Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-260 (2026)

Relief from judgment or order

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

60-260. Relief from judgment or order. (a) Corrections based on clerical mistakes; oversights and omissions. The court may correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order or other part of the record. The court may do so on motion, or on its own, with or without notice. But after an appeal has been docketed in the appellate court and while it is pending, such a mistake may be corrected only with the appellate court's leave.

(b) Grounds for relief from a final judgment, order or proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons:

(1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect;

(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under subsection (b) of K.S.A. 60-259, and amendments thereto;

(3) fraud, whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic, misrepresentation or misconduct by an opposing party;

(4) the judgment is void;

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or

(6) any other reason that justifies relief.

(c) Timing and effect of the motion. (1) Timing. A motion under subsection (b) must be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons under paragraphs (b)(1), (2) and (3) no more than one year after the entry of the judgment or order, or the date of the proceeding.

(2) Effect on finality. The motion does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation.

(d) Other powers to grant relief. This section does not limit a court's power to:

(1) Entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order or proceeding;

(2) grant relief under K.S.A. 60-309, and amendments thereto, to a defendant who was not personally notified of the action; or

(3) set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.

(e) Bills and writs abolished. The following bills are abolished: Bills of review; bills in the nature of bills of review; and writs of coram nobis, coram vobis and audita querela.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-260; L. 1976, ch. 251, § 5; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 134; L. 2011, ch. 48, § 12; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 301 cases (62 in the last 5 years), 1967–2026 · leading case: In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 73× “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

Garcia v. Ball, 363 P.3d 399 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 39× “2d 662 (1995) (order setting aside final judgment upheld under K.S.A. 60-260[b][3], even though neither moving party nor court referred to that specific provision), rev.”

Wiechman v. Huddleston, 370 P.3d 1194 (Kan. 2016). · cites it 12× “But in doing so, it did not address K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-260 or whether the 4-year delay in bringing the motion was reasonable.”

In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020). · cites it 19× “60-259, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-260, and K.S.A. 2019 Supp.”

In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 30× “Wassar’s reliance, however, fails to take into account that the purpose of K.S.A. 60-260 is to provide relief from judgments or orders.”

State v. Mitchell, 298 P.3d 349 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 17× “We hold this to be the exclusive statutory remedy authorizing a prisoner in custody under sentence of a court of general jurisdiction to make a collateral attack upon the sentence in a criminal case, and that K.S.A. 60-260 is not available to him for this purpose.”

Brady v. Brady, 592 P.2d 865 (Kan. 1979). · cites it 22× “The court then ruled it had authority to relieve the appellee from final judgment under K.S.A. 60-260( b )(6). The trial court gave the father credit against the judgment for the period of time Michael was in the father's custody commencing in June 1973, and it also gave the…”

In Re Petition of City of Shawnee for Annexation of Land, 687 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 18× “The landowners also filed a motion for relief from the court's May 2, 1983, order pursuant to K.S.A. 60-260, and a motion for leave to file an appeal from that order pursuant to K.”

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 25× “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

N. Nat. Gas Co. v. ONEOK Field Servs. Co., 296 P.3d 1106 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 6× “*937 The District Court Did Not Aruse Its Discretion by Denying Northern’s Motion to Modify the Summary Judgment Ruling Although its argument is not entirely clear, Northern appears to also contend the district court erred by failing to recognize that FERC’s Juné 2, 2010, order…”

Daniels v. Chaffee, 630 P.2d 1090 (Kan. 1981). · cites it 26× “2d § 60-260 (1979) takes the position that while K.S.A. 60-260 does not expressly give the trial court the authority to "relieve a party from a final judgment" sua sponte without a motion, the court has inherent power to do so, as it has traditionally had before the enactment of…”

State v. Kingsley, 326 P.3d 1083 (Kan. 2014). · cites it 9× “3d 349 (2013) (questions of statutoiy and case-law interpretation, which are questions of law subject to de novo review, led to holdings that [1] K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-260[b] does not apply to collateral attack on conviction and [2] K.”

Show all 301 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 60-260(5) — 1 case

Mid Kansas Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Burke, 666 P.2d 203 (Kan. 1983).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(6) — 1 case

Tanner v. Hancock, 619 P.2d 1177 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(6)(6) — 2 cases

Wirt v. Esrey, 662 P.2d 1238 (Kan. 1983).

Est. of Corson v. Erickson, 602 P.2d 1320 (Kan. 1979).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(a) — 23 cases

In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005). “Wassar’s reliance, however, fails to take into account that the purpose of K.S.A. 60-260 is to provide relief from judgments or orders.”

Cornejo v. Probst, 630 P.2d 1202 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981).

Miller v. Glacier Dev. Co., LLC, 270 P.3d 1065 (Kan. 2011).

State v. Ross, 289 P.3d 76 (Kan. 2012).

Hoeffner v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 335 P.3d 684 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(a)(1)(A) — 4 cases

Brown (ID 99897) v. Werholtz (D. Kan. 2023).

Roberson (ID 104710) v. Williams (D. Kan. 2023).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b) — 166 cases

In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020). “60-259, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-260, and K.S.A. 2019 Supp.”

Wiechman v. Huddleston, 370 P.3d 1194 (Kan. 2016). “But in doing so, it did not address K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-260 or whether the 4-year delay in bringing the motion was reasonable.”

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

N. Nat. Gas Co. v. ONEOK Field Servs. Co., 296 P.3d 1106 (Kan. 2013). “*937 The District Court Did Not Aruse Its Discretion by Denying Northern’s Motion to Modify the Summary Judgment Ruling Although its argument is not entirely clear, Northern appears to also contend the district court erred by failing to recognize that FERC’s Juné 2, 2010, order…”

In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005). “Wassar’s reliance, however, fails to take into account that the purpose of K.S.A. 60-260 is to provide relief from judgments or orders.”

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(1) — 37 cases

In re Est. of Lentz, 476 P.3d 1151 (Kan. 2020). “60-259, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-260, and K.S.A. 2019 Supp.”

Garcia v. Ball, 363 P.3d 399 (Kan. 2015). “2d 662 (1995) (order setting aside final judgment upheld under K.S.A. 60-260[b][3], even though neither moving party nor court referred to that specific provision), rev.”

State v. Davisson, 370 P.3d 423 (Kan. 2016).

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

Garcia v. Ball, 323 P.3d 872 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(2) — 10 cases

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

Subway Restaurants, Inc. v. Kessler, 46 P.3d 1113 (Kan. 2002).

State v. James, 553 P.3d 308 (Kan. 2024).

Logan v. Logan, 937 P.2d 967 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).

In Re the Est. of Mettee, 694 P.2d 1325 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(3) — 21 cases

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005). “Wassar’s reliance, however, fails to take into account that the purpose of K.S.A. 60-260 is to provide relief from judgments or orders.”

Smith v. Russell, 58 P.3d 698 (Kan. 2002).

Hessenflow v. Hessenflow, 909 P.2d 662 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).

In Re Petition of City of Shawnee for Annexation of Land, 687 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1984). “The landowners also filed a motion for relief from the court's May 2, 1983, order pursuant to K.S.A. 60-260, and a motion for leave to file an appeal from that order pursuant to K.”

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(4) — 44 cases

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

State v. Mitchell, 298 P.3d 349 (Kan. 2013). “We hold this to be the exclusive statutory remedy authorizing a prisoner in custody under sentence of a court of general jurisdiction to make a collateral attack upon the sentence in a criminal case, and that K.S.A. 60-260 is not available to him for this purpose.”

State v. Kingsley, 326 P.3d 1083 (Kan. 2014). “3d 349 (2013) (questions of statutoiy and case-law interpretation, which are questions of law subject to de novo review, led to holdings that [1] K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 60-260[b] does not apply to collateral attack on conviction and [2] K.”

In re Marriage of Williams, 417 P.3d 1033 (Kan. 2018).

Bd. of Jefferson Cnty. Commissioners v. Adcox, 132 P.3d 1004 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(5) — 8 cases

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Atchity, 913 P.2d 162 (Kan. 1996).

First Nat'l Bank v. Sankey Motors, Inc., 204 P.3d 1167 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).

In Re the Marriage of Jones, 921 P.2d 839 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).

In Re the Marriage of Zodrow, 727 P.2d 435 (Kan. 1986).

Hankin v. Graphic Tech., Inc., 222 P.3d 523 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(6) — 64 cases

In re the Est. of McLeish, 307 P.3d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013).

In Re the Marriage of Wherrell, 58 P.3d 734 (Kan. 2002).

In re the Marriage of Leedy, 109 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2005). “Wassar’s reliance, however, fails to take into account that the purpose of K.S.A. 60-260 is to provide relief from judgments or orders.”

In Re the Adoption of A.A.T., 196 P.3d 1180 (Kan. 2008). “*1188 Analysis K.S.A. 60-260 expressly provides for relief from district court decisions in certain circumstances.”

— K.S.A. § 60-260(b)(l) — 16 cases

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

Canaan v. Bartee, 35 P.3d 841 (Kan. 2001).

In re the Est. of McLeish, 307 P.3d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 2013).

In Re the Est. of Newland, 730 P.2d 351 (Kan. 1986).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(c) — 15 cases

Wiechman v. Huddleston, 370 P.3d 1194 (Kan. 2016). “But in doing so, it did not address K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-260 or whether the 4-year delay in bringing the motion was reasonable.”

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

In Re the Marriage of Thomas, 825 P.2d 1163 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).

In re Parentage of N.P. (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(c)(1) — 8 cases

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

In re Marriage of Murphy (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).

Stout v. KanEquip, Inc., 551 P.3d 260 (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).

State ex rel. Sec'y, Dep't for Child. & Families v. Est. of Sands (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).

Ferguson v. State (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(c)(2) — 1 case

MidFirst Bank v. Sipple (Kan. Ct. App. 2026).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(c)(l) — 2 cases

Morton Cnty. Hosp. v. Howell, 361 P.3d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “60-259 rather than K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-260 because K.S.A. 2014 Supp.”

— K.S.A. § 60-260(d)(3) — 1 case

In re Adoption of E.A. (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(e) — 1 case

Woods v. State (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(f) — 1 case

In re Marriage of L.S. & D.J. (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fc) — 4 cases

Wirt v. Esrey, 662 P.2d 1238 (Kan. 1983).

Wilson v. Wilson, 827 P.2d 788 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).

Darnall v. Lowe, 615 P.2d 786 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).

Est. of Corson v. Erickson, 602 P.2d 1320 (Kan. 1979).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fc)(1) — 1 case

Binyon v. Nesseth, 646 P.2d 1043 (Kan. 1982).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fe) — 9 cases

Mid Kansas Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Burke, 666 P.2d 203 (Kan. 1983).

Miotk v. Rudy, 605 P.2d 587 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).

Jones v. Smith, 616 P.2d 300 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).

Daniels v. Chaffee, 630 P.2d 1090 (Kan. 1981). “2d § 60-260 (1979) takes the position that while K.S.A. 60-260 does not expressly give the trial court the authority to "relieve a party from a final judgment" sua sponte without a motion, the court has inherent power to do so, as it has traditionally had before the enactment of…”

Thompson v. James, 597 P.2d 259 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fe)(6) — 1 case

Brady v. Brady, 592 P.2d 865 (Kan. 1979). “The court then ruled it had authority to relieve the appellee from final judgment under K.S.A. 60-260( b )(6). The trial court gave the father credit against the judgment for the period of time Michael was in the father's custody commencing in June 1973, and it also gave the…”

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fe)(l) — 1 case

Richardson v. Richardson, 599 P.2d 320 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(fo) — 5 cases

Caplinger v. Carter, 676 P.2d 1300 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984).

Brown v. Triple \D\" Drilling Co.", 585 P.2d 987 (Kan. 1978).

Wilson v. Wilson, 827 P.2d 788 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).

In Re Est. of Kreie, 679 P.2d 712 (Kan. 1984).

Est. of Corson v. Erickson, 602 P.2d 1320 (Kan. 1979).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(h) — 11 cases

Barkley v. Toland, 646 P.2d 1124 (Kan. Ct. App. 1982).

Giles v. Russell, 567 P.2d 845 (Kan. 1977).

Miotk v. Rudy, 605 P.2d 587 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).

Mid Kansas Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Burke, 666 P.2d 203 (Kan. 1983).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(h)(4) — 1 case

Barkley v. Toland, 646 P.2d 1124 (Kan. Ct. App. 1982).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(h)(6) — 5 cases

Wirt v. Esrey, 662 P.2d 1238 (Kan. 1983).

Barkley v. Toland, 646 P.2d 1124 (Kan. Ct. App. 1982).

Patrzykont v. Patrzykont, 644 P.2d 1009 (Kan. Ct. App. 1982).

Ellis v. Whittaker, 709 P.2d 991 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985).

— K.S.A. § 60-260(o) — 2 cases

Brown v. Triple \D\" Drilling Co.", 585 P.2d 987 (Kan. 1978).

Traylor v. Wachter, 598 P.2d 1061 (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.