K.S.A. » Chapter 41
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 41-101 (2026)

Citation of act

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

41-101. Citation of act. This act may be cited as the "Kansas liquor control act."

History: L. 1949, ch. 242, § 1; March 9.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1928–2008 · leading case: Mills v. City of Overland Park, 837 P.2d 370 (Kan. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mills v. City of Overland Park, 837 P.2d 370 (Kan. 1992). · cites it 4× “), while the former is contained is the Kansas Liquor Control Act (K.S.A. 41-101 et seq. ). The statement in Ling that 21-3610 was once a part of K.”
State Ex Rel. Schneider v. Kennedy, 587 P.2d 844 (Kan. 1978). · cites it 2× “Shortly thereafter in 1949, the legislature passed a comprehensive liquor control scheme known as the Kansas Liquor Control Act, now codified at K.S.A. 41-101 et seq. For purposes of this section the legislature defined "open saloon" in K.”
State Ex Rel. Kline v. Bd. of Comm'rs of Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cty., 85 P.3d 1237 (Kan. 2004). · cites it 2× “On cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings, the district court concluded that, because provisions of the Kansas Liquor Control Act, K.S.A. 41-101 et seq., are not uniformly applicable, the Cities had authority under the Home Rule Amendment to the Kansas Constitution, art.”
Glazer's Wholesale Drug Co., Inc. v. Kansas, 145 F. Supp. 2d 1234 (D. Kan. 2001). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs bring this action for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions within the Kansas Liquor Control Act, K.S.A., 41-101 et seq. (“KLCA” or “the Act”).”
Bland v. Scott, 112 P.3d 941 (Kan. 2005). “Hold the Kansas Liquor Control Act, K.S.A. 41-101 et seq., unconstitutional (1) insofar as it did not supply a quid pro quo for the repeal of the dram shop act, and (2) as violative of Section 18 of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution; or 5.”
City of Lyons v. Suttle, 498 P.2d 9 (Kan. 1972). · cites it 2× “The first is the Kansas Liquor Control Act (K.S.A. 41-101 et seq. ) which applies to beverages including beer with an alcoholic content of more than 3.”
Colby Distrib. Co. v. Lennen, 606 P.2d 102 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “: This is an action seeking a declaratory judgment and permanent injunction from the enforcement of 1979 amendments to the Kansas Liquor Control Act (K.SA. 41-101 et seq). The amendments were enacted by the legislature, effective May 10, 1979 and are designated House Bill 2020.”
Beeler v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 265 P. 57 (Kan. 1928). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff’s motion to be allowed interest was not filed until after the term of court at which the verdict rendered had expired, and the succeeding term of court had also expired, and another term of court had commenced.”
Farha v. City of Wichita, 161 P.3d 717 (Kan. 2007). “516 (Liquor Control Act, K.S.A. 41-101 et seq., not uniformly applicable; opt-out of statutory prohibition on Sunday liquor sales permissible); compare City of Wichita, 255 Kan.”
Blomgren v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 191 P.3d 320 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “The hearing officer held a hearing and found that Jill had secured advantages by playing by a different set of rules than local competitors and that she had a general disregard for the Liquor Control Act, K.S.A. 41-101 et seq. The officer concluded that Jill’s license should be…”
Cray v. Kennedy, 640 P.2d 1219 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 3× “tain findings of law, have remanded the matter to the administrative tribunal for further proceedings consistent with the trial court’s findings, inasmuch as it is the administrative officials who are empowered to issue the licenses and not the courts? The determination of these…”
State ex rel. Kline v. Unified Bd. of Commissioners, 85 P.3d 1237 (Kan. 2004). · cites it 2× “On cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings, the district court concluded that, because provisions of the Kansas Liquor Control Act, K.S.A. 41-101 et seq., are not uniformly applicable, the Cities had authority under the Home Rule Amendment to the Kansas Constitution, art.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
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.