K.S.A. » Chapter 29
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 29-101 (2026)

Enclosure of domestic animals with fence required

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

29-101. Enclosure of domestic animals with fence required. All domestic animals, other than cats and dogs, shall be enclosed with a fence sufficiently close, composed of posts and rails, posts and palings, posts and planks or palisades, posts and wire, rails alone, laid up in the manner commonly called a worm fence, or turf, with ditches on each side, of stone, or a hedge in existence on July 1, 1986, composed either of thorn or Osage orange.

History: G.S. 1868, ch. 40, § 1; R.S. 1923, 29-101; L. 1986, ch. 195, § 2; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2022 · leading case: Miami Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners v. Kanza Rail-Trails Conservancy, Inc., 255 P.3d 1186 (Kan. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Miami Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners v. Kanza Rail-Trails Conservancy, Inc., 255 P.3d 1186 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 8× “The district court also ruled that the KRTA controlled the type of fencing that must be installed and general Kansas fence laws, specifically K.S.A. 29-101 (requiring enclosure of domestic animals with fence), did not apply.”
In Re Maike, 77 B.R. 832 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1987). “See K.S.A. 29-101. 3 . Other poultry cases are discussed below.”
Lindsay v. Cobb, 627 P.2d 349 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “Plaintiff and defendant were adjoining landowners in Leavenworth County, State of Kansas, and at all relevant times a fence was constructed and maintained along the entire property line between the property owned by plaintiff and the property owned by defendant; that said fence…”
Reynolds v. Kansas Dep't of Transp., 30 P.3d 1041 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “The statute does not designate who is responsible for erecting and maintaining the fence. In 1986, the legislature moved away from strict liability and enacted the rule of *698 ordinary negligence when dealing with domestic animal trespass.”
Lee v. Kaup Kattle Co. (D. Kan. 2022). · cites it 2× “Moreover, Defendants claim they complied with K.S.A. § 29-101, which requires that “[a]ll domestic animals, other than cats and dogs .”
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.