History:
L. 1965, ch. 347, § 14; L. 1983, ch. 191, § 11; L. 1986, ch. 213, § 3; L. 1989, ch. 175, § 2; L. 1996, ch. 77, § 2; Repealed, L. 2002, ch. 114, § 81; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Modifies common law rule with respect to order of priority in selection of guardian. In re Johnson, 210 Kan. 828, 830, 504 P.2d 217.
2. Grandparent with visitation rights under K.S.A. 38-129 not entitled to notice of adoption; court without power to grant right after adoption. Browning v. Tarwater, 215 Kan. 501, 504, 524 P.2d 1135.
3. Priority considered in selection of guardian and conservator of minor. In re Stremel, 233 Kan. 136, 139, 142, 660 P.2d 952 (1983).
4. Cited; K.S.A. 59-3004 inherently requires that will be probated before it is effective for appointment for guardianship purposes. In re Guardianship of Slemp, 11 Kan. App. 2d 156, 159, 717 P.2d 519 (1986).
5. Factors in addition to statutory requirements to be considered in appointment of guardian for minor determined. In re Guardianship of T.D.S., 13 Kan. App. 2d 275, 277, 769 P.2d 32 (1989).
6. Noted in holding provisions in K.S.A. 59-3010 mandatory not directory thus requiring compliance for jurisdiction regarding guardianship/conservatorship. In re Guardianship and Conservatorship of Fogle, 17 Kan. App. 2d 357, 361, 837 P.2d 842 (1992).
7. District court is not prohibited from approving conservator's disbursements and accounting solely because bond untimely filed. In re Guardianship & Conservatorship of Heck, 22 Kan. App. 2d 135, 142, 913 P.2d 213 (1996).
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Heck, 913 P.2d 213 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3דRalph’s argument essentially is that the district court was prohibited by statute from approving the accounting because Archer did not timely comply with the court’s order requiring the oath and bond or with K.S.A. 59-3014, and, because Archer’s actions were null and void on…”
In Re Stremel, 660 P.2d 952 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 3דFinally, K.S.A. 59-3014 sets forth certain priorities for the appointment of a guardian or conservator including first, the nominee of the minor if the minor is over 14 years of age, and second, the nominee of a natural guardian of the minor.”
In re the Guardianship of T.D.S., 769 P.2d 32 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 5ד, for the appointment of a guardian or conservator, or both, of a minor, K.S.A. 59-3014 mandates the priority in selecting the guardian and/or conservator unless the best interests of the minor dictate otherwise or unless it is shown that the person nominated is not suitable to…”
Ward v. Ward, 30 P.3d 1001 (Kan. 2001). “Finally, it was also proper for the appointees to be parties designated by the minor’s natural guardian, as K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 59-3014(a) states: “[T]he court in appointing a suitable guardian or conservator shall give priority in the following order: (1) To die nominee of a…”
In Re the Conservatorship of McRoy, 861 P.2d 1378 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). “K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 59-3014(e). It may compel any person alleged to have concealed, converted, embezzled, or disposed of any property potentially belonging to a conservatee to appear so that a disclosure proceeding may be conducted.”
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Fogle, 837 P.2d 842 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992). “59-3013 and amendments thereto, has made a finding that a disabled person is able to and should be permitted to make some decisions which affect the person, a guardian shall be appointed and ‘Letters of Limited Guardianship’ shall specify which of the powers and duties of a…”
Mason v. Dome, 660 P.2d 952 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 3דFinally, K.S.A. 59-3014 sets forth certain priorities for the appointment of a guardian or conservator including first, the nominee of the minor if the minor is over 14 years of age, and second, the nominee of a natural guardian of the minor.”
— K.S.A. § 59-3014(a) — 2 cases
Ward v. Ward, 30 P.3d 1001 (Kan. 2001). “Finally, it was also proper for the appointees to be parties designated by the minor’s natural guardian, as K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 59-3014(a) states: “[T]he court in appointing a suitable guardian or conservator shall give priority in the following order: (1) To die nominee of a…”
In re the Guardianship of T.D.S., 769 P.2d 32 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). “, for the appointment of a guardian or conservator, or both, of a minor, K.S.A. 59-3014 mandates the priority in selecting the guardian and/or conservator unless the best interests of the minor dictate otherwise or unless it is shown that the person nominated is not suitable to…”
— K.S.A. § 59-3014(a)(1) — 1 case
In re the Guardianship of T.D.S., 769 P.2d 32 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). “, for the appointment of a guardian or conservator, or both, of a minor, K.S.A. 59-3014 mandates the priority in selecting the guardian and/or conservator unless the best interests of the minor dictate otherwise or unless it is shown that the person nominated is not suitable to…”
— K.S.A. § 59-3014(a)(2) — 1 case
In re the Guardianship of T.D.S., 769 P.2d 32 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). “, for the appointment of a guardian or conservator, or both, of a minor, K.S.A. 59-3014 mandates the priority in selecting the guardian and/or conservator unless the best interests of the minor dictate otherwise or unless it is shown that the person nominated is not suitable to…”
— K.S.A. § 59-3014(d) — 2 cases
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Heck, 913 P.2d 213 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). “Ralph’s argument essentially is that the district court was prohibited by statute from approving the accounting because Archer did not timely comply with the court’s order requiring the oath and bond or with K.S.A. 59-3014, and, because Archer’s actions were null and void on…”
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Fogle, 837 P.2d 842 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992). “59-3013 and amendments thereto, has made a finding that a disabled person is able to and should be permitted to make some decisions which affect the person, a guardian shall be appointed and ‘Letters of Limited Guardianship’ shall specify which of the powers and duties of a…”
— K.S.A. § 59-3014(e) — 1 case
In Re the Conservatorship of McRoy, 861 P.2d 1378 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). “K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 59-3014(e). It may compel any person alleged to have concealed, converted, embezzled, or disposed of any property potentially belonging to a conservatee to appear so that a disclosure proceeding may be conducted.”
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.