Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 44-119 (2026)

Same; liability; attorney's fee

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

44-119. Same; liability; attorney's fee. Any person, firm or corporation found guilty of the violation of this act, shall be liable to the party injured to an amount equal to three times the sum he may be injured, and such employers of labor shall also be liable for a reasonable attorney fee, which shall be taxed as part of the costs in the case.

History: L. 1897, ch. 144, § 4; May 8; R.S. 1923, 44-119.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2012–2025 · leading case: Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Tech., LLC, 964 N.E.2d 806 (Ind. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Loparex, LLC v. MPI Release Tech., LLC, 964 N.E.2d 806 (Ind. 2012). “” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-119 (2000). 8 . "If any person, agent, company or corporation, after having discharged any employee from his or its service, shall prevent or attempt to prevent, by word or writing of any kind, such discharged employee from obtaining employment with any…”

Schrader v. Emporia State Univ. (D. Kan. 2021). · cites it 12× “He also brings two Kansas law claims against ESU for Tortious Interference with Prospective Contractual Relationship or Expectancy (Count IX) and Blacklisting under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-119 (Count X).4 Each defendant has filed an individual Motion to Dismiss.”

Horinek v. Spirit AeroSystems, Inc. (D. Kan. 2024). · cites it 10× “K.S.A. § 44-119. Defendant argues that plaintiff has failed to state a claim for blacklisting because he has not alleged that defendant has been criminally convicted of violating the statute.”

Zickel v. Happer (D. Kan. 2025). · cites it 6× “64 Defendant Happer contends that Plaintiff does not state a claim for blacklisting because Plaintiff does not allege that Defendant Happer was criminally convicted of violation the statute.”

Tanksley v. Rice Cnty. Sheriff's Off. (D. Kan. 2021). · cites it 2× “See Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-119 . It provides: Any person, firm or corporation found guilty of the violation of this act, shall be liable to the party injured to an amount equal to three times the sum he may be injured, and such employers of labor shall also be liable for a…”

Painter v. Midwest Health (10th Cir. 2022). “We have previously addressed the Kansas statutory scheme governing blacklisting and concluded that, “[b]ased on the plain language of [ Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-119 ], . . . a criminal blacklisting conviction is an element of a civil blacklisting claim against an employer under…”

Painter v. Midwest Health, Inc. (D. Kan. 2021). “The parties agree that this statute (along with § 44-119) govern this claim. See Doc. 77 at 2 (Pretrial Order ¶ 1.”

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.