K.S.A. » Chapter 60
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-1105 (2026)

Limitations and amendment

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

60-1105. Limitations and amendment. (a) Limitations. An action to foreclose a lien under this article shall be brought within one year from the time of filing the lien statement, but if a promissory note has been attached to the lien statement in lieu of an itemized statement, the action shall be commenced within one year from the maturity of said note.

(b) Amendment. Where action is brought to enforce a lien the lien statement may be amended by leave of the judge in furtherance of justice, except to increase the amount claimed.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-1105; January 1, 1964.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: Tradesmen Int'l, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Real Est. Bus. Trust, 129 P.3d 102 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tradesmen Int'l, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Real Est. Bus. Trust, 129 P.3d 102 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “Gard’s comments in Gard’s Kansas Code of Civil Procedure Annotated § 60-1105, p. 661 (1st ed. 1963), on K.S.”
In Re Birdview Satellite Commc'ns, Inc., 90 B.R. 465 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1988). · cites it 9× “The Bank and the debtor counter that a mechanic’s lien is only perfected upon the timely commencement of an action to foreclose it, and that since Midgley did not commence an action within the time allowed by K.S.A. 60-1105 and 11 U.S.C. § 546 (b), its lien expired.”
Columbia Sav. Ass'n, F.A. v. McPheeters, 911 P.2d 187 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 10× “60-1108 further provides: “If no action to foreclose or adjudicate any lien filed under the provisions of this article shall be instituted within the time provided in subsection (a) of K.S.A. 60-1105, and amendments thereto, the lien shall be considered canceled by limitation of…”
J. Walters Constr. Co. v. Greystone South P'ship, L.P., 817 P.2d 201 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “Central Life and Sun argue that in doing so the court allowed the lien total to be increased in violation of K.S.A. 60-1105. That contention fails because the effect of the trial court’s determination was to treat $26,796.”
Boyce v. Knudson, 548 P.2d 712 (Kan. 1976). · cites it 2× “If no action to foreclose or adjudicate any lien filed under the provisions of this article shall be instituted within the time provided in section 60-1105 (a) the olerk of the district court shall enter under the head of ‘Remarks,’ in the mechanic’s-lien docket hereinbefore…”
Bob Eldridge Constr. Co. v. Pioneer Materials, Inc., 684 P.2d 355 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 2× “The bond statute involved here, K.S.A. 60-1110, does not provide its own statute of limitations.”
Scott v. Strickland, 691 P.2d 45 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “K.S.A. 60-1105(b) permits amendment of a lien statement upon leave of court and in the furtherance of justice so long as the amount of the lien is not increased.”
Trilogy Dev. Co. v. BB Syndication Servs., Inc., 468 B.R. 854 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 2011). “The court also addressed the parties’ dispute over the effect to be given a Kansas statute providing that “[a]n action to foreclose a lien under this article shall be brought within one year from the time of filing the lien statement Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-1105 (a). The claimant…”
Nat'l Restoration Co. v. Merit Gen. Contractors, Inc., 208 P.3d 755 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “2d 222 (1967),] concluded that K.S.A. 60-1105(b) does not permit ‘amendment of a vitally defective hen statement after the statutory period in which to file such hen has expired.”
Halsey v. Pat Reichenberger Lumber, Inc., 621 P.2d 1021 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “” The court concluded that K.S.A. 60-1105(b) does not permit “amendment of a vitally defective lien statement after the statutory period in which to file such lien has expired.”
In re Lien Against the Dist. at City Ctr. (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “See K.S.A. 60-1105. That said, Kansas law provides multiple avenues for interested parties to challenge the validity and enforceability of a lien.”
Hermes v. Stackley, 699 P.2d 560 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “By way of comparison, K.S.A. 60-1105, which governs the foreclosure of mechanics’ liens, does require court action for such a foreclosure.”
— K.S.A. § 60-1105(a) — 3 cases
In Re Birdview Satellite Commc'ns, Inc., 90 B.R. 465 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1988). “The Bank and the debtor counter that a mechanic’s lien is only perfected upon the timely commencement of an action to foreclose it, and that since Midgley did not commence an action within the time allowed by K.S.A. 60-1105 and 11 U.S.C. § 546 (b), its lien expired.”
Columbia Sav. Ass'n, F.A. v. McPheeters, 911 P.2d 187 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996). “60-1108 further provides: “If no action to foreclose or adjudicate any lien filed under the provisions of this article shall be instituted within the time provided in subsection (a) of K.S.A. 60-1105, and amendments thereto, the lien shall be considered canceled by limitation of…”
In re Lien Against the Dist. at City Ctr. (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). “See K.S.A. 60-1105. That said, Kansas law provides multiple avenues for interested parties to challenge the validity and enforceability of a lien.”
— K.S.A. § 60-1105(b) — 5 cases
Tradesmen Int'l, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Real Est. Bus. Trust, 129 P.3d 102 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Gard’s comments in Gard’s Kansas Code of Civil Procedure Annotated § 60-1105, p. 661 (1st ed. 1963), on K.S.”
J. Walters Constr. Co. v. Greystone South P'ship, L.P., 817 P.2d 201 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). “Central Life and Sun argue that in doing so the court allowed the lien total to be increased in violation of K.S.A. 60-1105. That contention fails because the effect of the trial court’s determination was to treat $26,796.”
Scott v. Strickland, 691 P.2d 45 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984). “K.S.A. 60-1105(b) permits amendment of a lien statement upon leave of court and in the furtherance of justice so long as the amount of the lien is not increased.”
Nat'l Restoration Co. v. Merit Gen. Contractors, Inc., 208 P.3d 755 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “2d 222 (1967),] concluded that K.S.A. 60-1105(b) does not permit ‘amendment of a vitally defective hen statement after the statutory period in which to file such hen has expired.”
Halsey v. Pat Reichenberger Lumber, Inc., 621 P.2d 1021 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “” The court concluded that K.S.A. 60-1105(b) does not permit “amendment of a vitally defective lien statement after the statutory period in which to file such lien has expired.”
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.