Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 66-227 (2026)

Crossings

✓ current as of May 2026

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

66-227. Crossings. It is hereby made the duty of every person or corporation owning or operating any railroad crossed by a public highway, county highway or township road to make, and keep in good repair, good and sufficient crossings for such highway, road or street over their tracks, including all the grading, bridges, ditches and culverts within their right-of-way that may be necessary to make a safe crossing. The vertical profile or alignment of the centerline of the highway, road or street through the crossing shall comply with the American association of state highway and transportation officials (AASHTO) design manual titled, "a policy on geometric design of highways and streets" as published and in effect on January 1, 2001.

When the highway crossing the track is improved by the construction of a hard-surfaced road, the railroad company shall pave the space between the rails and for a distance of two feet on each side thereof with a pavement of the same or a better type for the full width of the pavement on the highway. On other crossings where the highway has not been improved, the planking or other material used between and for a distance of one foot outside of the rails shall be of a length to equal the roadway width measured perpendicular to the axis of the highway. Nothing in this act shall be construed to repeal any provision of law relating to railroad crossings on streets in cities of the first and second class.

History: L. 1915, ch. 280, § 1; L. 1919, ch. 242, § 1; R.S. 1923, 66-227; L. 2001, ch. 15, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1932–2007 · leading case: Gerald Alumbaugh v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. & the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 322 F.3d 520 (8th Cir. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gerald Alumbaugh v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. & the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 322 F.3d 520 (8th Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “He alleges that Union Pacific is liable for negligence per se under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 66-227 (Supp.2001), which addresses the duties and liabilities of railroad companies as to crossings, approaches, and gates.”

Taylor v. St. Louis Sw. Ry. Co., 746 F. Supp. 50 (D. Kan. 1990). · cites it 2× “The court further finds that Union Pacific has not demonstrated that the Kansas statute which governs approach grades, K.S.A. 66-227, is unconstitutional. 2 Therefore, this portion of defendant’s fourth motion for determination of law will also be denied by the court.”

Colbert v. Union Pac. R.R., 485 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (D. Kan. 2007). · cites it 2× “Specifically, plaintiff alleges that defendants had a duty to: (1) keep the crossings in good repair, in accordance with K.S.A. § 66-227; (2) maintain adequate warning devices at the crossing and assure that they function properly; (3) comply with the Manual on Uniform Traffic…”

Sisk Ex Rel. Sisk v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger, 647 F. Supp. 861 (D. Kan. 1986). “Pursuant to K.S.A. 66-227, the railroad’s “surface responsibility” extends only two feet from the outside rails.”

Brim v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 12 P.2d 715 (Kan. 1932). · cites it 2× “227, being section 66-227 R. S. 1923, in the particulars of width and grade of the approaches of the crossing in question.”

Gerald Alumbaugh v. Union Pac. RR (8th Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “He alleges that Union Pacific is liable for negligence per se under Kan. Stat. Ann.§ 66-227 (Supp. 2001), which addresses the duties and liabilities of railroad companies as to crossings, approaches, and gates.”

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.