26 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1952–2026 11 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lilesgreen2 sentences2026State v. Liles, 313 Kan. 772 , 783, 490 P.3d 1206 (2021); see also Supreme Court Rule 6.02(a)(4), (a)(5) (2025 Kan. 2025See State v. Liles, 313 Kan. 772 , 783, 490 P.3d 1206 (2021); see also Supreme Court Rule 6.02(a)(4), (a)(5) (2024 Kan. | 2 | 3 |
State v. Crosbygreen2 sentences2026See State v. Crosby, 312 Kan. 630 , 635, 479 P.3d 167 (2021). 2024State v. Crosby, 312 Kan. 630 , 635, 479 P.3d 167 (2021). | 1 | 2 |
Quivira, Inc. v. Quivira Co., Inc.green2 sentences1964See, also, Quivira, Inc. v. Quivira Co., Inc., 173 Kan. 339 , 245 P. 2d 972 , and Gilley v. Gilley, 176 Kan. 61 , 268 P. 2d 938 , which hold that on an appeal the rule is that error is never presumed and the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. 1964See, also, Quivira, Inc. v. Quivira Co., Inc., 173 Kan. 339 , 245 P. 2d 972 , and Gilley v. Gilley, 176 Kan. 61 , 268 P. 2d 938 , which hold that on an appeal the rule is that error is never presumed and the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Espinozagreen2 sentences2025See State v. Espinoza, 311 Kan. 435 , 436-37, 462 P.3d 159 (2020). 2025See State v. Espinoza, 311 Kan. 435 , 436-37, 462 P.3d 159 (2020). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Mendozagreen1 sentence2019Ed. 2d 508 (1993); United States v. Mendoza, 543 F.3d 1186, 1190 (10th Cir. 2008) ("When the party alleging error has not objected in the court below . . . [federal courts] review only for plain error: '[1] error, [2] that is plain, [3] which affects . . . substantial rights and [4] which seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.'"). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fostergreen2 sentences2019See State v. Foster, 290 Kan. 696, 717 , 233 P.3d 265 (2010). 2019See State v. Foster, 290 Kan. 696, 717 , 233 P.3d 265 (2010). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Kiddgreen2 sentences2018See State v. Kidd , 293 Kan. 591 , 601, 265 P.3d 1165 (2011) ; State v. Paul , 285 Kan. 658 , 670, 175 P.3d 840 (2008). 2018See State v. Kidd , 293 Kan. 591 , 601, 265 P.3d 1165 (2011) ; State v. Paul , 285 Kan. 658 , 670, 175 P.3d 840 (2008). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Robinsongreen1 sentence2016See Robinson, 303 Kan. at 219 ("While K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619[b] compels our review of all issues briefed on appeal, it does 'not require that we treat the record other than as it is presented to us.' We thus consider this challenge based on the status of the record presented on appeal and mindful of the fact that Robinson, as the party alleging error, bears the burden of demonstrating error.). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taguegreen2 sentences2015See, e.g., State v. Tague, 296 Kan. 993, 1005 , 298 P.3d 273 (2013) (burden is on party asserting error to establish trial judge abused discretion in limiting cross-examination). 2015See, e.g., State v. Tague, 296 Kan. 993, 1005 , 298 P.3d 273 (2013) (burden is on party asserting error to establish trial judge abused discretion in limiting cross-examination). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Whitegreen2 sentences2012See State v. White, 284 Kan. 333, 342-43 , 161 P.3d 208 (2007). 2012See State v. White, 284 Kan. 333, 342-43 , 161 P.3d 208 (2007). | 1 | 1 |
Perry v. Perrygreen1 sentence1964See, also, Quivira, Inc. v. Quivira Co., Inc., 173 Kan. 339 , 245 P. 2d 972 , and Gilley v. Gilley, 176 Kan. 61 , 268 P. 2d 938 , which hold that on an appeal the rule is that error is never presumed and the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. | 1 | 1 |
Gilley v. Gilleygreen1 sentence1964See, also, Quivira, Inc. v. Quivira Co., Inc., 173 Kan. 339 , 245 P. 2d 972 , and Gilley v. Gilley, 176 Kan. 61 , 268 P. 2d 938 , which hold that on an appeal the rule is that error is never presumed and the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Thomas
green
2 sentences2026Thomas, 307 Kan. at 739 . 2022As the party alleging error, Frantz has the burden to prove the district court abused its discretion. 307 Kan. at 739 . "[A] criminal defendant states a violation of the 17 Confrontation Clause by showing that he was prohibited from engaging in otherwise appropriate cross-examination designed to show a prototypical form of bias on the part of the witness, and thereby 'to expose to the jury the facts from which jurors . . . could appropriately draw inferences relating to the reliability of the witness.' Davis v. Alaska, [415 U.S.] at 318." Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. at 680 . | 3 | 2022–2026 |
City of Mission Hills v. Sexton
green
2 sentences2024City of Mission Hills v. Sexton, 284 Kan. 414, 436 , 160 P.3d 812 (2007); see Sims, 308 39 Kan. at 1497-98. 2024City of Mission Hills v. Sexton, 284 Kan. 414, 436 , 160 P.3d 812 (2007); see Sims, 308 39 Kan. at 1497-98. | 3 | 2009–2024 |
State v. Smith-Parker
green
1 sentence2025Smith-Parker, 301 Kan. at 161 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Delaware v. Van Arsdall
green
1 sentence2022As the party alleging error, Frantz has the burden to prove the district court abused its discretion. 307 Kan. at 739 . "[A] criminal defendant states a violation of the 17 Confrontation Clause by showing that he was prohibited from engaging in otherwise appropriate cross-examination designed to show a prototypical form of bias on the part of the witness, and thereby 'to expose to the jury the facts from which jurors . . . could appropriately draw inferences relating to the reliability of the witness.' Davis v. Alaska, [415 U.S.] at 318." Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. at 680 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Douglas
green
1 sentence2022State v. Douglas, 313 Kan. 704 , 710, 490 P.3d 34 (2021). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Paul
green
2 sentences2018See State v. Kidd , 293 Kan. 591 , 601, 265 P.3d 1165 (2011) ; State v. Paul , 285 Kan. 658 , 670, 175 P.3d 840 (2008). 2018See State v. Kidd , 293 Kan. 591 , 601, 265 P.3d 1165 (2011) ; State v. Paul , 285 Kan. 658 , 670, 175 P.3d 840 (2008). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Crum
green
2 sentences2009State *921 v. Crum, 286 Kan. 145, 160 , 184 P.3d 222 (2008). 2009State *921 v. Crum, 286 Kan. 145, 160 , 184 P.3d 222 (2008). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Wichita Wire, Inc. v. Lenox
green
1 sentence2007Among other reasons, the district court denied Steffes’ request for a temporary injunction because he failed to establish a substantial likelihood that he would eventually prevail on the merits. *394 See Wichita Wire, Inc. v. Lenox, 11 Kan. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Chrispens v. Coastal Refining & Marketing, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000Chrispens v. Coastal Refining & Mktg., Inc., 257 Kan. 745, 756 , 897 P.2d 104 (1995); KRPC 1.9 Comment (1999 Kan. 2000Chrispens v. Coastal Refining & Mktg., Inc., 257 Kan. 745, 756 , 897 P.2d 104 (1995); KRPC 1.9 Comment (1999 Kan. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
McClelland v. Barrett
green
2 sentences1964In McClelland v. Barrett, 193 Kan. 203 , 392 P. 2d 951 , this day decided, appropriate and controlling general rules were succinctly *221 stated to the effect that on appeal error is never presumed and the burden rests on the party alleging error to show it in the record, and further, a presumption of validity attaches to a judgment of the district court until the contrary is shown, and before this court will set aside such judgment, it must affirmatively appear the judgment is erroneous. (2 West’s Kansas Digest, Appeal & Error, § 901; 1 Hatcher’s Kansas Digest, rev. ed., Appeal & Error, § 538 1964In McClelland v. Barrett, 193 Kan. 203 , 392 P. 2d 951 , this day decided, appropriate and controlling general rules were succinctly *221 stated to the effect that on appeal error is never presumed and the burden rests on the party alleging error to show it in the record, and further, a presumption of validity attaches to a judgment of the district court until the contrary is shown, and before this court will set aside such judgment, it must affirmatively appear the judgment is erroneous. (2 West’s Kansas Digest, Appeal & Error, § 901; 1 Hatcher’s Kansas Digest, rev. ed., Appeal & Error, § 538 | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Elliott v. P. H. Albright Farm Loan Co.
neutral
2 sentences1952Albright Farm Loan Co., 129 Kan. 280 , 282 Pac. 749 ) and that the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. 1952Albright Farm Loan Co., 129 Kan. 280 , 282 Pac. 749 ) and that the burden is on the party alleging error to show it. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Fakes v. Osborne
neutral
2 sentences1952(Fakes v. Osborne, 165 Kan. 176 , 193 P. 2d 218 . 1952(Fakes v. Osborne, 165 Kan. 176 , 193 P. 2d 218 . | 1 | 1952–1952 |
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.