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

K.S.A. § 38-2273 (2026)

Appeals; procedure; verification; continuing jurisdiction

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

38-2273. Appeals; procedure; verification; continuing jurisdiction. (a) An appeal may be taken by any party or interested party from any order of temporary custody, adjudication, disposition, finding of unfitness or termination of parental rights.

(b) An appeal from an order entered by a district magistrate judge who is not regularly admitted to practice law in Kansas shall be to a district judge. The appeal shall be heard on the basis of the record within 30 days from the date the notice of appeal is filed. If no record was made of the proceedings, the trial shall be de novo.

(c) Procedure on appeal shall be governed by article 21 of chapter 60 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and amendments thereto.

(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, appeals under this section shall have priority over all other cases.

(e) Every notice of appeal, docketing statement and brief shall be verified by the appellant if the appellant has been personally served at any time during the proceedings. Failure to have the required verification shall result in the dismissal of the appeal.

(f) While a case is on appeal from the district court, the district court or magistrate court shall continue to have jurisdiction over all issues not specifically appealed and shall conduct timely permanency hearings.

History: L. 2006, ch. 200, § 68; L. 2010, ch. 75, § 16; L. 2014, ch. 71, § 4; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52 cases (20 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: In re N.E., 516 P.3d 586 (Kan. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re N.E., 516 P.3d 586 (Kan. 2022). · cites it 55× “K.S.A. 38-2273(a) governs appellate jurisdiction under the Revised Kansas Code for the Care of Children, K.”
In Re Interest of T.S., 419 P.3d 1159 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 32× “SYLLABUS BY THE COURT K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 38-2273 does not provide the right to appeal a denial of a motion to terminate parental rights.”
In the Interest of N.A.C., 329 P.3d 458 (Kan. 2014). · cites it 27× “68; K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273. The current appellate jurisdiction statute, which lacks the pre-1982 “final order” language, demonstrates the legislature intended to limit appellate jurisdiction to particular categories of orders and to permit interlocutory review of them instead…”
In the Interest of D.M.M., 166 P.3d 431 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 7× “Before we can address the merits of Grandmother’s claims, we must determine whether this court has jurisdiction over Grandmother’s appeal.”
In the Interest of N.A.C., 361 P.3d 771 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 16× “But in order for this court to have subject matter jurisdiction over Maternal Cousins’ appeal, the order being appealed must be one of the specified orders listed in K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273(a). In this case, the *707 order being appealed concluded SRS—by and through Youthville…”
Interest of C.E., 275 P.3d 67 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8× “K.S.A. 2010 Supp. 38-2273. The Secretary of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) appealed a placement order made by a magistrate judge to the district court.”
In the Interests of A.S., 364 P.3d 1203 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 13× “In response, the State claims K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 38-2273(a) provides it with jurisdiction to appeal.”
In the Interest of A.F., 172 P.3d 63 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “” K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2273(a). The key words found here are terms of art, de *745 fined by this comprehensive statute.”
In re D.D., 2013 VT 79 (Vt. 2013). · cites it 2× “, Kan. Stat. Ann. § 38-2273 (a) (appealable orders include temporary custody, adjudication, disposition, finding of unfitness and termination of parental rights); Ohio Rev.”
In the Interest of B.D.-Y., 187 P.3d 594 (Kan. 2008). “We transferred from the *687 Court of Appeals; our jurisdiction is pursuant to K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 38-2273(a). The ultimate issue on appeal is as follows: 1.”
In the Interest of N.U., 369 P.3d 984 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “We note that K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 38-2273 governs appeals in CINC cases.”
In the Interest of A.E.S., 298 P.3d 386 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “Upon motion of the State, the combined journal entry of disposition was added to the record on appeal pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 3.”
Show all 52 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(a) — 40 cases
In re N.E., 516 P.3d 586 (Kan. 2022). “K.S.A. 38-2273(a) governs appellate jurisdiction under the Revised Kansas Code for the Care of Children, K.”
In Re Interest of T.S., 419 P.3d 1159 (Kan. 2018). “SYLLABUS BY THE COURT K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 38-2273 does not provide the right to appeal a denial of a motion to terminate parental rights.”
In the Interest of N.A.C., 329 P.3d 458 (Kan. 2014). “68; K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273. The current appellate jurisdiction statute, which lacks the pre-1982 “final order” language, demonstrates the legislature intended to limit appellate jurisdiction to particular categories of orders and to permit interlocutory review of them instead…”
In the Interest of N.A.C., 361 P.3d 771 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013). “But in order for this court to have subject matter jurisdiction over Maternal Cousins’ appeal, the order being appealed must be one of the specified orders listed in K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273(a). In this case, the *707 order being appealed concluded SRS—by and through Youthville…”
In the Interests of A.S., 364 P.3d 1203 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “In response, the State claims K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 38-2273(a) provides it with jurisdiction to appeal.”
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(b) — 2 cases
In the Interest of L.C.W., 211 P.3d 829 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
In Re Lcw, 211 P.3d 829 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(c) — 10 cases
In re N.E., 516 P.3d 586 (Kan. 2022). “K.S.A. 38-2273(a) governs appellate jurisdiction under the Revised Kansas Code for the Care of Children, K.”
In the Interest of A.F., 172 P.3d 63 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). “” K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2273(a). The key words found here are terms of art, de *745 fined by this comprehensive statute.”
In the Interest of L.B., 217 P.3d 1004 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
In the Interest of L.C.W., 211 P.3d 829 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
In Re Lb, 217 P.3d 1004 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(d) — 2 cases
In the Interest of N.A.C., 329 P.3d 458 (Kan. 2014). “68; K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273. The current appellate jurisdiction statute, which lacks the pre-1982 “final order” language, demonstrates the legislature intended to limit appellate jurisdiction to particular categories of orders and to permit interlocutory review of them instead…”
In re N.A.C. (Kan. 2014).
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(e) — 2 cases
In re K.S. (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).
In re S.G. (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
— K.S.A. § 38-2273(f) — 5 cases
In the Interest of N.U., 369 P.3d 984 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). “We note that K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 38-2273 governs appeals in CINC cases.”
In the Interest of N.A.C., 361 P.3d 771 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013). “But in order for this court to have subject matter jurisdiction over Maternal Cousins’ appeal, the order being appealed must be one of the specified orders listed in K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 38-2273(a). In this case, the *707 order being appealed concluded SRS—by and through Youthville…”
In re N.U (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).
In re A.S. – Per Curiam – Appeal dismissed – Sedgwick (Kan. Ct. App. 2023).
In re B.H. (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).
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.