Kansas Statutes Annotated
K.S.A. § 60-246 (2026)
Objections to rulings or orders
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KS-LEGkslegislature.org
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
60-246. Objections to rulings or orders. A formal exception to a ruling or order is unnecessary. When the ruling or order is requested or made a party need only state the action that it wants the court to take or objects to, along with the grounds for the request or objection. Failing to object does not prejudice a party who had no opportunity to do so when the ruling or order was made.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-246; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 116; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Sledd v. Reed, 785 P.2d 694 (Kan. 1990).
Sledd v. Reed, 785 P.2d 694 (Kan. 1990). “K.S.A. 60-246 provides: “Objections to rulings.”
Gray v. Conner Indus., Inc. (D. Kan. 2021). “”39 K.S.A. 60-246 defines client and communication as follows: (1) “Client” means a person or corporation or other association that, directly or through an authorized representative, consults an attorney or attorney's representative for the purpose of retaining the attorney or…”
Robinson v. McBride Bldg. Co., 818 P.2d 1184 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991). “K.S.A. 60-246 states: “Formal exceptions to rulings or orders of the court are unnecessary.”
Deffenbaugh Indus., Inc. v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty./Kansas City, Kansas (D. Kan. 2021). “K.S.A. § 60-246(a). While claims of attorney-client privilege are governed by state law in diversity cases, the work product doctrine is governed by a uniform federal standard pursuant to Fed.”
MWCB Rock Road, LLC v. C&W Facility Servs. Inc. (D. Kan. 2021). “§ 60-246 defines client and communication as follows: (1) “Client” means a person or corporation or other association that, directly or through an authorized representative, consults an attorney or attorney's representative for the purpose of retaining the attorney or securing…”
Geist v. Kansas State Univ. Found. (D. Kan. 2023). “Plaintiff has not met his burden to establish either an express or implied current attorney-client relationship with Husch. Having failed to prove he had either a former or current attorney-client relationship with Mr.”
State v. Aguilar (Kan. Ct. App. 2026). “Citing K.S.A. 60-246, he suggests that this argument preserves the issue for appeal.”
State v. Van-Royen (Kan. Ct. App. 2026). “ANALYSIS Preservation Van-Royen did not object to the witness fees or the BFAW fees at sentencing; however, he had no opportunity to do so. At sentencing, the district court approved only "ordinary costs and fees," and the witness and BFAW fees appeared only in the journal entry.”
State v. Walker (Kan. Ct. App. 2026). “" K.S.A. 60-246; State v. Gonzalez, 307 Kan.”
In the Interest of Collins, 598 P.2d 1075 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979). “She states that the contemporaneous objection rule does not apply to her since she was excluded by the trial court from the hearing other than for the purpose of giving testimony, and that therefore she comes within the exception stated at K.S.A. 60-246, which in pertinent part…”
— K.S.A. § 60-246(a) — 1 case
Deffenbaugh Indus., Inc. v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty./Kansas City, Kansas (D. Kan. 2021). “K.S.A. § 60-246(a). While claims of attorney-client privilege are governed by state law in diversity cases, the work product doctrine is governed by a uniform federal standard pursuant to Fed.”
— K.S.A. § 60-246(c) — 1 case
Geist v. Kansas State Univ. Found. (D. Kan. 2023). “Plaintiff has not met his burden to establish either an express or implied current attorney-client relationship with Husch. Having failed to prove he had either a former or current attorney-client relationship with Mr.”
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.