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

K.S.A. § 60-4111 (2026)

Claims; filing of notice of receipt, form and manner

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

60-4111. Claims; filing of notice of receipt, form and manner. (a) (1) Only an owner of or interest holder in property seized for forfeiture may file a claim, and shall do so in the manner provided in this section. The claim shall be mailed to the seizing agency and to the plaintiff's attorney by certified mail, return receipt requested, within 60 days after the effective date of notice of pending forfeiture.

(2) The plaintiff's attorney shall file a notice of receipt with the court when a claim is received unless the claim was already filed with the court. Such filing shall include a copy of the claim and documents showing the date that the claim was mailed and received.

(b) The claim shall be signed by the claimant under penalty of perjury, K.S.A. 21-5903, and amendments thereto, and shall set forth the following:

(1) The caption of the proceedings and identifying number, if any, as set forth on the notice of pending forfeiture or complaint, the name of the claimant, and the name of the plaintiff's attorney who authorized the notice of pending forfeiture or complaint;

(2) the address where the claimant will accept mail;

(3) the nature and extent of the claimant's interest in the property; and

(4) a detailed description of when and how the claimant obtained an interest in the property.

(c) Substantial compliance with subsection (b) shall be deemed sufficient.

(d) It is permissible to assert the right against self-incrimination in a claim. If a claimant asserts the right, the court, in the court's discretion, may draw an adverse inference from the assertion against the claimant. The adverse inference shall not, by itself, be the basis of a judgment against the claimant.

History: L. 1994, ch. 339, § 11; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 225; L. 2018, ch. 26, § 8; L. 2024, ch. 79, § 5; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Trial court denial of motion to set aside judgment held void as untimely was erroneous. State v. U.S. Currency in the amount of $3,743, 25 Kan. App. 2d 54, 60, 956 P.2d 1351 (1998).

2. Mailing of claim to seized property by first class mail does not comply with law, but held substantial compliance as city had actual notice of claim. City of Hoisington v. $2,044 in U.S. Currency, 27 Kan. App. 2d 825, 8 P.3d 58 (2000).

3. Provisions of section are mandatory not directory. State v. 6,618.00 U.S. Currency, 35 Kan. App. 2d 54, 128 P.3d 413 (2006).

4. Board of Indigents' Defense Services not an interest holder with right to file claim in funds seized. State ex rel. Topeka Police Dept. v. 895.00 U.S. Currency, 281 Kan. 819, 830, 133 P.3d 91 (2006).

5. Strict compliance with statute is required for a person to contest forfeiture of property. State v. One 1995 Chevrolet Caprice Classic/Impala SS, 53 Kan. App. 2d 35, 39, 382 P.3d 476 (2016).


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Topeka Police Dep't v. $895.00 U.S. Currency, 133 P.3d 91 (Kan. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Topeka Police Dep't v. $895.00 U.S. Currency, 133 P.3d 91 (Kan. 2006). · cites it 16× “Within 30 days, BIDS responded by filing an affidavit of claimant under the provisions of K.S.A. 60-4111 seeking the seized $895 under an exemption for attorney fees pursuant to K.”
State Ex Rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. One 1995 Chevrolet Caprice Classic/Impala SS VIN 31G1BL52P8SR191732, 382 P.3d 476 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 23× “Strict compliance with K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-4111 is mandatory for a person to contest forfeiture of property; thus, a purported claimant's appearance at the forfeiture hearing alone is not sufficient to comply with the requirements of that statute.”
State v. $6,618.00 U.S. Currency, 128 P.3d 413 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 13× “On May 29,2003, Al-Haj filed a claim to $4,453 and the Tahoe pursuant to K.S.A. 60-4111. The State then filed an in rem forfeiture action under K.”
City of Hoisington v. $2,044 in U.S. Currency, 8 P.3d 58 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “The court also found that the City’s actual notice of a claim of ownership did not constitute a waiver of the certified mail requirement of K.S.A. 60-4111(a). On appeal, Steinert raises a number of issues.”
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 21× “Although he claimed an interest in the seized currency, he provided no details, exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege under the United States and Kansas Constitutions against self-incrimination under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4111. Just over a month later, the State moved to…”
State v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $3,743, 956 P.2d 1351 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). “The district court seems to have relied on an alternative rationale in denying Clayton’s motion; the district court concluded that Clayton waited too long to challenge the default judgment.”
State v. $59,000 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 13× “6 We acknowledge, and agree with, the State's argument that noncompliance with K.S.A. 60-4111 erodes a claimant's standing to challenge the forfeiture.”
Trestle & Tower Eng'g, Inc. v. Star Ins., 13 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (D. Kan. 1998). · cites it 2× “In Blinne, plaintiff asserted various claims under a performance bond issued pursuant to K.S.A. 60-4111. Included among the claims was one for the rental value of idle equipment.”
State Ex Rel. Lawrence/Douglas Cnty. Drug Enf't Unit v. $17,023 in U.S. Currency, 321 P.3d 551 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 60-4111(a). The individual filing the claim — called the claimant— *530 must explain both his or her interest in the property and why the property in question is not subject to forfeiture.”
United States v. Chandler, 18 F. Supp. 2d 1240 (D. Kan. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 60-4110 through the filing of a petition for recognition of an exemption and the filing of a claim on behalf of the owner or interest holder under K.S.A. § 60-4111. When no petition or claim is filed, the plaintiffs attorney proceeds in accordance with K.”
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. Fuleki (Kan. 2026). · cites it 3× “Fuleki timely appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed the district court, holding "the district court must examine the legality of the actions of law enforcement, through his motion to suppress, before it considers Fuleki's standing to assert his claim under K.S.A. 2019 Supp.…”
Ternes v. Bd. of Sumner Cnty. Comm'rs (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). “3d 58 (2000) (noting that since the City had actual notice of the claim, service by first class mail substantially complied with K.S.A. 60-4111.) The underlying rationale in these cases is that substantial compliance standards do not allow the courts to create new methods of…”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(a) — 8 cases
State Ex Rel. Topeka Police Dep't v. $895.00 U.S. Currency, 133 P.3d 91 (Kan. 2006). “Within 30 days, BIDS responded by filing an affidavit of claimant under the provisions of K.S.A. 60-4111 seeking the seized $895 under an exemption for attorney fees pursuant to K.”
City of Hoisington v. $2,044 in U.S. Currency, 8 P.3d 58 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). “The court also found that the City’s actual notice of a claim of ownership did not constitute a waiver of the certified mail requirement of K.S.A. 60-4111(a). On appeal, Steinert raises a number of issues.”
State Ex Rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. One 1995 Chevrolet Caprice Classic/Impala SS VIN 31G1BL52P8SR191732, 382 P.3d 476 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). “Strict compliance with K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-4111 is mandatory for a person to contest forfeiture of property; thus, a purported claimant's appearance at the forfeiture hearing alone is not sufficient to comply with the requirements of that statute.”
State v. U.S. Currency in the Amount of $3,743, 956 P.2d 1351 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). “The district court seems to have relied on an alternative rationale in denying Clayton’s motion; the district court concluded that Clayton waited too long to challenge the default judgment.”
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “Although he claimed an interest in the seized currency, he provided no details, exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege under the United States and Kansas Constitutions against self-incrimination under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4111. Just over a month later, the State moved to…”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(a)(1) — 1 case
State v. $59,000 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2026). “6 We acknowledge, and agree with, the State's argument that noncompliance with K.S.A. 60-4111 erodes a claimant's standing to challenge the forfeiture.”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(b) — 4 cases
State v. $6,618.00 U.S. Currency, 128 P.3d 413 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “On May 29,2003, Al-Haj filed a claim to $4,453 and the Tahoe pursuant to K.S.A. 60-4111. The State then filed an in rem forfeiture action under K.”
State Ex Rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. One 1995 Chevrolet Caprice Classic/Impala SS VIN 31G1BL52P8SR191732, 382 P.3d 476 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). “Strict compliance with K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-4111 is mandatory for a person to contest forfeiture of property; thus, a purported claimant's appearance at the forfeiture hearing alone is not sufficient to comply with the requirements of that statute.”
State Ex Rel. Lawrence/Douglas Cnty. Drug Enf't Unit v. $17,023 in U.S. Currency, 321 P.3d 551 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014). “K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 60-4111(a). The individual filing the claim — called the claimant— *530 must explain both his or her interest in the property and why the property in question is not subject to forfeiture.”
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “Although he claimed an interest in the seized currency, he provided no details, exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege under the United States and Kansas Constitutions against self-incrimination under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4111. Just over a month later, the State moved to…”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(b)(4) — 1 case
State v. $6,618.00 U.S. Currency, 128 P.3d 413 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “On May 29,2003, Al-Haj filed a claim to $4,453 and the Tahoe pursuant to K.S.A. 60-4111. The State then filed an in rem forfeiture action under K.”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(c) — 1 case
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “Although he claimed an interest in the seized currency, he provided no details, exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege under the United States and Kansas Constitutions against self-incrimination under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4111. Just over a month later, the State moved to…”
— K.S.A. § 60-4111(d) — 1 case
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “Although he claimed an interest in the seized currency, he provided no details, exercising his Fifth Amendment privilege under the United States and Kansas Constitutions against self-incrimination under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4111. Just over a month later, the State moved to…”
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.