Kansas Statutes Annotated
K.S.A. § 60-204 (2026)
Process, generally
✓ current as of May 2026 Cite as: K.S.A. § 60-204 (2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KS-LEGkslegislature.org
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
60-204. Process, generally. The methods of serving process set out in article 3 of this chapter constitute sufficient service of process in all civil actions and proceedings, but are alternatives to and do not restrict different methods specifically provided by law. Substantial compliance with any method of serving process effects valid service of process if the court finds that, notwithstanding some irregularity or omission, the party served was made aware that an action or proceeding was pending in a specified court that might affect the party or the party's status or property.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-204; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 71; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61
cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: Fisher v. DeCarvalho
Fisher v. DeCarvalho (2011)
“60-304(a), it was valid under K.S.A. 60-204 because she substantially complied with the statutory method of service of process.”
Fisher v. DeCarvalho (2013)
“In response, Fisher argued that the provisions of K.S.A. 60-204 validated the service of process because she had substantially complied with the requirements of K.”
Spiess v. Meyers (2007)
“§ 60-304(d)(5) governing service on government bodies; (2) the service of the original summonses constitutes substantial compliance under K.S.A. § 60-204; and (3) the service of the alias summonses complies with Rule 4(e) and Kansas law.”
Wanjiku v. Johnson County (2016)
“Nevertheless, under K.S.A. § 60-204, “[substantial compliance with any method of serving'process effects valid service of process if the court finds that .”
Burnham v. Humphrey Hospitality Reit Trust, Inc. (2005)
“See Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-204 . She further argued that, although the original complaint misnamed the Defendants, her July 15, 2003 amended complaint related back to the original complaint.”
Dunn v. City of Emporia (1982)
“Plaintiff nonetheless points to K.S.A. 60-204, which provides: “The methods of serving process as set forth in article 3 of this chapter shall constitute sufficient service of process in all civil actions and special proceedings, but they shall be alternative to, and not in…”
Cook v. Cook (2003)
“K.S.A. 60-204 states that the methods of serving process, set forth in K.”
State v. Martinez (2010)
“59-2129(d) (consent for adoption deemed sufficient if substantially complies with form); K.S.A. 60-204 (substantial compliance with methods of service of process shall effect valid service); K.”
Grimmett v. Burke (1995)
“K.S.A. 60-204 provides in part: “In any method of serving process, substantial compliance therewith shall effect valid service of process if the court finds that, notwithstanding some irregularity or omission, the party served was made aware that an action or proceeding was…”
Fulcher v. City of Wichita (2006)
“See K.S.A. § 60-204 ("In any method of serving process, substantial compliance therewith shall effect valid service of process if the court finds that, notwithstanding some irregularity or omission, the party served was made aware that an action or proceeding was pending in a…”
Hughes v. Martin (1986)
“60-203 and K.S.A. 60-204, which provide as follows: “60-203.”
Pork Motel, Corp. v. Kansas Department of Health & Environment (1983)
“K.S.A. 60-204. Use of K.S.A. 60-205, service and filing of pleading and other papers, has not been limited to Chapter 60 actions.”
— K.S.A. § 60-204(e) — 1 case
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.