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

K.S.A. § 60-259 (2026)

New trial; motion to alter or amend judgment

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

60-259. New trial; motion to alter or amend judgment. (a) In general. (1) Grounds for a new trial. The court may, on motion, grant a new trial to all or any of the parties and on all or part of the issues for the following reasons:

(A) Abuse of discretion by the court, misconduct by the jury or an opposing party, accident or surprise that ordinary prudence could not have guarded against, or because the party was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to present its evidence and be heard on the merits of the case;

(B) erroneous rulings or instructions by the court;

(C) the verdict, report or decision was given under the influence of passion or prejudice;

(D) the verdict, report or decision is in whole or in part contrary to the evidence;

(E) newly discovered evidence that is material for the moving party which it could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial; or

(F) the verdict, report or decision was procured by corruption of the party obtaining it, and in this case, the new trial must be granted as a matter of right, and all costs incurred up to the time of granting the new trial must be charged to the party obtaining the verdict, report or decision.

(2) Further action after a nonjury trial. After a nonjury trial, the court may, on motion for a new trial, open the judgment if one has been entered, take additional testimony, amend findings of fact and conclusions of law or make new ones and direct the entry of a new judgment.

(b) Time to file a motion for a new trial. A motion for a new trial must be filed no later than 28 days after the entry of judgment. While a timely-filed motion is pending, the court may on motion and notice to the parties, permit the moving party to amend the motion for a new trial to state different or additional reasons.

(c) Definite statement of reasons. The motion should not follow the general language of subsection (a) in stating reasons for a new trial, but rather must state specifically the alleged error or other reasons relied on.

(d) Time to serve affidavits or declarations. When a motion for a new trial is based on affidavits or on declarations pursuant to K.S.A. 53-601, and amendments thereto, they must be filed with the motion. The opposing party has 14 days after being served to file opposing affidavits or declarations. The court may permit reply affidavits or declarations.

(e) New trial on the court's initiative or for reasons not in the motion. No later than 28 days after the entry of judgment, the court, on it* own, may order a new trial for any reason that would justify granting one on a party's motion. After giving the parties notice and an opportunity to be heard, the court may grant a timely motion for a new trial for a reason not stated in the motion. In either event, the court must specify the reasons in its order.

(f) Motion to alter or amend a judgment. A motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed no later than 28 days after the entry of judgment.

(g) Production of evidence. In a case in which a reason for the motion is error in the exclusion of evidence, lack of reasonable opportunity to present evidence or newly discovered evidence, the evidence must be presented at the hearing by affidavit or by declaration pursuant to K.S.A. 53-601, and amendments thereto, or, when authorized by the court, by deposition or oral testimony and the opposing party may respond in like manner.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-259; amended by Supreme Court order dated July 17, 1969; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 133; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 250 cases (63 in the last 5 years), 1966–2026 · leading case: In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020). · cites it 29× “60-260(b)(1) and (2)" and was, by title and content, a motion to alter or amend the judgment under K.S.A. 60-259 that did toll her time to file an appeal.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Park City, 260 P.3d 387 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 17× “or granting or denying a motion under K.S.A. 60-259, and amendments thereto, to alter or amend the judgment; or denying a motion for new trial under K.”
Miller v. Johnson, 289 P.3d 1098 (Kan. 2012). · cites it 8× “60-19a02(d) imposes a cap on noneconomic damages that prevents the trial court from awarding more than $250,000, but it does not prevent a trial court from granting a new trial when permitted by K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-259 and the evidence.”
Cornejo v. Probst, 630 P.2d 1202 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 17× “The trial court overruled the motion for two reasons: (1) the motion was inadequate because it failed to comply with K.S.A. 60-259 regarding service of affidavits, and (2) the matters proffered related to the mental processes of the jury.”
Daniels v. Chaffee, 630 P.2d 1090 (Kan. 1981). · cites it 16× “The power of a trial court to grant a new trial on its own motion is provided for in K.S.A. 60-259( e ). K.S.A. 60-259 provides in part as follows: "( a ) Grounds.”
Loose v. Brubacher, 549 P.2d 991 (Kan. 1976). · cites it 11× “) *729 K.S.A. 1975 Supp. 60-259 provides that a motion for new trial or a motion to alter or amend the judgment may be filed within ten days of the entry of judgment to seek, among other relief, correction of erroneous rulings of the court.”
Ponds v. State, 437 P.3d 85 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “60-252, and amendments thereto, to amend or make additional findings of fact, whether or not an alteration of the judgment would be required if the motion is granted; or granting or denying a motion under K.S.A. 60-259, and amendments thereto, to alter or amend the judgment; or…”
Saucedo v. Winger, 850 P.2d 908 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 6× “K.S.A. 60-259. See State v. Macomber, 244 Kan.”
In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 4× “60-260(b)(2) allows a court to relieve a party from a final judgment when there is "newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in *1205 time to move for a new trial under K.S.A. 60-259." K.S.A. 60-259 requires a motion for new trial within 10…”
In Re Columbia Med. Ctr. of Las Colinas, Subsidiary, L.P., 290 S.W.3d 204 (Tex. 2009). · cites it 2× “1008(3); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-259 (e) (2005); Ky. R.”
Walters v. Hitchcock, 697 P.2d 847 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 8× “K.S.A. 60-259 governs motions for new trial.”
Ross-Williams v. Bennett, 419 P.3d 608 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “Motion to Alter or Amend Nearly a month after the district court had rendered its decision regarding the reasonableness of fees and expenses, counsel for the plaintiffs filed a motion to alter or amend this portion of the judgment under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-259(f). Specifically,…”
Show all 250 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 60-259(1) — 4 cases
Canaan v. Bartee, 72 P.3d 911 (Kan. 2003).
Antrim, Piper, Wenger, Inc. v. Lowe, 159 P.3d 215 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
Denno v. Denno, 749 P.2d 46 (Kan. Ct. App. 1988).
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Bopp, 836 P.2d 1142 (Kan. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a) — 39 cases
Unruh v. Purina Mills, LLC, 221 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2009).
Saucedo v. Winger, 850 P.2d 908 (Kan. 1993). “K.S.A. 60-259. See State v. Macomber, 244 Kan.”
Dougan v. Rossville Drainage Dist., 15 P.3d 338 (Kan. 2000).
Miller v. Johnson, 289 P.3d 1098 (Kan. 2012). “60-19a02(d) imposes a cap on noneconomic damages that prevents the trial court from awarding more than $250,000, but it does not prevent a trial court from granting a new trial when permitted by K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-259 and the evidence.”
Wiechman v. Huddleston, 370 P.3d 1194 (Kan. 2016).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1) — 3 cases
Allison v. State, 432 P.3d 87 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018).
Benning v. Palmer (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
In re S.J. (Kan. Ct. App. 2026).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1)(A) — 1 case
In re Marriage of Hardin (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1)(B) — 2 cases
In re Marriage of Hardin (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
Gudenkauf Tree Svc. v. Jacobs (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1)(C) — 2 cases
Miller v. Johnson, 289 P.3d 1098 (Kan. 2012). “60-19a02(d) imposes a cap on noneconomic damages that prevents the trial court from awarding more than $250,000, but it does not prevent a trial court from granting a new trial when permitted by K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-259 and the evidence.”
Benning v. Palmer (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1)(D) — 3 cases
In re Marriage of Ruda (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
Benning v. Palmer (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
Gudenkauf Tree Svc. v. Jacobs (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(1)(E) — 6 cases
In re Marriage of Ruda (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
Winters v. State (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
In re S.J. (Kan. Ct. App. 2026).
Taylor v. State (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).
In re Marriage of Farha & Oaks (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(2) — 3 cases
Whittker v. State (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
In re Marriage of Farha & Oaks (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
N&B Enter., Inc. v. English (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(a)(l)(C) — 2 cases
Miller v. Johnson, 289 P.3d 1098 (Kan. 2012). “60-19a02(d) imposes a cap on noneconomic damages that prevents the trial court from awarding more than $250,000, but it does not prevent a trial court from granting a new trial when permitted by K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-259 and the evidence.”
City of Neodesha v. BP Corp. North Am., Inc., 334 P.3d 830 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(b) — 24 cases
In Re the Marriage of Pierce, 982 P.2d 995 (Kan. Ct. App. 1999).
Read v. Miller, 802 P.2d 528 (Kan. 1990).
Garcia v. Ball, 363 P.3d 399 (Kan. 2015).
In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005).
In Re the Marriage of Thompson, 832 P.2d 349 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(c) — 5 cases
State v. Ruebke, 731 P.2d 842 (Kan. 1987).
Daniels v. Chaffee, 630 P.2d 1090 (Kan. 1981). “The power of a trial court to grant a new trial on its own motion is provided for in K.S.A. 60-259( e ). K.S.A. 60-259 provides in part as follows: "( a ) Grounds.”
State v. Zimmerman, 833 P.2d 925 (Kan. 1992).
Cornejo v. Probst, 630 P.2d 1202 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “The trial court overruled the motion for two reasons: (1) the motion was inadequate because it failed to comply with K.S.A. 60-259 regarding service of affidavits, and (2) the matters proffered related to the mental processes of the jury.”
Benning v. Palmer (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(d) — 2 cases
Williams v. Lawton, 207 P.3d 1027 (Kan. 2009).
Cornejo v. Probst, 630 P.2d 1202 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “The trial court overruled the motion for two reasons: (1) the motion was inadequate because it failed to comply with K.S.A. 60-259 regarding service of affidavits, and (2) the matters proffered related to the mental processes of the jury.”
— K.S.A. § 60-259(e) — 3 cases
In Re Columbia Med. Ctr. of Las Colinas, Subsidiary, L.P., 290 S.W.3d 204 (Tex. 2009). “1008(3); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-259 (e) (2005); Ky. R.”
Daniels v. Chaffee, 630 P.2d 1090 (Kan. 1981). “The power of a trial court to grant a new trial on its own motion is provided for in K.S.A. 60-259( e ). K.S.A. 60-259 provides in part as follows: "( a ) Grounds.”
Donnini v. Ouano, 810 P.2d 1163 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(ei) — 1 case
Cornejo v. Probst, 630 P.2d 1202 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “The trial court overruled the motion for two reasons: (1) the motion was inadequate because it failed to comply with K.S.A. 60-259 regarding service of affidavits, and (2) the matters proffered related to the mental processes of the jury.”
— K.S.A. § 60-259(f) — 87 cases
In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020). “60-260(b)(1) and (2)" and was, by title and content, a motion to alter or amend the judgment under K.S.A. 60-259 that did toll her time to file an appeal.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Park City, 260 P.3d 387 (Kan. 2011). “or granting or denying a motion under K.S.A. 60-259, and amendments thereto, to alter or amend the judgment; or denying a motion for new trial under K.”
Ross-Williams v. Bennett, 419 P.3d 608 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “Motion to Alter or Amend Nearly a month after the district court had rendered its decision regarding the reasonableness of fees and expenses, counsel for the plaintiffs filed a motion to alter or amend this portion of the judgment under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-259(f). Specifically,…”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Park City, 204 P.3d 648 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
Steele v. Guardianship & Conservatorship of Crist, 840 P.2d 1107 (Kan. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(g) — 11 cases
Walters v. Hitchcock, 697 P.2d 847 (Kan. 1985). “K.S.A. 60-259 governs motions for new trial.”
Bacon v. Mercy Hosp. of Ft. Scott, 756 P.2d 416 (Kan. 1988).
State v. Ruebke, 731 P.2d 842 (Kan. 1987).
State v. Quick, 597 P.2d 1108 (Kan. 1979).
Douglas v. Lombardino, 693 P.2d 1138 (Kan. 1985).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(h) — 1 case
In Re Est. of Burns, 608 P.2d 942 (Kan. 1980).
— K.S.A. § 60-259(o) — 2 cases
Brown v. Triple \D\" Drilling Co.", 585 P.2d 987 (Kan. 1978).
In the Interest of Trotter, 598 P.2d 557 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979).
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.