20-3018.
Transfer of certain cases docketed in supreme court to court of appeals; transfer of cases docketed in wrong court; effect; motion for rehearing by court of appeals; petition for review of case by supreme court; rules of supreme court; authority of supreme court in granting or denying review; power of supreme court to order transfer of case from court of appeals to supreme court.
(a) Any case within the jurisdiction of the court of appeals which is erroneously docketed in the supreme court shall be transferred by the supreme court to the court of appeals. Any case within the jurisdiction of the court of appeals and in which notice of appeal to the supreme court was filed prior to January 10, 1977, may be transferred to the court of appeals by the supreme court. No case docketed either in the supreme court or the court of appeals shall be dismissed solely for the reason of having been filed in the wrong court, but shall be transferred by the supreme court to the court which the supreme court determines to have jurisdiction. Any such case shall be considered timely and properly filed in the court to which it is transferred.
(b) Any party aggrieved by a decision of the court of appeals may file a motion with such court for a rehearing, in accordance with rules of the supreme court, but such motion shall not be a condition precedent to a review of such decision by the supreme court, and any such party may petition the supreme court for review within thirty (30) days after the date of such decision. The procedures governing petitions for review shall be prescribed by rules of the supreme court, and the review of any such decision shall be at the discretion of the supreme court. While neither controlling nor fully measuring the court's discretion, the following shall be considered in determining whether review will be granted: (1) The general importance of the question presented; (2) the existence of a conflict between the decision sought to be reviewed and a prior decision of the supreme court, or of another panel of the court of appeals; (3) the need for exercising the supreme court's supervisory authority; and (4) the final or interlocutory character of the judgment, order or ruling sought to be reviewed.
(c) At any time on its own motion, the supreme court may order the court of appeals to transfer any case before the court of appeals to the supreme court for review and final determination.
History:
L. 1975, ch. 178, § 18; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
1,047
cases (
76 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case:
Trear v. Chamberlain, 425 P.3d 297 (Kan. 2018).
Trear v. Chamberlain, 425 P.3d 297 (Kan. 2018).
· cites it 4× “60-2101(b) (providing Supreme Court jurisdiction over cases subject to review under K.S.A. 20-3018). 5 THE FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROVISION Defendants argue Chamberlain's 2013 offer to sell the 73-acre tract discharged the contractual obligation she owed Trear under the 1986…”
– GFTLenexa, LLC v. City of Lenexa –, 453 P.3d 304 (Kan. 2019).
· cites it 3× “2d 21 (1996) (appeal transferred from Court of Appeals on court's own motion under K.S.A. 20-3018[c]). In other instances, the Supreme Court has accepted direct appeals in inverse condemnation actions.”
State v. Ward, 256 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2011).
· cites it 2× “Our jurisdiction arises from K.S.A. 20-3018(b) and K.S.A. 22-3602(e). I.”
State v. Gonzalez, 412 P.3d 968 (Kan. 2018).
· cites it 2× “60-2101(b) (providing Supreme Court jurisdiction over cases subject to review under K.S.A. 20-3018 ). CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CRIME OF CONVICTION Gonzalez claims for the first time on appeal that the statute defining unintentional second-degree murder is unconstitutionally…”
Kargus v. State, 169 P.3d 307 (Kan. 2007).
· cites it 5× “2d at 775-76 ; see K.S.A. 20-3018(b); K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 22-3602(e); Supreme Court Rule 8.”
State v. Obregon, 444 P.3d 331 (Kan. 2019).
· cites it 2× “See K.S.A. 20-3018(b) (providing for petitions for review of Court of Appeals decisions); K.”
State v. Berreth, 273 P.3d 752 (Kan. 2012).
· cites it 4× “We granted Berreth's petition for review under K.S.A. 20-3018 to reexamine the jurisdictional basis for the State's appeal and to examine the correctness of the Court of Appeals' rulings.”
State v. Petersen-Beard, 377 P.3d 1127 (Kan. 2016).
· cites it 2× “We granted Petersen-Beard's petition for review pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(b), exercise jurisdiction pursuant to K.”
State v. Lowery, 420 P.3d 456 (Kan. 2018).
· cites it 3× “The State petitioned for review, which we granted. Jurisdiction is proper.”
State v. Albano, 487 P.3d 750 (Kan. 2021).
· cites it 2× “60-2101(b) (providing Supreme Court jurisdiction over cases subject to review under K.S.A. 20-3018). Legal Framework and Standard of Review Albano brings her constitutional challenge to the KSGA under section 5 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights, which provides: "The…”
State v. Crawford, 324 P.3d 311 (Kan. 2014).
· cites it 4× “22-3602(e) (party may petition the Supreme Court for review as provided in K.S.A. 20-3018[b]); K.S.A. 20-3018(b) (party aggrieved by a decision of the Court of Appeals may petition the Supreme Court for review); Supreme Court Rule 8.”
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Our jurisdiction is under K.S.A. 20-3018(c), a transfer on our motion from the Court of Appeals.”
— K.S.A. § 20-3018(6) — 1 case
— K.S.A. § 20-3018(a) — 6 cases
– GFTLenexa, LLC v. City of Lenexa –, 453 P.3d 304 (Kan. 2019).
“2d 21 (1996) (appeal transferred from Court of Appeals on court's own motion under K.S.A. 20-3018[c]). In other instances, the Supreme Court has accepted direct appeals in inverse condemnation actions.”
State v. Berreth, 273 P.3d 752 (Kan. 2012).
“We granted Berreth's petition for review under K.S.A. 20-3018 to reexamine the jurisdictional basis for the State's appeal and to examine the correctness of the Court of Appeals' rulings.”
— K.S.A. § 20-3018(b) — 419 cases
State v. Ward, 256 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2011).
“Our jurisdiction arises from K.S.A. 20-3018(b) and K.S.A. 22-3602(e). I.”
Kargus v. State, 169 P.3d 307 (Kan. 2007).
“2d at 775-76 ; see K.S.A. 20-3018(b); K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 22-3602(e); Supreme Court Rule 8.”
State v. Obregon, 444 P.3d 331 (Kan. 2019).
“See K.S.A. 20-3018(b) (providing for petitions for review of Court of Appeals decisions); K.”
State v. Petersen-Beard, 377 P.3d 1127 (Kan. 2016).
“We granted Petersen-Beard's petition for review pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018(b), exercise jurisdiction pursuant to K.”
Trear v. Chamberlain, 425 P.3d 297 (Kan. 2018).
“60-2101(b) (providing Supreme Court jurisdiction over cases subject to review under K.S.A. 20-3018). 5 THE FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROVISION Defendants argue Chamberlain's 2013 offer to sell the 73-acre tract discharged the contractual obligation she owed Trear under the 1986…”
— K.S.A. § 20-3018(c) — 582 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001).
“Our jurisdiction is under K.S.A. 20-3018(c), a transfer on our motion from the Court of Appeals.”
— K.S.A. § 20-3018(h) — 1 case
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.