26-511.
Interest on final judgment.
(a) If the compensation finally awarded on appeal exceeds the amount of money paid to the clerk of the court pursuant to K.S.A. 26-507, the judge shall enter judgment against the plaintiff for the amount of the deficiency, with interest. If the compensation finally awarded on appeal is less than the amount paid to the clerk of the court pursuant to K.S.A. 26-507, the judge shall enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the return of the difference, with interest.
(b) If the money paid to the clerk of the court under K.S.A. 26-507 is paid before July 1, 1982, the judgment shall bear interest as follows:
(1) On and after the date of the payment to the clerk and before July 1, 1982, at the rate of 6% per annum; and
(2) on and after July 1, 1982, and until the date the judgment is paid, at the rate provided by K.S.A. 16-204, and amendments thereto.
(c) If the money paid to the clerk of the court under K.S.A. 26-507 is paid on or after July 1, 1982, the judgment shall bear interest, on and after the date of the payment to the clerk and until the date the judgment is paid, at the rate provided by K.S.A. 16-204, and amendments thereto.
History:
L. 1963, ch. 234, § 11; L. 1982, ch. 88, § 2; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Specific reference to interest on eminent domain judgments controls over general provision. Schwartz v. Western Power & Gas Co., Inc., 208 Kan. 844, 851, 494 P.2d 1113.
2. Special statute applicable only to condemnation appeals taken under eminent domain procedure act, K.S.A. 26-501 et seq. Herman v. City of Wichita, 228 Kan. 63, 68, 69, 612 P.2d 588.
3. Determination of rate of post-judgment interest. Meinhardt v. Kansas Power & Light Co., 8 Kan. App. 2d 471, 473, 661 P.2d 820 (1983).
4. Applicability of K.S.A. 16-204 regarding postjudgment interest rate noted. Evans v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 15 Kan. App. 2d 97, 112, 803 P.2d 1033 (1991).
5. State statutory interest rate applied to condemnation award to landowner from natural gas pipeline company. Spears v. William Natural Gas Co., 932 F. Supp. 259, 260 (1996).
6. Property owners not required to hold excess eminent domain award in trust for city. In Re Taylor, 197 B.R. 909 (1996).
7. Eminent domain statutes discussed; school district's purchase of land later resold. Knop v. Gardner Edgerton U.S.D. No. 231, 41 Kan. App. 2d 698, 205 P.3d 755 (2009).
Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 270 P.3d 1065 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 6דThe majority concludes that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction in the eminent domain appeal to enter a judgment against Dean personally for the return of funds under K.S.A. 26-511 because he did not personally receive the proceeds of the original appraisers'…”
Miller v. Dean, 289 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4דDean asserts that the Kansas District Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because he did not receive the proceeds of the original appraisers' award and because the Kansas court could not enter a judgment for the return of such funds by him under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 26-511 .…”
Bd. of Educ. of USD 512 v. Vic Regnier Builders, 648 P.2d 1143 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 2דIf, within 10 years after entry of final judgment under K.S.A. 26-511, the school district fails to construct substantial buildings or improvements that are used for school purposes on any real property acquired under this subsection, the school district shall notify the…”
Herman v. City of Wichita, 612 P.2d 588 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 6דThe statute further provides in substance that, if the compensation finally awarded on appeal is less than the amount paid in by the condemning authority, the condemning authority is entitled to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the time payment was made to…”
N. Nat. Gas Co. v. Approximately 9117 Acres, 114 F. Supp. 3d 1144 (D. Kan. 2015). · cites it 4דK.S.A. § 26-511. Although the condemnation procedures used in this federal proceeding differ from the Kansas procedures, the Kansas judgment rate nevertheless provides a fair assessment of the compensation owed for the period from the taking of the property until ultimate…”
Spears v. Williams Nat. Gas Co., 932 F. Supp. 259 (D. Kan. 1996). · cites it 4דAs required by Kan. Stat.Ann. § 26-511, the judgment should have only been for the amount of the deficiency.”
Young Partners, LLC v. Bd. of Educ., 160 P.3d 830 (Kan. 2007). “If, within 10 years after entry of final judgment under K.S.A. 26-511, the school district fails to construct substantial buildings or improvements that are used for school purposes on any real property acquired under this subsection, the school district shall notify the…”
Evans v. Provident Life & Accident Ins., 803 P.2d 1033 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2ד) Evans argues that this section sets the minimum interest and not the maximum interest and that the trial court could have awarded a higher rate of interest even if K.”
In Re Condemnation of Land for State High. Purposes, 683 P.2d 1247 (Kan. 1984). “So the power of eminent domain as to urban renewal has been given by the legislature to the municipality to determine that slum or blighted areas exist in such municipality and the rehabilitation, conservation, or redevelopment of such areas is necessary in the interest of…”
Meinhardt v. Kansas Power & Light Co., 661 P.2d 820 (Kan. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2דK.S.A. 26-511 is a specific statute regarding interest to be awarded in condemnation cases and it applies in the stead of the more general provision of K.”
Knop v. Gardner Edgerton Unified Sch. Dist., 205 P.3d 755 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 5ד26-511, and amendments thereto, the school district fails to construct substantial buildings or improvements that are used for school purposes on any real property acquired under this subsection, the school district shall notify the original owners or their heirs or assigns that…”
Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 270 P.3d 1065 (Kan. 2011). “The majority concludes that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction in the eminent domain appeal to enter a judgment against Dean personally for the return of funds under K.S.A. 26-511 because he did not personally receive the proceeds of the original appraisers'…”
Knop v. Gardner Edgerton Unified Sch. Dist., 205 P.3d 755 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “26-511, and amendments thereto, the school district fails to construct substantial buildings or improvements that are used for school purposes on any real property acquired under this subsection, the school district shall notify the original owners or their heirs or assigns that…”
— K.S.A. § 26-511(c) — 1 case
Spears v. Williams Nat. Gas Co., 932 F. Supp. 259 (D. Kan. 1996). “As required by Kan. Stat.Ann. § 26-511, the judgment should have only been for the amount of the deficiency.”
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.