26-508.
Appeal from award; notice to parties affected; perfection of appeal; retroactive application.
(a) If the plaintiff, or any defendant, is dissatisfied with the award of the appraisers, such party, within 30 days after the filing of the appraisers' report, may appeal from the award by filing a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the district court. The appeal shall be deemed perfected upon the filing of the notice of appeal. In the event any parties shall perfect an appeal, copies of such notice of appeal shall be mailed to all parties affected by such appeal, within seven days after the date of the perfection thereof. An appeal by the plaintiff or any defendant shall bring the issue of damages to all interests in the tract before the court for trial de novo. The appeal shall be docketed as a new civil action, the docket fee of a new court action shall be collected and the appeal shall be tried as any other civil action. The only issue to be determined therein shall be the compensation required by K.S.A. 26-513, and amendments thereto.
(b) This section, as amended by this act, shall be construed and applied prospectively, as well as retroactively to July 1, 2003, and shall apply to all eminent domain proceedings pending on or commenced after July 1, 2003.
History:
L. 1963, ch. 234, § 8; L. 1968, ch. 138, § 2; L. 2003, ch. 106, § 2; L. 2006, ch. 192, § 13; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 44; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Neighbor v. Westar Energy, Inc., 349 P.3d 469 (Kan. 2015).
· cites it 19× “Landowner David Neighbor timely filed his appeal under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 26-508, and the district court later granted his motion to dismiss it without prejudice.”
Miller v. Bartle, 150 P.3d 1282 (Kan. 2007).
· cites it 16× “See K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 26-508. Therefore, we are left to consider only the issues raised by the Bardes.”
Condemnation of Land for State High. Purposes v. Stranger Valley Land Co., 123 P.3d 731 (Kan. 2005).
· cites it 23× “’s (Stranger Valley) appeal from the appraisers’ award when it timely filed the notice of appeal but did not comply with the provisions of K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 26-508 requiring the payment of a docket fee and the docketing of the appeal as a new civil action.”
City of Wichita v. 200 South Broadway, Ltd. P'ship, 855 P.2d 956 (Kan. 1993).
· cites it 10× “K.S.A. 26-508 provides: “If the plaintiff, or any defendant, is dissatisfied with the award of the appraisers, he may, within thirty (30) days after the filing of the appraisers’ report, appeal from the award by filing a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the district…”
Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 161 P.3d 730 (Kan. 2007).
· cites it 8× “26-508, which provides: "If the plaintiff, or any defendant, is dissatisfied with the award of the appraisers, such party, within 30 days after the filing of the appraisers' report, may appeal from the award by filing a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the district…”
Water Dist. No. 1 of Johnson Cnty. v. Prairie Ctr. Dev., L.L.C., 375 P.3d 304 (Kan. 2016).
· cites it 6× “WaterOne had taken a permanent water main easement in Tract 16A, which is a tract of land on which the Bonhams held their own easement. And the Bonhams' easement had become a private roadway known as Stonecrest Road.”
Harsch v. Miller, 200 P.3d 467 (Kan. 2009).
· cites it 3× “The Harsches then filed an action pursuant to K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 26-508 in Coffey County District Court, 07-CV-36, appealing die amount of the damages award of the court-appointed appraisers.”
Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 270 P.3d 1065 (Kan. 2011).
· cites it 6× “Moreover, Bartle quite clearly stated that "[t]he plain language of K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 26-508 limits the district court's jurisdiction in appeals from eminent domain proceedings to the issue of compensation that is, to a determination of the fair market value of the property in…”
Ben J. v. City of Salina, 208 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2009).
· cites it 4× “58-3509 should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the appeal provision of an eminent domain proceeding.”
City of Wichita v. Denton, 294 P.3d 207 (Kan. 2013).
· cites it 4× “The City and Denton accepted the appraisers’ award; Clear Channel appealed pursuant to K.S.A. 26-508. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City, affirming the appraisers’ award.”
Woods v. Unified Gov't of wyco/kck, 275 P.3d 46 (Kan. 2012).
· cites it 7× “The district court found that Woods’ notice of appeal, filed 48 days after the filing of the appraisers’ report, was untimely under K.S.A. 2009 Supp. 26-508. Woods contends that Unified Government failed to comply with the notice requirements applicable to eminent domain…”
— K.S.A. § 26-508(a) — 10 cases
Ben J. v. City of Salina, 208 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2009).
“58-3509 should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the appeal provision of an eminent domain proceeding.”
Neighbor v. Westar Energy, Inc., 349 P.3d 469 (Kan. 2015).
“Landowner David Neighbor timely filed his appeal under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 26-508, and the district court later granted his motion to dismiss it without prejudice.”
City of Wichita v. Denton, 294 P.3d 207 (Kan. 2013).
“The City and Denton accepted the appraisers’ award; Clear Channel appealed pursuant to K.S.A. 26-508. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City, affirming the appraisers’ award.”
Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 270 P.3d 1065 (Kan. 2011).
“Moreover, Bartle quite clearly stated that "[t]he plain language of K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 26-508 limits the district court's jurisdiction in appeals from eminent domain proceedings to the issue of compensation that is, to a determination of the fair market value of the property in…”
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.