cy pres doctrine (Kansas) · Go Syfert
← Kansas issues

cy pres doctrine in Kansas

7 Kansas opinions name it 1 courts 1941–1992 0 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas.

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 (8)

CaseCitedYears
TRUSTEES OF ENDOWMENT FUND, HOFFMAN MEM. HOSP. v. Kring green
kan · 1979
2 sentences

1992Ass'n v. Kring, 225 Kan. 499, 503-04 , 592 P.2d 438 (1979), where the cy-pres doctrine was applied to carry out a grantor’s intent when a trust established by the grantor failed.

1992Ass'n v. Kring, 225 Kan. 499, 503-04 , 592 P.2d 438 (1979), where the cy-pres doctrine was applied to carry out a grantor’s intent when a trust established by the grantor failed.

21991–1992
In Re the Estate of Coleman green
kanctapp · 1978
2 sentences

1991Three decades after Shannep , the Court of Appeals considered the cy pres doctrine in Coleman, 2 Kan.

1991Coleman held that the entity seeking the application of the cy pres doctrine has the burden to demonstrate, either by extrinsic evidence or by evidence within the will itself, that the donor had the requisite general charitable intent. 2 Kan.

21979–1991
Weeks v. Hyland neutral
kan · 1941
2 sentences

1952That the statute was designed to be in force is made clear by our opinion in the case of In re Estate of Weeks, 154 Kan. 103 , 114 P. 2d 857 ; where it was sought, without effect, to be avoided by the doctrine of cy pres.

1952That the statute was designed to be in force is made clear by our opinion in the case of In re Estate of Weeks, 154 Kan. 103 , 114 P. 2d 857 ; where it was sought, without effect, to be avoided by the doctrine of cy pres.

21945–1952
Shannep v. Strong green
kan · 1945
2 sentences

1979In Shannep v. Strong, 160 Kan. 206, 213 , 160 P.2d 683 (1945), this court notes that the cy-pres doctrine is designed to effectuate the intention of the settlor.

1979In Shannep v. Strong, 160 Kan. 206, 213 , 160 P.2d 683 (1945), this court notes that the cy-pres doctrine is designed to effectuate the intention of the settlor.

11979–1979
Smyth v. Anderson green
ga · 1977
2 sentences

1979Shannep v. Strong, 160 Kan. at 213 ; Simmons v. Parsons College, 256 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 1977); Smyth v. Anderson, 238 Ga. 343 , 232 S.E.2d 835 (1977).

1979Shannep v. Strong, 160 Kan. at 213 ; Simmons v. Parsons College, 256 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 1977); Smyth v. Anderson, 238 Ga. 343 , 232 S.E.2d 835 (1977).

11979–1979
Simmons v. Parsons College green
iowa · 1977
1 sentence

1979Shannep v. Strong, 160 Kan. at 213 ; Simmons v. Parsons College, 256 N.W.2d 225 (Iowa 1977); Smyth v. Anderson, 238 Ga. 343 , 232 S.E.2d 835 (1977).

11979–1979
In Re Estate of Woods green
kan · 1957
2 sentences

1958(In re Estate of Woods, 181 Kan. 271 , 311 P. 2d 359 .) In the Woods case a general and public charitable trust was created by the clear, unambiguous language in the will of the testator and for that reason we there disregarded the application of the doctrine of cy pres.

1958(In re Estate of Woods, 181 Kan. 271 , 311 P. 2d 359 .) In the Woods case a general and public charitable trust was created by the clear, unambiguous language in the will of the testator and for that reason we there disregarded the application of the doctrine of cy pres.

11958–1958
In re United States Trust Co. neutral
nyappdiv · 1923
1 sentence

1941Matter of Hart, 205 App. Div. 703 , 200 N. Y.

11941–1941

Where else courts name it

NY 103 (1903–2025) PA 61 (1923–2025) CA 33 (1901–2010) IL 28 (1905–2012) NJ 23 (1910–2024) MA 22 (1904–2025) TX 18 (1927–2025) CT 17 (1893–2023) OH 16 (1916–2025) MO 12 (1951–2014) IA 11 (1903–2019) KY 11 (1923–2010) WI 10 (1888–2019) ME 10 (1917–2025) MI 8 (1927–1986) AL 7 (1907–2006) KS 7 (1941–1992) GA 7 (1964–2009) OR 7 (1927–1990) LA 6 (1956–2018) VA 6 (1946–2023) MD 6 (1912–2002) AR 6 (1949–2017) RI 6 (1929–2007) NE 5 (1908–2003) IN 5 (1913–2005) NC 5 (1972–2003) FL 5 (1930–2011) DE 5 (1925–1994) CO 5 (1993–2026) UT 4 (1982–2013) TN 4 (2006–2011) MN 4 (1962–2004) AZ 4 (1947–1992) HI 3 (1970–2006) DC 3 (1977–1990) MS 3 (1987–2009) WV 3 (1941–1993) SC 3 (1961–2007) WA 3 (1948–2011) ND 2 (1986–2016)

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