History:
L. 1917, ch. 80, § 11; R.S. 1923, 68-1111; L. 1957, ch. 364, § 1; L. 1971, ch. 224, § 1; L. 1975, ch. 427, § 144; L. 1979, ch. 212, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 255, § 3; Repealed, L. 2015, ch. 40, § 8; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Right of county to build bridge considered. Kansas City Bridge & Iron Co. v. Comm'rs of Wyandotte Co., 35 Kan. 557, 561, 11 P. 360; Cloud County v. Mitchell County, 75 Kan. 750, 756, 90 P. 286.
2. Plans and specification to be on file; statute construed. Bridge & Iron Co. v. Labette County, 98 Kan. 292, 305, 158 P. 8.
3. Bridge and culvert contracts not binding on county unless approved by engineer. Dolman and Clark v. Kingman County, 116 Kan. 201, 204, 226 P. 240.
Johnson v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 913 P.2d 119 (Kan. 1996). “Although KDOT approved the bridge plans (see K.S.A. 68-1111), the Division, not KDOT, holds the approval authority for the permit required for a channel alteration.”
Johnson v. Bd. of Pratt Cnty. Comm'rs, 897 P.2d 169 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). “Although KDOT may have exercised discretionary authority when it approved the bridge plans (see K.S.A. 68-1111), whether the requirement that the plans conform to generally recognized and prevailing standards was satisfied was disputed.”
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.