26-503.
Eminent domain procedure; notice.
The plaintiff shall cause to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the lands are situated a notice of the proceeding at least 14 days in advance of the date fixed by the court for consideration of the petition and appointment of appraisers, and shall at least 14 days before such date mail to each interested party as named in K.S.A. 26-502, and amendments thereto, and whose address is known or can with reasonable diligence be ascertained a copy of such publication notice and petition insofar as it relates to his interest. No defect in any notice or in the service thereof shall invalidate any proceedings.
History:
L. 1963, ch. 234, § 3; L. 1969, ch. 195, § 1; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 40; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Schuck v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., Inc., 180 P.3d 571 (Kan. 2008).
“Schuck has not shown that Rural Telephone did not comply with the notice requirements contained in K.S.A. 26-503. As required by K.S.A. 2007 Supp.”
City of Wichita v. Meyer, 939 P.2d 926 (Kan. 1997).
· cites it 2× “REM was not notified that its property (tracts 47 and 48) was being condemned by the City, and was not given notice of the date fixed for the court to consider the initial petition and to appoint appraisers.”
City of Shawnee v. Webb, 694 P.2d 896 (Kan. 1985).
“After the City commenced the action by filing its petition, statutory notice was given to the landowners pursuant to K.S.A. 26-503, and on the date fixed a hearing was held.”
Hickman Trust v. City of Clay Ctr., 974 P.2d 584 (Kan. 1999).
“26-502 and K.S.A. 26-503. The Cityfailed to name REM and to list tracts 47 and 48 in its initial condemnation petition and also failed to include REM in the initial publication and mailing following the filing of the petition.”
Landau Inv. Co. v. City of Overland Park, 930 P.2d 1065 (Kan. 1997).
“The condemnor is required to give notice in accord with the provisions of K.S.A. 26-503. If the court finds that the plaintiff has the power of eminent domáin and that the taking is necessary to a lawful corporate purpose of the plaintiff, the judge shall appoint three…”
Creegan v. State (Kan. 2017).
“26-502 ("each lot, parcel or tract of land"); K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 26-503 ("lands"); K.S.A.”
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.