K.S.A. » Chapter 44
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 44-323 (2026)

Assessment of interest; who deemed employer

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

44-323. Assessment of interest; who deemed employer. (a) At the discretion of the presiding officer, interest, as provided under K.S.A. 16-201, and amendments thereto, may be assessed on wage claims found to be due and owing from the date the wages were due as defined in K.S.A. 44-314, and amendments thereto.

(b) Any officer, manager, major shareholder or other person who has charge of the affairs of an employer, and who knowingly permits the employer to engage in violations of K.S.A. 44-314 or 44-315, and amendments thereto, may be deemed the employer for purposes of this act.

History: L. 1973, ch. 204, § 11; L. 1983, ch. 165, § 2; L. 1988, ch. 356, § 139; L. 2003, ch. 76, § 2; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: Matjasich v. State of Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 21 P.3d 985 (Kan. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matjasich v. State of Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 21 P.3d 985 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 5× “KDHR’s finding that members of a Hmited HabiHty company are Hable for unpaid wages under K.S.A. 44-323 was erroneous and is reversed.”
Garcia v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 890 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (D. Kan. 2012). · cites it 2× “” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-323 (a). Kan. Stax. Ann.”
Beckman v. Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 43 P.3d 891 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “K.S.A. 44-323(a) provides that the hearing officer has discretion to assess interest, as provided under K.”
Weinzirl v. the Wells Grp., Inc., 677 P.2d 1004 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 2× “In 1983, K.S.A. 44-323( a ) was amended to read: "At the discretion of the hearing officer, interest, as provided under K.”
Mullins v. Venable, 297 S.E.2d 866 (W. Va. 1982). “1982) Kan. StatAnn. § 44-323(b) (1981); Nev.Rev.”
Temmen v. Kent-Brown Chevrolet Co., 605 P.2d 95 (Kan. 1980). “The defendant is liable for damages for that breach and could be charged with a class C misdemeanor, pursuant to K.S.A. 44-323. With respect to the existence of a private remedy by the employee for a violation of K.”
Boucher v. Shaw, 196 P.3d 959 (Nev. 2008). “Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-323 (b) (2000) (statute amended in 2003 and now reads somewhat differently) (emphases added).”
Whelan's, Inc. v. Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 681 P.2d 621 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 2× “, as found in K.S.A. 44-323( b ). Intervenors are employees of Whelan's.”
A.O. Smith Corp. v. Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 144 P.3d 760 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005). “43 plus interest pursuant to K.S.A. 44-323(a) will adequately compensate the claimants in this case.”
Leonard v. McMorris, 106 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (D. Colo. 2000). “or any agent having the management of the corporation who knowingly permits the corporation to engage in [a] violation [of Kansas’ wage act] shall be deemed the employer for purposes of this act”); Minn. StatAnn.”
Alkire v. Fissel, 932 P.2d 1034 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 10× “44-315 and K.S.A. 44-323, which provide as follows: K.”
Head v. Knopp, 587 P.2d 867 (Kan. 1978). “” Defendants argue that since K.S.A. 44-323 provides “[w]illful violation of .”
Show all 22 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 44-323(a) — 4 cases
Beckman v. Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 43 P.3d 891 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “K.S.A. 44-323(a) provides that the hearing officer has discretion to assess interest, as provided under K.”
A.O. Smith Corp. v. Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 144 P.3d 760 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005). “43 plus interest pursuant to K.S.A. 44-323(a) will adequately compensate the claimants in this case.”
Alkire v. Fissel, 932 P.2d 1034 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “44-315 and K.S.A. 44-323, which provide as follows: K.”
Spicin Foods, Inc. (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).
— K.S.A. § 44-323(b) — 12 cases
Matjasich v. State of Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 21 P.3d 985 (Kan. 2001). “KDHR’s finding that members of a Hmited HabiHty company are Hable for unpaid wages under K.S.A. 44-323 was erroneous and is reversed.”
Mullins v. Venable, 297 S.E.2d 866 (W. Va. 1982). “1982) Kan. StatAnn. § 44-323(b) (1981); Nev.Rev.”
Leonard v. McMorris, 106 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (D. Colo. 2000). “or any agent having the management of the corporation who knowingly permits the corporation to engage in [a] violation [of Kansas’ wage act] shall be deemed the employer for purposes of this act”); Minn. StatAnn.”
Traffas v. Bridge Capital Corp., 46 F.3d 1152 (10th Cir. 1995).
Creative Consum. Concepts, Inc. v. Kansas Dept. of Labor (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
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.