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

K.S.A. § 60-2310 (2026)

Wage garnishment; definitions; restrictions, exceptions; sickness preventing work; assignment of account; prohibition on courts

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

60-2310. Wage garnishment; definitions; restrictions, exceptions; sickness preventing work; assignment of account; prohibition on courts. (a) Definitions. As used in this act and the acts of which this act is amendatory, unless the context otherwise requires, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them:

(1) "Earnings" means compensation payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus or otherwise;

(2) "disposable earnings" means that part of the earnings of any individual remaining after the deduction from such earnings of any amounts required by law to be withheld;

(3) "wage garnishment" means any legal or equitable procedure through which the earnings of any individual are required to be withheld for payment of any debt; and

(4) "federal minimum hourly wage" means that wage prescribed by subsection (a)(1) of section 6 of the federal fair labor standards act of 1938, and any amendments thereto.

(b) Restriction on wage garnishment. Subject to the provisions of subsection (e), only the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual may be subjected to wage garnishment. The maximum part of such earnings of any wage earning individual which may be subjected to wage garnishment for any workweek or multiple thereof may not exceed the lesser of: (1) Twenty-five percent of the individual's aggregate disposable earnings for that workweek or multiple thereof; (2) the amount by which the individual's aggregate disposable earnings for that workweek or multiple thereof exceed an amount equal to 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage, or equivalent multiple thereof for such longer period; or (3) the amount of the plaintiff's claim as found in the order for garnishment. No one creditor may issue more than one garnishment against the earnings of the same judgment debtor during any one 30-day period, but the court shall allow the creditor to file amendments or corrections of names or addresses of any party to the order of garnishment at any time. In answering such order the garnishee-employer shall withhold from all earnings of the judgment-debtor for any pay period or periods ending during such 30-day period an amount or amounts as are allowed and required by law. Nothing in this act shall be construed as charging the plaintiff in any garnishment action with the knowledge of the amount of any defendant's earnings prior to the commencement of such garnishment action.

(c) Sickness preventing work. If any debtor is prevented from working at the debtor's regular trade, profession or calling for any period greater than two weeks because of illness of the debtor or any member of the family of the debtor, and this fact is shown by the affidavit of the debtor, the provisions of this section shall not be invoked against any such debtor until after the expiration of two months after recovery from such illness.

(d) Assignment of account. If any person, firm or corporation sells or assigns an account to any person or collecting agency, that person, firm or corporation or their assignees shall not have or be entitled to the benefits of wage garnishment. The provision of this subsection shall not apply to the following:

(1) Assignments of support rights to the secretary for children and families pursuant to K.S.A. 39-709 and 39-756, and amendments thereto, and support enforcement actions conducted by court trustees pursuant to K.S.A. 23-492 et seq., and amendments thereto;

(2) support rights which have been assigned to any other state pursuant to title IV-D of the federal social security act, 42 U.S.C. § 651 et seq.;

(3) assignments of accounts receivable or taxes receivable to the director of accounts and reports made under K.S.A. 75-3728b, and amendments thereto; or

(4) collections pursuant to contracts entered into in accordance with K.S.A. 20-169, and amendments thereto, involving the collection of restitution or debts to district courts.

(e) Exceptions to restrictions on wage garnishment. The restrictions on the amount of disposable earnings subject to wage garnishment as provided in subsection (b) shall not apply in the following instances:

(1) Any order of any court for the support of any person, including any order for support in the form of alimony, but the foregoing shall be subject to the restriction provided for in subsection (g);

(2) any order of any court of bankruptcy under chapter XIII of the federal bankruptcy act; and

(3) any debt due for any state or federal tax.

(f) Prohibition on courts. No court of this state may make, execute or enforce any order or process in violation of this section.

(g) The maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual for any workweek which is subject to garnishment to enforce any order for the support of any person shall not exceed:

(1) If the individual is supporting a spouse or dependent child other than a spouse or child with respect to whose support such order is used, 50% of the individual's disposable earnings for that week;

(2) if the individual is not supporting a spouse or dependent child described in paragraph (1), 60% of such individual's disposable earnings for that week; and

(3) with respect to the disposable earnings of any individual for any workweek, the 50% specified in paragraph (1) shall be 55% and the 60% specified in paragraph (2) shall be 65%, if such earnings are subject to garnishment to enforce a support order for a period which is prior to the twelve-week period which ends with the beginning of such workweek.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-2310; L. 1967, ch. 324, § 2; L. 1968, ch. 404, § 1; L. 1970, ch. 238, § 1; L. 1972, ch. 222, § 4; L. 1976, ch. 210, § 7; L. 1977, ch. 206, § 1; L. 1978, ch. 227, § 5; L. 1979, ch. 183, § 5; L. 1982, ch. 250, § 1; L. 1983, ch. 289, § 1; L. 1985, ch. 115, § 51; L. 1988, ch. 212, § 3; L. 1988, ch. 213, § 3; L. 1994, ch. 273, § 5; L. 1996, ch. 195, § 3; L. 1997, ch. 182, § 103; L. 2014, ch. 115, § 234; L. 2022, ch. 31, § 4; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1965–2021 · leading case: In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001). · cites it 70× “Debtors assert that seventy-five percent (75%) of these wages are exempt under K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). · cites it 22× “A 60-2310 K.S.A. 60-2310 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) Restriction on %oage garnishment.”
In Re Resler, 282 B.R. 246 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2002). · cites it 22× “Nonexempt earnings are earnings which are not exempt from wage garnishment pursuant to K.S.A. 60-2310.... On the other hand, Kan.”
Wagner v. Mahaffey, 408 P.2d 602 (Kan. 1965). · cites it 26× “60-1701) and in the alternative that subsection (d) of section 60-2310 K- S. A. is constitutional.”
Carbaugh v. Carbaugh (In Re Carbaugh), 278 B.R. 512 (10th Cir. BAP 2002). · cites it 6× “Alternatively, the Debtor argues that Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-2310 (“Kansas wage garnishment statute”) supports his position that the monies in the BFC account are earnings and, as earnings, are exempt.”
In Re Rangel, 317 B.R. 553 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). · cites it 28× “The debtors seek to exempt 75 percent of their 2003 income tax refund pursuant to K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
Coward v. Smith, 636 P.2d 793 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 8× “Thus there is no requirement that the debtor be paid for a regular pay period in order to be covered by K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 60-2310. “6. The question then becomes whether the legislature intended to bring independent contractors under the wing of K.”
James v. Strange, 407 U.S. 128 (1972). · cites it 3× “' Section 60-2310 also provides further debtor protection from wage garnishment at a time of disabling personal sickness and from professional collecting agencies; See Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 60-2310 (c) and (d) (Supp.”
Bieber v. Associated Collection Servs., Inc., 631 F. Supp. 1410 (D. Kan. 1986). · cites it 4× “K.S.A. 60-2310 is the Kansas statute governing garnishment of wages.”
In Re Price, 195 B.R. 775 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1996). · cites it 8× “According to the Amendment, debtor Mary Mona Hahner-Price (“debtor”) claims 75% of her interest in real estate commissions as exempt pursuant to K.S.A 60-2310. The debtor claims interest in two real estate commissions in the amount of $2,672.”
In Re Doughman, 263 B.R. 905 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1999). · cites it 8× “The Court need only look to the statute to conclude that, irrespective of whether the proceeds lose their character as “earnings” upon deposit into a bank account, the restrictions in K.S.A. § 60-2310 apply only to wages before they are paid to the debtor.”
In Re Koch, 14 B.R. 64 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1981). · cites it 4× “If all or any portion of such a refund is an estate asset, may it be exempt as wages pursuant to K.S.A. § 60-2310. FACTS No facts are in dispute.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(a) — 1 case
Stormont-Vail Healthcare v. Sievers (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(a)(1) — 5 cases
Coward v. Smith, 636 P.2d 793 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “Thus there is no requirement that the debtor be paid for a regular pay period in order to be covered by K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 60-2310. “6. The question then becomes whether the legislature intended to bring independent contractors under the wing of K.”
In Re Rangel, 317 B.R. 553 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2004). “The debtors seek to exempt 75 percent of their 2003 income tax refund pursuant to K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
Stormont-Vail Healthcare v. Sievers (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
Stormont-Vail Healthcare, Inc. v. Sievers, 498 P.3d 1217 (Kan. 2021).
Carson v. Kramer & Frank, P.C. (D. Kan. 2021).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(a)(2) — 2 cases
In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001). “Debtors assert that seventy-five percent (75%) of these wages are exempt under K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
Master Fin. Co. v. Pollard, 283 P.3d 817 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(a)(3) — 4 cases
In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001). “Debtors assert that seventy-five percent (75%) of these wages are exempt under K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). “A 60-2310 K.S.A. 60-2310 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) Restriction on %oage garnishment.”
In Re Doughman, 263 B.R. 905 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1999). “The Court need only look to the statute to conclude that, irrespective of whether the proceeds lose their character as “earnings” upon deposit into a bank account, the restrictions in K.S.A. § 60-2310 apply only to wages before they are paid to the debtor.”
Stormont-Vail Healthcare v. Sievers (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(a)(l) — 2 cases
In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001). “Debtors assert that seventy-five percent (75%) of these wages are exempt under K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). “A 60-2310 K.S.A. 60-2310 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) Restriction on %oage garnishment.”
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(b) — 8 cases
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). “A 60-2310 K.S.A. 60-2310 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) Restriction on %oage garnishment.”
In Re Urban, 262 B.R. 865 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2001). “Debtors assert that seventy-five percent (75%) of these wages are exempt under K.S.A. § 60-2310. The trustee objects to the claimed exemption.”
Woody v. United States Dep't of Just. (In Re Woody), 335 B.R. 431 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2005).
In Re Doughman, 263 B.R. 905 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1999). “The Court need only look to the statute to conclude that, irrespective of whether the proceeds lose their character as “earnings” upon deposit into a bank account, the restrictions in K.S.A. § 60-2310 apply only to wages before they are paid to the debtor.”
Coward v. Smith, 636 P.2d 793 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “Thus there is no requirement that the debtor be paid for a regular pay period in order to be covered by K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 60-2310. “6. The question then becomes whether the legislature intended to bring independent contractors under the wing of K.”
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(c) — 3 cases
In re Marriage of Gerleman, 430 P.3d 467 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018).
State Ex Rel. Sec'y of the Kansas Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs. v. White, 216 P.3d 727 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
Master Fin. Co. v. Pollard, 283 P.3d 817 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(d) — 4 cases
Bieber v. Associated Collection Servs., Inc., 631 F. Supp. 1410 (D. Kan. 1986). “K.S.A. 60-2310 is the Kansas statute governing garnishment of wages.”
Whisler v. Whisler, 684 P.2d 1025 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984).
Carson v. Kramer & Frank, P.C. (D. Kan. 2021).
State v. Cooley (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(d)(4) — 1 case
State v. Cooley (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(e) — 1 case
In Re Adcock, 264 B.R. 708 (D. Kan. 2000). “A 60-2310 K.S.A. 60-2310 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) Restriction on %oage garnishment.”
— K.S.A. § 60-2310(g) — 2 cases
Bair v. Bair, 750 P.2d 994 (Kan. 1988).
Master Fin. Co. v. Pollard, 283 P.3d 817 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
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.