10 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2026 6 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 Ex Rel. Morrison v. Sebeliusgreen2 sentences2022Morrison v. Sebelius, 285 Kan. 875, 896 , 179 P.3d 366 (2008). "[B]efore a court may dismiss a case as moot, it must conclude that the requested relief would not have an impact on the appellant's rights." State v. Roat, 311 Kan. 581 , 593, 466 P.3d 439 (2020). 2020It said, "As part of the Kansas case-or-controversy requirement, courts require: (a) parties must have standing; (b) issues cannot be moot; (c) issues must be ripe, having taken fixed and final shape rather than remaining nebulous and contingent; and (d) issues cannot present a political question." (Emphasis added.) 285 Kan. at 896 . 8 This court has cited Sebelius a number of times for the notion that there is no case or controversy when an issue is moot. | 1 | 4 |
Creecy v. Kansas Dept. of Revenuegreen1 sentence2020See Creecy v. Kansas Department of Revenue, 310 Kan. 454 , 460, 447 P.3d 959 (2019) (one of four elements of case-or-controversy requirement is that issue not be moot); State v. Cheever, 306 Kan. 760 , 786, 402 P.3d 1126 , cert. denied 138 S. Ct. 560 (2017) (same); Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 521 , 364 P.3d 536 (2015) (same); Gannon v. State, 298 Kan. 1107, 1119 , 319 P.3d 1196 (2014) (same). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Snowgreen2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 1 |
Public Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co.green2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 1 |
Baker v. Carrgreen2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Martensgreen2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rivera v. Schwab
green
2 sentences2025Rivera v. Schwab, 315 Kan. 877, 902 , 512 P.3d 168 (2022). 9 Justiciability includes both prudential and jurisdictional requirements. 2025Rivera v. Schwab, 315 Kan. 877, 902 , 512 P.3d 168 (2022). 9 Justiciability includes both prudential and jurisdictional requirements. | 3 | 2024–2025 |
Sierra Club v. Moser
green
2 sentences2026It is well settled that "parties in a judicial action must have standing as part of the Kansas case-or-controversy requirement imposed by the judicial power clause of article 3, § 1 of the Kansas Constitution." Sierra Club v. Moser, 298 Kan. 22, 29 , 310 P.3d 360 (2013). 2026It is well settled that "parties in a judicial action must have standing as part of the Kansas case-or-controversy requirement imposed by the judicial power clause of article 3, § 1 of the Kansas Constitution." Sierra Club v. Moser, 298 Kan. 22, 29 , 310 P.3d 360 (2013). | 2 | 2022–2026 |
State v. Roat
green
1 sentence2022Morrison v. Sebelius, 285 Kan. 875, 896 , 179 P.3d 366 (2008). "[B]efore a court may dismiss a case as moot, it must conclude that the requested relief would not have an impact on the appellant's rights." State v. Roat, 311 Kan. 581 , 593, 466 P.3d 439 (2020). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Gannon v. State
green
2 sentences2020See Creecy v. Kansas Department of Revenue, 310 Kan. 454 , 460, 447 P.3d 959 (2019) (one of four elements of case-or-controversy requirement is that issue not be moot); State v. Cheever, 306 Kan. 760 , 786, 402 P.3d 1126 , cert. denied 138 S. Ct. 560 (2017) (same); Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 521 , 364 P.3d 536 (2015) (same); Gannon v. State, 298 Kan. 1107, 1119 , 319 P.3d 1196 (2014) (same). 2020See Creecy v. Kansas Department of Revenue, 310 Kan. 454 , 460, 447 P.3d 959 (2019) (one of four elements of case-or-controversy requirement is that issue not be moot); State v. Cheever, 306 Kan. 760 , 786, 402 P.3d 1126 , cert. denied 138 S. Ct. 560 (2017) (same); Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 521 , 364 P.3d 536 (2015) (same); Gannon v. State, 298 Kan. 1107, 1119 , 319 P.3d 1196 (2014) (same). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Solomon v. State
green
2 sentences2020See Creecy v. Kansas Department of Revenue, 310 Kan. 454 , 460, 447 P.3d 959 (2019) (one of four elements of case-or-controversy requirement is that issue not be moot); State v. Cheever, 306 Kan. 760 , 786, 402 P.3d 1126 , cert. denied 138 S. Ct. 560 (2017) (same); Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 521 , 364 P.3d 536 (2015) (same); Gannon v. State, 298 Kan. 1107, 1119 , 319 P.3d 1196 (2014) (same). 2020See Creecy v. Kansas Department of Revenue, 310 Kan. 454 , 460, 447 P.3d 959 (2019) (one of four elements of case-or-controversy requirement is that issue not be moot); State v. Cheever, 306 Kan. 760 , 786, 402 P.3d 1126 , cert. denied 138 S. Ct. 560 (2017) (same); Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 521 , 364 P.3d 536 (2015) (same); Gannon v. State, 298 Kan. 1107, 1119 , 319 P.3d 1196 (2014) (same). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co.
neutral
2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Van Sickle v. Shanahan
green
2 sentences2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). 2008See State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323, 343 , 144 P.3d 729 (2006) (standing); Martens, 279 Kan. at 244-45 , 106 P.3d 28 (mootness); Department of Revenue v. Dow Chemical Co., 231 Kan. 37, 41 , 642 P.2d 104 (1982) (quoting Public Service Comm'n, 344 U.S. at 243-44 , 73 S.Ct. 236 (ripeness)); Van Sickle v. Shanahan, 212 Kan. 426, 438 , 511 P.2d 223 (1973) (adopting standards for political questions stated in Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 210, 217 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 , [1962]). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.