Kansas Statutes Annotated
K.S.A. § 5-412 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KS-LEGkslegislature.org
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
5-412.
History: L. 1973, ch. 24, § 12; Repealed, L. 2018, ch. 90, § 35; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases, 1981–2013 · leading case: Jackson Trak Grp., Inc. Ex Rel. Jackson Jordan, Inc. v. Mid States Port Auth., 751 P.2d 122 (Kan. 1988).
Jackson Trak Grp., Inc. Ex Rel. Jackson Jordan, Inc. v. Mid States Port Auth., 751 P.2d 122 (Kan. 1988). “Further, an arbitrator’s award is presumptively valid unless one of the specific grounds in K.S.A. 5-412 can be proved. Mid States *690 argues that the district court erred in confirming the arbitration award and should have vacated it because the arbitrators exceeded their…”
Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Reed, 287 P.3d 933 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “” Reed argues that Heartland’s appeal must fail because both parties mutually agreed to waive judicial review of the arbitration decision by these terms.”
Moreland v. Perkins, Smart & Boyd, 240 P.3d 601 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “The district court must presume an award is valid unless one of the specific grounds in K.S.A. 5-412(a) is proven. Alexander v. Everhart, 27 Kan.”
Rural Water Dist. No. 6 v. Ziegler Corp., 677 P.2d 573 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “2d 1079 (1981), the Kansas Supreme Court, in taking cognizance of K.S.A. 5-412 ruled: “ ‘Where parties have agreed to be bound by a submission to arbitration, errors of law and fact, or an erroneous decision of matters submitted to the judgment of the arbitrators, are…”
Foley Co. v. Grindsted Prods., Inc., 662 P.2d 1254 (Kan. 1983). “The primary statute with which we are involved is K.S.A. 5-412 (Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann.”
Griffith v. McGovern, 141 P.3d 516 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Failure to Disclose K.S.A. 5-412(a) sets forth the five bases for vacating an arbitration award.”
MBNA Am. Bank, N.A. v. Credit, 132 P.3d 898 (Kan. 2006). “In these circumstances, K.S.A. 5-412(5) permitted Credit to file a timely motion to vacate and raise the argument that no arbitration agreement existed.”
Neighbors Constr. Co. v. Woodland Park at Soldier Creek, LLC, 284 P.3d 1057 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “, allows a party to appeal from an order confirming or vacating an arbitration award.”
Alexander v. Everhart, 7 P.3d 1282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). “All three experts agree to be governed by the terms of this Agreement, including adherence to the time frame for selecting die arbitrator and rendering a decision as required by this Section.” The district court’s scope of review in examining an arbitration award is quite…”
Heartland Premier, Ltd. v. Grp. B & B, L.L.C., 31 P.3d 978 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “5-412(a)(3). In its application to vacate the award and a motion for summary judgment, Group B maintained that the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his authority in awarding Heartland attorney fees.”
Prof'l Builders, Inc. v. Sedan Floral, Inc., 819 P.2d 1254 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). “5-412 provides in part: “(a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud or other undue means.” Sedan contends that, because the architect responsible for certification of substantial completion of the…”
Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co., 206 P.3d 1 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “An arbitration award may be challenged at confirmation on the basis that the arbitrator exceeded his or her authority, see K.S.A. 5-412(a)(3); 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(4) (2006), so the issue could have — and should have — been raised first before the district court.”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(5) — 1 case
MBNA Am. Bank, N.A. v. Credit, 132 P.3d 898 (Kan. 2006). “In these circumstances, K.S.A. 5-412(5) permitted Credit to file a timely motion to vacate and raise the argument that no arbitration agreement existed.”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a) — 10 cases
Moreland v. Perkins, Smart & Boyd, 240 P.3d 601 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “The district court must presume an award is valid unless one of the specific grounds in K.S.A. 5-412(a) is proven. Alexander v. Everhart, 27 Kan.”
Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Reed, 287 P.3d 933 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “” Reed argues that Heartland’s appeal must fail because both parties mutually agreed to waive judicial review of the arbitration decision by these terms.”
Neighbors Constr. Co. v. Woodland Park at Soldier Creek, LLC, 284 P.3d 1057 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “, allows a party to appeal from an order confirming or vacating an arbitration award.”
Rural Water Dist. No. 6 v. Ziegler Corp., 677 P.2d 573 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “2d 1079 (1981), the Kansas Supreme Court, in taking cognizance of K.S.A. 5-412 ruled: “ ‘Where parties have agreed to be bound by a submission to arbitration, errors of law and fact, or an erroneous decision of matters submitted to the judgment of the arbitrators, are…”
Griffith v. McGovern, 141 P.3d 516 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Failure to Disclose K.S.A. 5-412(a) sets forth the five bases for vacating an arbitration award.”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(1) — 1 case
Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Reed, 287 P.3d 933 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “” Reed argues that Heartland’s appeal must fail because both parties mutually agreed to waive judicial review of the arbitration decision by these terms.”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(2) — 1 case
Foley Co. v. Grindsted Prods., Inc., 662 P.2d 1254 (Kan. 1983). “The primary statute with which we are involved is K.S.A. 5-412 (Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann.”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(3) — 8 cases
Jackson Trak Grp., Inc. Ex Rel. Jackson Jordan, Inc. v. Mid States Port Auth., 751 P.2d 122 (Kan. 1988). “Further, an arbitrator’s award is presumptively valid unless one of the specific grounds in K.S.A. 5-412 can be proved. Mid States *690 argues that the district court erred in confirming the arbitration award and should have vacated it because the arbitrators exceeded their…”
Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co., 206 P.3d 1 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “An arbitration award may be challenged at confirmation on the basis that the arbitrator exceeded his or her authority, see K.S.A. 5-412(a)(3); 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(4) (2006), so the issue could have — and should have — been raised first before the district court.”
All. Platforms, Inc. v. Behrens, 305 P.3d 30 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013).
Heartland Premier, Ltd. v. Grp. B & B, L.L.C., 31 P.3d 978 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “5-412(a)(3). In its application to vacate the award and a motion for summary judgment, Group B maintained that the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his authority in awarding Heartland attorney fees.”
Alexander v. Everhart, 7 P.3d 1282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). “All three experts agree to be governed by the terms of this Agreement, including adherence to the time frame for selecting die arbitrator and rendering a decision as required by this Section.” The district court’s scope of review in examining an arbitration award is quite…”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(4) — 2 cases
Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Reed, 287 P.3d 933 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “” Reed argues that Heartland’s appeal must fail because both parties mutually agreed to waive judicial review of the arbitration decision by these terms.”
Rural Water Dist. No. 6 v. Ziegler Corp., 677 P.2d 573 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “2d 1079 (1981), the Kansas Supreme Court, in taking cognizance of K.S.A. 5-412 ruled: “ ‘Where parties have agreed to be bound by a submission to arbitration, errors of law and fact, or an erroneous decision of matters submitted to the judgment of the arbitrators, are…”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(5) — 3 cases
Foley Co. v. Grindsted Prods., Inc., 662 P.2d 1254 (Kan. 1983). “The primary statute with which we are involved is K.S.A. 5-412 (Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann.”
Alexander v. Everhart, 7 P.3d 1282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). “All three experts agree to be governed by the terms of this Agreement, including adherence to the time frame for selecting die arbitrator and rendering a decision as required by this Section.” The district court’s scope of review in examining an arbitration award is quite…”
Alexander v. Everhart, 3 P.3d 575 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000).
— K.S.A. § 5-412(a)(l) — 6 cases
Griffith v. McGovern, 141 P.3d 516 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Failure to Disclose K.S.A. 5-412(a) sets forth the five bases for vacating an arbitration award.”
Prof'l Builders, Inc. v. Sedan Floral, Inc., 819 P.2d 1254 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). “5-412 provides in part: “(a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud or other undue means.” Sedan contends that, because the architect responsible for certification of substantial completion of the…”
Foley Co. v. Grindsted Prods., Inc., 662 P.2d 1254 (Kan. 1983). “The primary statute with which we are involved is K.S.A. 5-412 (Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann.”
Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Reed, 287 P.3d 933 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012). “” Reed argues that Heartland’s appeal must fail because both parties mutually agreed to waive judicial review of the arbitration decision by these terms.”
Alexander v. Everhart, 7 P.3d 1282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). “All three experts agree to be governed by the terms of this Agreement, including adherence to the time frame for selecting die arbitrator and rendering a decision as required by this Section.” The district court’s scope of review in examining an arbitration award is quite…”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(b) — 3 cases
MBNA Am. Bank, N.A. v. Credit, 132 P.3d 898 (Kan. 2006). “In these circumstances, K.S.A. 5-412(5) permitted Credit to file a timely motion to vacate and raise the argument that no arbitration agreement existed.”
Prof'l Builders, Inc. v. Sedan Floral, Inc., 819 P.2d 1254 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). “5-412 provides in part: “(a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud or other undue means.” Sedan contends that, because the architect responsible for certification of substantial completion of the…”
Nowicki v. Proj. Paint Rsch. Labs, 195 P.3d 273 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 5-412(c) — 1 case
Rural Water Dist. No. 6 v. Ziegler Corp., 677 P.2d 573 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “2d 1079 (1981), the Kansas Supreme Court, in taking cognizance of K.S.A. 5-412 ruled: “ ‘Where parties have agreed to be bound by a submission to arbitration, errors of law and fact, or an erroneous decision of matters submitted to the judgment of the arbitrators, are…”
— K.S.A. § 5-412(c)(3) — 1 case
Foley Co. v. Grindsted Prods., Inc., 662 P.2d 1254 (Kan. 1983). “The primary statute with which we are involved is K.S.A. 5-412 (Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. Code Ann.”
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.