion requirement was the court’s focus in Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 902 , 528 P.2d 1232 (1974), and Jenkins v. Newman Memorial County Hospital, 212 Kan. 92 , 510 P.2d 132 (1973). 1994The exhaustion requirement was the court’s focus in Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 902 , 528 P.2d 1232 (1974), and Jenkins v. Newman Memorial County Hospital, 212 Kan. 92 , 510 P.2d 132 (1973). | 6 | 1978–2004 |
Felder v. Casey
green
2 sentences2019The Court could not allow states to "apply such an outcome-determinative law when entertaining substantive federal rights in their courts." 487 U.S. at 141 , 108 S.Ct. 2302 . *1167 In Felder , the Supreme Court noted that the notice-of-claim statute "operates, in part, as an exhaustion requirement, in that it forces claimants to seek satisfaction in the first instance from the governmental defendant." 487 U.S. at 142 , 108 S.Ct. 2302 . 2019The Court could not allow states to "apply such an outcome-determinative law when entertaining substantive federal rights in their courts." 487 U.S. at 141 , 108 S.Ct. 2302 . *1167 In Felder , the Supreme Court noted that the notice-of-claim statute "operates, in part, as an exhaustion requirement, in that it forces claimants to seek satisfaction in the first instance from the governmental defendant." 487 U.S. at 142 , 108 S.Ct. 2302 . | 2 | 2001–2019 |
Jenkins v. Newman Memorial County Hospital
yellow
2 sentences1994The exhaustion requirement was the court’s focus in Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 902 , 528 P.2d 1232 (1974), and Jenkins v. Newman Memorial County Hospital, 212 Kan. 92 , 510 P.2d 132 (1973). 1994The exhaustion requirement was the court’s focus in Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 902 , 528 P.2d 1232 (1974), and Jenkins v. Newman Memorial County Hospital, 212 Kan. 92 , 510 P.2d 132 (1973). | 2 | 1974–1994 |
Hamlin v. Kansas Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences2018In Kingsley , the Kansas Supreme Court held that the exhaustion requirement applies to administrative procedures and requires that the licensee (1) timely request an administrative hearing; and (2) if the licensee disagrees with the administrative order affirming the suspension, he or she may file a petition for review. 288 Kan. at 411 , 204 P.3d 562 . 2018In Kingsley , the Kansas Supreme Court held that the exhaustion requirement applies to administrative procedures and requires that the licensee (1) timely request an administrative hearing; and (2) if the licensee disagrees with the administrative order affirming the suspension, he or she may file a petition for review. 288 Kan. at 411 , 204 P.3d 562 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Williams v. DesLauriers
green
1 sentence2013Significantly, in Williams v. DesLauriers, 38 Kan. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Wilcox v. Fisher
green
2 sentences2013More tiran 25 years before Levier , in a ha-beas corpus action involving the custody of an adopted child, the Kansas Supreme Court invoked tire exhaustion requirement and found that “[s]uch a rule is so well recognized that it does not require citation of authorities.” Wilcox v. Fisher, 163 Kan. 74, 80 , 180 P.2d 283 (1947). 2013More tiran 25 years before Levier , in a ha-beas corpus action involving the custody of an adopted child, the Kansas Supreme Court invoked tire exhaustion requirement and found that “[s]uch a rule is so well recognized that it does not require citation of authorities.” Wilcox v. Fisher, 163 Kan. 74, 80 , 180 P.2d 283 (1947). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Angle v. Kansas Department of Revenue
green
1 sentence2009App. 2d 756, 764-65 , 758 P.2d 226 , rev. denied 243 Kan. 777 (1988) — a case involving the requirement that issues be litigated during the administrative hearing before those issues can be raised on appeal, not the exhaustion requirement. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Soza v. Kansas Department of Revenue Division of Vehicles
green
2 sentences2009At the close of the opinion, the Soza court stated that because the plaintiff “failed to adequately raise issues at the administrative hearing,” the district court correctly dismissed the case “for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and resultant lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” 33 Kan. 2009The Court of Appeals affirmed, stating that “mere ‘reservation’ of issues at the administrative hearing is inadequate to meet the exhaustion requirement for subject matter jurisdiction of the district court on appeal of such matters.” 33 Kan. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Brown v. USAA Casualty Insurance
green
1 sentence2004The court ruled that the statutory requirement that the insured be “legally entitled” to damages from the tortfeasor does not require the insured to obtain a judgment against the tortfeasor before the insured is entitled to UIM bene *297 fits, and the court held that the policy’s exhaustion clause was void and unenforceable as a matter of public policy. 17 Kan. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Howlett Ex Rel. Howlett v. Rose
green
1 sentence2001Ed. 2d 481 , 100 S. Ct. 553 (1980),] and held that a Wisconsin notice-of-claim statute that effectively shortened the statute of limitations and imposed an exhaustion requirement on claims against public agencies and employees was pre-empted insofar as it was applied to § 1983 actions.” 496 U.S. at 377 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Martinez v. California
green
1 sentence2001Ed. 2d 481 , 100 S. Ct. 553 (1980),] and held that a Wisconsin notice-of-claim statute that effectively shortened the statute of limitations and imposed an exhaustion requirement on claims against public agencies and employees was pre-empted insofar as it was applied to § 1983 actions.” 496 U.S. at 377 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Patsy v. Board of Regents of Fla.
green
1 sentence2001In Patsy v. Board of Regents of Florida, 457 U.S. 496 (1982), we held that plaintiffs need not exhaust state administrative remedies before instituting § 1983 suits in federal court. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Western Kansas Express, Inc. v. Dugan Truck Line, Inc.
green
1 sentence1995The court noted that “issues which might profit from the expertise of the regulatory agency have already been addressed by the KCC.” Further, “[s]ince there was no remedy available to plaintiffs in that forum for the damages they may have sustained, there is no bar erected by the exhaustion doctrine or policy created by ‘primary jurisdiction’ to prevent the district court’s resolution of this case.” 11 Kan. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| J. Enterprises, Inc. v. Board of Harvey County Comm'rs neutral | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Vann v. Employment Security Board of Review
neutral
1 sentence1993“If no administrative remedy is available or if it is inadequate to address the problem at issue, exhaustion is not required.” Vann v. Employment Security Bd. of Review, 12 Kan. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State Ex Rel. Sanborn v. Unified School District 259 green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. green | 1 | 1987–1987 |
| Taylor v. Bakery & Confectionary Union & Industry International Welfare Fund green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Amato v. Bernard green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Patsy v. Florida International University red | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Gibson v. Berryhill green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Diedrich v. Commissioner green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Beaver v. Chaffee green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| United States Alkali Export Ass'n v. United States green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
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.
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.