K.S.A. » Chapter 15
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 15-119 (2026)

Same; notice of hearing required for certain officials

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

15-119. Same; notice of hearing required for certain officials. The county clerk shall, not less than 15 days before the hearing, send notices of the hearing with a copy of the petition, without the signatures, to the county clerk of any other county in which any part of the territory lies; to the clerk, secretary or chairperson of any duly constituted city, county, regional or metropolitan planning commission exercising planning authority over all or part of the territory; to the director of the division of community development of the department of economic development; and to the city clerk of any city, any portion of whose area is within five miles of the nearest boundary of the territory as described in the petition.

History: L. 1963, ch. 509, § 5; L. 1985, ch. 256, § 4; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Cited; notice of hearing requirements for incorporation of cities discussed. City of Kansas City v. Board of County Commissioners, 213 Kan. 777, 778, 780, 782, 783, 784, 786, 518 P.2d 403.


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1974–1982 · leading case: City of Wichita v. Bd. of Sedgwick Cnty. Comm'rs, 652 P.2d 717 (Kan. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Wichita v. Bd. of Sedgwick Cnty. Comm'rs, 652 P.2d 717 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 2× “In the instant case there is no allegation by any party that there were any *152 procedural deficiencies in the action before the Board and hence there is no contention that the order of the Board was procedurally unlawful.”
City of Kansas City v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 518 P.2d 403 (Kan. 1974). “We do not question the district court’s finding that the officials named in K.S.A. 15-119 knew of the hearing held on October 18, 1971, by reason of general publicity which attended the meeting.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.