K.S.A. » Chapter 38
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 38-1503 (2026)

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

38-1503.

History: L. 1982, ch. 182, § 3; L. 1991, ch. 111, § 1; L. 2000, ch. 150, § 4; L. 2001, ch. 211, § 11; Repealed, L. 2006, ch. 200, § 120; January 1, 2007.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1985–2009 · leading case: In the Interest of M.F., 206 P.3d 57 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In the Interest of M.F., 206 P.3d 57 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “See K.S.A. 38-1503(a). The Revised Kansas Code for Care of Children, K.”
In Re the Adoption of Baby Girl B., 867 P.2d 1074 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994). “), which expressly states the UCCJA is applicable to that Code (K.S.A. 38-1503[b]), there is no statutory reference in the Kansas Adoption and Relinquishment Act (K.”
In re A.N.P., 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “The parameters of the district court’s jurisdiction under the KCCC are set forth in K.S.A. 38-1503. Under that statute, district courts are given original jurisdiction, subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), “to receive…”
In re S.M.H., 103 P.3d 976 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “However, K.S.A. 2003 Supp. 38-1503(a) makes it clear that CINC proceedings are not governed by the Code for the Care of Children “in those instances when the Indian child welfare act of 1978 applies.”
In the Interest of E.T., 137 P.3d 1035 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “38-1348 of the UCCJEA sets forth four alternatives through which a Kansas trial court obtains jurisdiction to malee an initial child-custody determination: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in K.S.A. 38-1351 and amendments thereto, a court of this state has jurisdiction to malee…”
In the Interest of J.D., 70 P.3d 700 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “S.A. 38-1584(d) as authority to review the plan for J.”
In the Interest of Wicks, 693 P.2d 481 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 38-1503(b). Likewise, the definitional section of the UCCJA defines a custody proceeding to include proceedings brought under the CCC where custody determination is an issue.”
In the Interest of H.D., 729 P.2d 1234 (Kan. Ct. App. 1986). “K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 38-1503 sets forth the court’s jurisdiction over proceedings under the Kansas Code for Care of Children: “Jurisdiction, (a) Proceedings concerning any child who appears to be a child in need of care shall be governed by this code, except in those instances when…”
In re H.A.M., 961 P.2d 716 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). “K.S.A. 38-1503(a) states: "Proceedings concerning any child who appears to be a child in need of care shall be governed by this code, except in those instances when the Indian child welfare act of1978 ( 25 U.”
Calderon v. State of Kansas, 24 F. Supp. 2d 1138 (D. Kan. 1998). · cites it 2× “In determining whether a child who has been adjudicated in need of care should be placed in the custody of a parent, the judge is required to consider a wide range of circumstances, including whether such placement is in the best interests of the child.”
In re L.C., 857 P.2d 1375 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). “If the answer is yes, this court must then determine whether the trial court complied with the jurisdictional requirements of the Act.”
In Re Jd, 70 P.3d 700 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “38-1584(d) as authority to review the plan for J.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 38-1503(a) — 9 cases
In the Interest of M.F., 206 P.3d 57 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “See K.S.A. 38-1503(a). The Revised Kansas Code for Care of Children, K.”
In re S.M.H., 103 P.3d 976 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005). “However, K.S.A. 2003 Supp. 38-1503(a) makes it clear that CINC proceedings are not governed by the Code for the Care of Children “in those instances when the Indian child welfare act of 1978 applies.”
In the Interest of E.T., 137 P.3d 1035 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “38-1348 of the UCCJEA sets forth four alternatives through which a Kansas trial court obtains jurisdiction to malee an initial child-custody determination: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in K.S.A. 38-1351 and amendments thereto, a court of this state has jurisdiction to malee…”
In re H.A.M., 961 P.2d 716 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). “K.S.A. 38-1503(a) states: "Proceedings concerning any child who appears to be a child in need of care shall be governed by this code, except in those instances when the Indian child welfare act of1978 ( 25 U.”
In re A.N.P., 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “The parameters of the district court’s jurisdiction under the KCCC are set forth in K.S.A. 38-1503. Under that statute, district courts are given original jurisdiction, subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), “to receive…”
— K.S.A. § 38-1503(b) — 5 cases
In the Interest of Wicks, 693 P.2d 481 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 38-1503(b). Likewise, the definitional section of the UCCJA defines a custody proceeding to include proceedings brought under the CCC where custody determination is an issue.”
In re A.N.P., 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “The parameters of the district court’s jurisdiction under the KCCC are set forth in K.S.A. 38-1503. Under that statute, district courts are given original jurisdiction, subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), “to receive…”
In re L.C., 857 P.2d 1375 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). “If the answer is yes, this court must then determine whether the trial court complied with the jurisdictional requirements of the Act.”
In Re Lc, 857 P.2d 1375 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
In Re Anp, 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 38-1503(c) — 4 cases
In the Interest of J.D., 70 P.3d 700 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). “S.A. 38-1584(d) as authority to review the plan for J.”
In re A.N.P., 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “The parameters of the district court’s jurisdiction under the KCCC are set forth in K.S.A. 38-1503. Under that statute, district courts are given original jurisdiction, subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), “to receive…”
In Re Jd, 70 P.3d 700 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). “38-1584(d) as authority to review the plan for J.”
In Re Anp, 934 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
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.