K.S.A. » Chapter 59
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 59-1704 (2026)

Liability for conversion

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

59-1704. Liability for conversion. If any person embezzles or converts to his or her own use any of the personal property of a decedent or conservatee, such person shall be liable for double the value of the property so embezzled or converted.

History: L. 1939, ch. 180, § 134; L. 1965, ch. 346, § 17; January 1, 1966.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2021 · leading case: Bolton v. Souter, 872 P.2d 758 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bolton v. Souter, 872 P.2d 758 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 16× “Dexter Galloway, conservator of Clarence Conrad Bolton, appeals the trial court’s refusal to double his money judgment against Velda Souter under K.S.A. 59-1704. Bolton was in his early 90’s in December of 1989 when conservatorship proceedings were commenced in which Joyce Van…”
In Re Conservatorship of Marcotte, 756 P.2d 1091 (Kan. 1988). · cites it 6× “The Court of Appeals, in holding that a voluntary conservatee may not dispose of personal property by inter vivos conveyance without court approval, ruled that the gifts “must be returned to the estate.”
In Re the Est. of Engels, 692 P.2d 400 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 5× “58 in estate funds for his own use, but refused to impose a double penalty on Ehlebracht pursuant to K.S.A. 59-1704; determined that Ehlebracht was not liable for rent during the months he allowed his son to use Gennade Engels’ home; disallowed a $319.”
Mohr v. Tatro (In Re Tatro), 387 B.R. 833 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2008). · cites it 8× “When Mohr could not persuade Tatro to give her the settlement funds, she sought legal counsel and, after investigation, filed an action in the District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas, alleging that Tatro had converted these funds “to his own use and benefit” in violation of…”
In re Est. of Taylor, 479 P.3d 476 (Kan. 2021). · cites it 14× “As part of the Kansas Probate Code, K.S.A. 59-1704 provides: "If any person embezzles or converts to his or her own use any of the personal property of a decedent or conservatee, such person shall be liable for double the value of the property so embezzled or converted.”
In Re Trusteeship of McDonald, 822 P.2d 637 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “The first of petitioners’ two complaints is that the trial court erred in not imposing the penalty for conversion directed by K.S.A. 59-1704. That statute provides that “[i]f any person embezzles or converts to his or her own use any of the personal property of a decedent or…”
In re the Conservatorship of Huerta, 41 P.3d 814 (Kan. 2002). “Despite the factual similarities, however, the primary issue in Koch was not the assessment of interest in excess of the penal sum of the bond, but rather whether the surety was obligated to pay double the amount converted by its principal under K.S.A. 59-1704. The bonding…”
In Re the Est. of Pritchard, 154 P.3d 24 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). “See K.S.A. 59-1704 (prescribing liability for conversion).”
Hubbard v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 704 P.2d 399 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “50 in actual damages doubled pursuant to the provisions of K.S.A. 59-1704. It entered judgment against Home Federal in the amount of $26,500.”
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Heck, 913 P.2d 213 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). “Moreover, the judicially appointed conservator falls within the definition of “fiduciaiy,” whether or not letters have been issued, and can be held hable under K.S.A. 59-1704 if property of the conservatee is converted.”
McCabe v. Duran, 180 P.3d 1098 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “59-1704 — which imposes double liability to any person who converts the property of a decedent or conservatee— to a trustee who embezzles trust funds, noting that the statute is penal in nature and should be strictly construed). McCabe argues that the KUTC was intended to apply…”
In Re Williamson, 918 P.2d 1302 (Kan. 1996). “The judgment was doubled pursuant to K.S.A. 59-1704 to $166,962.84. Respondent’s defense to the hearing panel for his actions as executor was that he was given the real estate and certain stock by the decedent, Anita Williamson, before her death, which he claims is shown by the…”
Show all 18 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.