8 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
In the Interest of Coopergreen2 sentences1995See In re Cooper, 230 Kan. 57, 67 , 631 P.2d 632 (1981); In re J.L.D., 14 Kan. 1995See In re Cooper, 230 Kan. 57, 67 , 631 P.2d 632 (1981); In re J.L.D., 14 Kan. | 2 | 2 |
In the Interest of J.D.C.green2 sentences2021See In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 166-67 , 159 P.3d 974 (2007) (citing favorably to the Mathews test for weighing due process considerations). 2021See In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 166-67 , 159 P.3d 974 (2007) (citing favorably to the Mathews test for weighing due process considerations). | 1 | 2 |
In Re JDCgreen2 sentences2021See In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 166-67 , 159 P.3d 974 (2007) (citing favorably to the Mathews test for weighing due process considerations). 2021See In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 166-67 , 159 P.3d 974 (2007) (citing favorably to the Mathews test for weighing due process considerations). | 1 | 2 |
In re the Detention of Morgangreen2 sentences2016The Mathews test looks at: (1) the liberty interest at stake; (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation of that liberty interest with the existing procedures and the probable value, if any, of additional safeguards; and (3) the government interest, including costs and administrative burdens of additional procedures. 180 Wash. 2d at 320-21 . 2016The Mathews test looks at: (1) the liberty interest at stake; (2) the risk of erroneous deprivation of that liberty interest with the existing procedures and the probable value, if any, of additional safeguards; and (3) the government interest, including costs and administrative burdens of additional procedures. 180 Wash. 2d at 320-21 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mathews v. Eldridge
green
2 sentences2024The Mathews factors are: "First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative 9 burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail." Mathews, 424 U.S. at 335 . 2024The Mathews factors are: "First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative 9 burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail." Mathews, 424 U.S. at 335 . | 2 | 2021–2024 |
In Re JLD
green
2 sentences1995See In re Cooper, 230 Kan. 57, 67 , 631 P.2d 632 (1981); In re J.L.D., 14 Kan. 1995See In re Cooper, 230 Kan. 57, 67 , 631 P.2d 632 (1981); In re J.L.D., 14 Kan. | 2 | 1995–1995 |
In Re the Adoption of B.J.M.
green
1 sentence2024On appeal, the panel applied the Mathews factors and concluded the father was not afforded procedural due process. 42 Kan. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
In re J.L.
green
2 sentences2024The factors in this balancing test are: "'(1) the individual interest at stake; "'(2) The risk of erroneous deprivation of the interest through the procedures used and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and "'(3) The State's interest in the procedures used, including the fiscal and administrative burdens that any additional or substitute procedures would entail. [Citation omitted.]'" In re J.L., 57 Kan. 2024The factors in this balancing test are: "'(1) the individual interest at stake; "'(2) The risk of erroneous deprivation of the interest through the procedures used and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and "'(3) The State's interest in the procedures used, including the fiscal and administrative burdens that any additional or substitute procedures would entail. [Citation omitted.]'" In re J.L., 57 Kan. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Patterson v. New York
green
2 sentences2021The Court of Appeals did not explain its rationale for applying this balancing test, and neither party discusses which framework should apply here. 6 The other framework applies mainly in criminal cases and was set out by the United States Supreme Court in Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 , 97 S. Ct. 2319 , 53 L. 2021The Court of Appeals did not explain its rationale for applying this balancing test, and neither party discusses which framework should apply here. 6 The other framework applies mainly in criminal cases and was set out by the United States Supreme Court in Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 , 97 S. Ct. 2319 , 53 L. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
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.