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.
6 Kansas opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Swafford v. McKunegreen1 sentence2026See Swafford v. McKune, 46 Kan. | 1 | 1 |
Wolff v. McDonnellgreen2 sentences2022Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 553-56, 564-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L. 2022Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 553-56, 564-66 , 94 S. Ct. 2963 , 41 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Washington v. Roberts
green
2 sentences2022Washington, 37 Kan. 2020Washington, 37 Kan. | 3 | 2020–2022 |
In Re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint
green
2 sentences2006In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001). 2006In re Habeas Corpus Application of Pierpoint, 271 Kan. 620 , 24 P.3d 128 (2001). | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.