75-6103.
Liability of governmental entities for damages caused by employee acts or omissions, when; applicable procedure.
(a) Subject to the limitations of this act, each governmental entity shall be liable for damages caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any of its employees while acting within the scope of their employment under circumstances where the governmental entity, if a private person, would be liable under the laws of this state.
(b) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, either the code of civil procedure or, subject to subsection (b)(2), the code of civil procedure for limited actions shall be applicable to actions within the scope of this act. Actions for claims within the scope of the Kansas tort claims act brought under the code of civil procedure for limited actions are subject to the limitations provided in K.S.A. 61-2802, and amendments thereto.
(2) Actions within the scope of the Kansas tort claims act may not be brought under the small claims procedure act. Notwithstanding any provision of the small claims procedure act to the contrary, if a small claims action is within the scope of the Kansas tort claims act, a lawyer may appear in such small claims action on behalf of any governmental entity, officer or employee for the sole purpose of filing, briefing and arguing a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
History:
L. 1979, ch. 186, § 3; L. 1980, ch. 294, § 1; L. 2000, ch. 161, § 116; L. 2014, ch. 55, § 1; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Prager v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 20 P.3d 39 (Kan. 2001).
· cites it 12× “K.S.A. 75-6103; McAllister & Robinson, The Potential Civil Liability of Law Enforcement Officers and Agencies, 67 J.”
Hill v. State, 448 P.3d 457 (Kan. 2019).
· cites it 5× “2d at 196 ("Because a private person could not be liable for a retaliatory job placement, then the State has not waived its immunity under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 75-6103[a]."). The panel then determined its holdings made it unnecessary to consider the State's arguments about two…”
Hill v. State, 388 P.3d 122 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 14× “As discussed later, the trial court erred when it denied the State and Garcias motions to dismiss because (1) Hill was'not suing for a tort recognized under Kansas law; and (2) the State had not waived sovereign immunity under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 75-6103(a) of the KTCA.”
Rollins v. Kansas Dept. of Transp., 711 P.2d 1330 (Kan. 1985).
· cites it 13× “In other words, plaintiff argues that K.S.A. 75-6103 imposes upon governmental entities all duties applicable to private persons.”
Schreiner v. Hodge, 504 P.3d 410 (Kan. 2022).
· cites it 5× “The general rule of liability is set forth in K.S.A. 75-6103(a), which provides: "Subject to the limitations of this act, each governmental entity shall be liable for damages caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any of its employees while acting within the…”
Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 40 P.3d 315 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “75-6104(m); and (3) a private person would not be liable under the facts of this case as required by K.S.A. 75-6103. The motion was denied. U.”
Robertson v. City of Topeka, 644 P.2d 458 (Kan. 1982).
· cites it 4× “We would note at the outset, however, that the number of exceptions enumerated in K.S.A. 1981 Supp. 75-6104 indicates there has been no wholesale rejection of immunity by the Kansas Legislature.”
Jackson v. City of Kansas City, 680 P.2d 877 (Kan. 1984).
· cites it 3× “Rather, the burden is upon the defendant governmental entity, or defendant employee, to establish governmental immunity under one or more of the exceptions of K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104. If the party claiming this exception cannot meet this burden, the general rule of liability,…”
Com. Bank of St. Joseph v. State, 833 P.2d 996 (Kan. 1992).
· cites it 5× “The trial court found (1) the chief warehouse examiner’s acceptance of a bribe to cover up grain shortages was an act outside the scope of his employment (K.S.A. 75-6103[a]); (2) the State was immune from liability for the retention of the examiner because that was a…”
Keiswetter v. State, 373 P.3d 803 (Kan. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 75-6104 lists several exceptions to liability, including the police protection exception.”
C.T. v. Liberal Sch. Dist., 562 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (D. Kan. 2008).
· cites it 2× “” K.S.A. § 75-6103(a). The KTCA broadly defines the term “employee,” however, to include “persons acting on behalf or in service of a governmental entity in any official capacity, whether with or without compensation.”
— K.S.A. § 75-6103(a) — 110 cases
Prager v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 20 P.3d 39 (Kan. 2001).
“K.S.A. 75-6103; McAllister & Robinson, The Potential Civil Liability of Law Enforcement Officers and Agencies, 67 J.”
Hill v. State, 388 P.3d 122 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).
“As discussed later, the trial court erred when it denied the State and Garcias motions to dismiss because (1) Hill was'not suing for a tort recognized under Kansas law; and (2) the State had not waived sovereign immunity under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 75-6103(a) of the KTCA.”
Hill v. State, 448 P.3d 457 (Kan. 2019).
“2d at 196 ("Because a private person could not be liable for a retaliatory job placement, then the State has not waived its immunity under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 75-6103[a]."). The panel then determined its holdings made it unnecessary to consider the State's arguments about two…”
Rollins v. Kansas Dept. of Transp., 711 P.2d 1330 (Kan. 1985).
“In other words, plaintiff argues that K.S.A. 75-6103 imposes upon governmental entities all duties applicable to private persons.”
Schreiner v. Hodge, 504 P.3d 410 (Kan. 2022).
“The general rule of liability is set forth in K.S.A. 75-6103(a), which provides: "Subject to the limitations of this act, each governmental entity shall be liable for damages caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any of its employees while acting within the…”
— K.S.A. § 75-6103(b) — 2 cases
— K.S.A. § 75-6103(b)(2) — 1 case
— K.S.A. § 75-6103(c) — 4 cases
— K.S.A. § 75-6103(o) — 1 case
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.