Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 75-6104 (2026)

Exceptions from liability; claims for damages arising from childhood sexual abuse not precluded

✓ current as of May 2026

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

75-6104. Exceptions from liability; claims for damages arising from childhood sexual abuse not precluded. (a) A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment shall not be liable for damages resulting from:

(1) Legislative functions, including, but not limited to, the adoption or failure to adopt any statute, regulation, ordinance or resolution;

(2) judicial function;

(3) enforcement of or failure to enforce a law, whether valid or invalid, including, but not limited to, any statute, rule and regulation, ordinance or resolution;

(4) adoption or enforcement of, or failure to adopt or enforce, any written personnel policy which protects persons' health or safety unless a duty of care, independent of such policy, is owed to the specific individual injured, except that the finder of fact may consider the failure to comply with any written personnel policy in determining the question of negligence;

(5) any claim based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a governmental entity or employee, whether or not the discretion is abused and regardless of the level of discretion involved;

(6) the assessment or collection of taxes or special assessments;

(7) any claim by an employee of a governmental entity arising from the tortious conduct of another employee of the same governmental entity, if such claim is:

(A) Compensable pursuant to the Kansas workers compensation act; or

(B) not compensable pursuant to the Kansas workers compensation act because the injured employee was a firemen's relief association member who was exempt from such act pursuant to K.S.A. 44-505d, and amendments thereto, at the time the claim arose;

(8) the malfunction, destruction or unauthorized removal of any traffic or road sign, signal or warning device unless it is not corrected by the governmental entity responsible within a reasonable time after actual or constructive notice of such malfunction, destruction or removal. Nothing herein shall give rise to liability arising from the act or omission of any governmental entity in placing or removing any of the above signs, signals or warning devices when such placement or removal is the result of a discretionary act of the governmental entity;

(9) any claim which is limited or barred by any other law or which is for injuries or property damage against an officer, employee or agent where the individual is immune from suit or damages;

(10) any claim based upon emergency management activities, except that governmental entities shall be liable for claims to the extent provided in article 9 of chapter 48 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and amendments thereto;

(11) the failure to make an inspection, or making an inadequate or negligent inspection, of any property other than the property of the governmental entity, to determine whether the property complies with or violates any law or rule and regulation or contains a hazard to public health or safety;

(12) snow or ice conditions or other temporary or natural conditions on any public way or other public place due to weather conditions, unless the condition is affirmatively caused by the negligent act of the governmental entity;

(13) the plan or design for the construction of or an improvement to public property, either in its original construction or any improvement thereto, if the plan or design is approved in advance of the construction or improvement by the governing body of the governmental entity or some other body or employee exercising discretionary authority to give such approval and if the plan or design was prepared in conformity with the generally recognized and prevailing standards in existence at the time such plan or design was prepared;

(14) failure to provide, or the method of providing, police or fire protection;

(15) any claim for injuries resulting from the use of any public property intended or permitted to be used as a park, playground or open area for recreational purposes, unless:

(A) The governmental entity or an employee thereof is guilty of gross and wanton negligence proximately causing such injury; or

(B) an employee of the governmental entity commits childhood sexual abuse as defined in K.S.A. 60-523, and amendments thereto;

(16) the natural condition of any unimproved public property of the governmental entity;

(17) any claim for injuries resulting from the use or maintenance of a public cemetery owned and operated by a municipality or an abandoned cemetery, title to which has vested in a governmental entity pursuant to K.S.A. 17-1366 through 17-1368, and amendments thereto, unless the governmental entity or an employee thereof is guilty of gross and wanton negligence proximately causing the injury;

(18) the existence, in any condition, of a minimum maintenance road, after being properly so declared and signed as provided in K.S.A. 68-5,102, and amendments thereto;

(19) any claim for damages arising from the operation of vending machines authorized pursuant to K.S.A. 68-432 or 75-3343a, and amendments thereto;

(20) providing, distributing or selling information from geographic information systems which includes an entire formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, process, digital database or system which electronically records, stores, reproduces and manipulates by computer geographic and factual information which has been developed internally or provided from other sources and compiled for use by a public agency, either alone or in cooperation with other public or private entities;

(21) any claim arising from providing a juvenile justice program to juvenile offenders, if such juvenile justice program has contracted with the commissioner of juvenile justice or with another nonprofit program that has contracted with the commissioner of juvenile justice. The provisions of this section do not apply to community service work within the scope of K.S.A. 60-3614, and amendments thereto, or to claims arising from childhood sexual abuse as defined in K.S.A. 60-523, and amendments thereto;

(22) performance of, or failure to perform, any activity pursuant to K.S.A. 74-8922, and amendments thereto, including, but not limited to, issuance and enforcement of a consent decree agreement, oversight of contaminant remediation and taking title to any or all of the federal enclave described in such statute;

(23) any claim arising from the making of a donation of used or excess fire control, fire rescue, or emergency medical services equipment to a fire department, fire district, volunteer fire department, medical emergency response team or the Kansas forest service if at the time of making the donation the donor believes that the equipment is serviceable or may be made serviceable. This subsection also applies to equipment that is acquired through the federal excess personal property program established by the federal property and administrative services act of 1949, 40 U.S.C. § 483. This subsection shall apply to any breathing apparatus or any mechanical or electrical device which functions to monitor, evaluate, or restore basic life functions, only if it is recertified to the manufacturer's specifications by a technician certified by the manufacturer; or

(24) any claim arising from the acceptance of a donation of fire control, fire rescue or emergency medical services equipment, if at the time of the donation the donee reasonably believes that the equipment is serviceable or may be made serviceable and if after placing the donated equipment into service, the donee maintains the donated equipment in a safe and serviceable manner.

(b) The enumeration of exceptions to liability in this section shall not be construed to be exclusive nor as legislative intent to waive immunity from liability in the performance or failure to perform any other act or function of a discretionary nature.

(c) The exceptions to liability in subsections (a)(1) through (a)(4) shall not be construed to preclude, prohibit or otherwise limit a claim for damages arising from childhood sexual abuse as defined in K.S.A. 60-523, and amendments thereto. Failure of a governmental entity to adopt or enforce a policy, regulation or law related to childhood sexual abuse and failure to exercise reasonable discretion in the supervision of a governmental employee who commits childhood sexual abuse may be considered by the trier of fact in determining the question of a governmental entity's negligence.

History: L. 1979, ch. 186, § 4; L. 1981, ch. 358, § 2; L. 1981, ch. 357, § 1; L. 1981, ch. 359, § 1; L. 1987, ch. 353, § 3; L. 1991, ch. 209, § 3; L. 1994, ch. 248, § 30; L. 1995, ch. 56, § 1; L. 1995, ch. 260, § 10; L. 1996, ch. 131, § 1; L. 1997, ch. 156, § 92; L. 1998, ch. 142, § 20; L. 2000, ch. 99, § 1; L. 2003, ch. 107, § 2; L. 2005, ch. 139, § 3; L. 2023, ch. 28, § 4; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 240 cases (24 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Jackson Ex Rel. Essien v. Unified Sch. Dist. 259, 995 P.2d 844 (Kan. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jackson Ex Rel. Essien v. Unified Sch. Dist. 259, 995 P.2d 844 (Kan. 2000). · cites it 90× “In order to avoid liability, the governmental entity has the burden of proving that it falls within one of the enumerated exceptions found in K.S.A. 75-6104. Barber v. Williams, 244 Kan.”

Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 40 P.3d 315 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 77× “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 contains the *224 immunity exceptions to the general rule of governmental liability.”

Est. of Belden v. Brown Cnty., 261 P.3d 943 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 24× “Had the legislature meant to impose no greater duty or obligation than the constitutional minimum, it would have adopted a specific tort claim exception in K.S.A. 75-6104 immunizing jails and prisons for their treatment of inmates.”

Jackson v. City of Kansas City, 680 P.2d 877 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 35× “)? Defendant City contends the district court erred in ruling the City and its employees were not immune from suit under the exceptions set forth in sections (a), (c), (d) and (m) of K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 of the Kansas Tort Claims Act.”

Schreiner v. Hodge, 504 P.3d 410 (Kan. 2022). · cites it 40× “" K.S.A. 75-6104 further clarifies that "[t]he enumeration of exceptions to liability in this section shall not be construed to be exclusive nor as legislative intent to waive immunity from liability in the performance or failure to perform any other act or function of a…”

Beck v. Kansas Adult Auth., 735 P.2d 222 (Kan. 1987). · cites it 40× “However, instead of reversing the case to provide the plaintiffs an opportunity to develop the facts, the majority then proceeds to hold that the KAA is immune from liability as a matter of law under the Kansas Tort Claims Act (K.S.A. 75-6104[d]). In arriving at that conclusion,…”

Est. of Randolph v. City of Wichita, 459 P.3d 802 (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 21× “K.S.A. 75-6104. Again, as a general matter, the immunities are to be narrowly construed consistent with the overarching rule of governmental liability.”

Kansas State Bank & Trust Co. v. Specialized Transp. Servs., Inc., 819 P.2d 587 (Kan. 1991). · cites it 20× “K.S.A. 75-6104 states in part: "A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment shall not be liable for damages resulting from: .”

Brock v. Richmond-Berea Cemetery Dist., 957 P.2d 505 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 44× “75-6104(j) (now K.S.A. 75-6104[k]) applied to grant the city immunity.”

Barrett Ex Rel. Barrett v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 259, 32 P.3d 1156 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 19× “The trial court also ruled that the discretionary function exception to the KTCA, K.S.A. 75-6104(e), was not available to the defendants “because of the existence of a mandatory duty of defendants to protect its student athletes from heat exposure.”

Nero v. Kansas State Univ., 861 P.2d 768 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 15× “75-6101 et seq. Under the KTCA, liability is the rule and immunity is the exception.”

Hill v. State, 448 P.3d 457 (Kan. 2019). · cites it 11× “The dissent's limited view of the sovereign immunity waiver would also render unnecessary many exceptions to liability expressly carved out by the Legislature in K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 75-6104. And we generally presume our Legislature does not intend to enact useless or meaningless…”

Show all 240 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(0) — 1 case

Wright v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 379, 14 P.3d 437 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(1) — 3 cases

Lopez v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty., 75 P.3d 1234 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003).

Lopez v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty., 89 P.3d 588 (Kan. 2004).

Kemna v. Kansas Dep't of Transp., 877 P.2d 462 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a) — 9 cases

Jackson v. City of Kansas City, 680 P.2d 877 (Kan. 1984). “)? Defendant City contends the district court erred in ruling the City and its employees were not immune from suit under the exceptions set forth in sections (a), (c), (d) and (m) of K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 of the Kansas Tort Claims Act.”

Hill v. State, 448 P.3d 457 (Kan. 2019). “The dissent's limited view of the sovereign immunity waiver would also render unnecessary many exceptions to liability expressly carved out by the Legislature in K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 75-6104. And we generally presume our Legislature does not intend to enact useless or meaningless…”

State Ex Rel. Stephan v. Kansas House of Representatives, 687 P.2d 622 (Kan. 1984).

Lamb v. State, 109 P.3d 1265 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).

Lopez v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty., 89 P.3d 588 (Kan. 2004).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a)(1) — 1 case

Scannell Props. 516, LLC v. City of Edwardsville (D. Kan. 2025).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a)(14) — 2 cases

Johnson v. Wichita, Kansas, City of (D. Kan. 2024).

McGuire v. Allen (D. Kan. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a)(15) — 1 case

Zaragoza v. Bd. of Johnson Cnty. Comm'rs (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a)(3) — 1 case

Johnson v. Wichita, Kansas, City of (D. Kan. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(a)(5) — 1 case

Teetz v. Sedgwick Cnty., Kansas (D. Kan. 2024).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(b) — 7 cases

Fugate v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Cnty./Kansas City, 161 F. Supp. 2d 1261 (D. Kan. 2001).

Smith v. State, 955 P.2d 1293 (Kan. 1998).

Jarboe v. Bd. of Sedgwick Cnty. Comm'rs, 938 P.2d 1293 (Kan. 1997).

Cory v. Thompson, 795 F. Supp. 368 (D. Kan. 1992).

Akbarnia v. Deming, 845 F. Supp. 788 (D. Kan. 1994).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(c) — 31 cases

Beck v. Kansas Adult Auth., 735 P.2d 222 (Kan. 1987). “However, instead of reversing the case to provide the plaintiffs an opportunity to develop the facts, the majority then proceeds to hold that the KAA is immune from liability as a matter of law under the Kansas Tort Claims Act (K.S.A. 75-6104[d]). In arriving at that conclusion,…”

Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 40 P.3d 315 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 contains the *224 immunity exceptions to the general rule of governmental liability.”

Cansler v. State, 675 P.2d 57 (Kan. 1984).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(c)(d) — 1 case

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(d) — 48 cases

Est. of Belden v. Brown Cnty., 261 P.3d 943 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). “Had the legislature meant to impose no greater duty or obligation than the constitutional minimum, it would have adopted a specific tort claim exception in K.S.A. 75-6104 immunizing jails and prisons for their treatment of inmates.”

Woodruff Ex Rel. Woodruff v. City of Ottawa, 951 P.2d 953 (Kan. 1997).

Potts v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Leavenworth Cnty., 176 P.3d 988 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).

Potts v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 176 P.3d 988 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(e) — 99 cases

Schreiner v. Hodge, 504 P.3d 410 (Kan. 2022). “" K.S.A. 75-6104 further clarifies that "[t]he enumeration of exceptions to liability in this section shall not be construed to be exclusive nor as legislative intent to waive immunity from liability in the performance or failure to perform any other act or function of a…”

Kansas State Bank & Trust Co. v. Specialized Transp. Servs., Inc., 819 P.2d 587 (Kan. 1991). “K.S.A. 75-6104 states in part: "A governmental entity or an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment shall not be liable for damages resulting from: .”

Nero v. Kansas State Univ., 861 P.2d 768 (Kan. 1993). “75-6101 et seq. Under the KTCA, liability is the rule and immunity is the exception.”

Barrett Ex Rel. Barrett v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 259, 32 P.3d 1156 (Kan. 2001). “The trial court also ruled that the discretionary function exception to the KTCA, K.S.A. 75-6104(e), was not available to the defendants “because of the existence of a mandatory duty of defendants to protect its student athletes from heat exposure.”

Est. of Randolph v. City of Wichita, 459 P.3d 802 (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). “K.S.A. 75-6104. Again, as a general matter, the immunities are to be narrowly construed consistent with the overarching rule of governmental liability.”

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(f) — 4 cases

Sage v. Williams, 933 P.2d 775 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).

Beck v. Kansas Univ. Psychiatry Found., 671 F. Supp. 1563 (D. Kan. 1987).

Snodgrass v. City of Wichita, Kansas (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(f)(2) — 1 case

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(g) — 4 cases

Carpenter v. Johnson, 649 P.2d 400 (Kan. 1982).

Toumberlin v. Haas, 689 P.2d 808 (Kan. 1984).

Force Ex Rel. Force v. City of Lawrence, 838 P.2d 896 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).

Fudge v. City of Kansas City, 720 P.2d 1093 (Kan. 1986).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(h) — 5 cases

Patterson v. Cowley Cnty., Kansas, 413 P.3d 432 (Kan. 2018).

Kastendieck v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 934 F. Supp. 387 (D. Kan. 1996).

Patterson v. Cowley Cnty., Kansas, 388 P.3d 923 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).

Tuley v. City of Kansas City, 843 P.2d 267 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(i) — 8 cases

Gilliam v. USD 244 Sch. Dist., 397 F. Supp. 2d 1282 (D. Kan. 2005).

Sanchez Ex Rel. Sanchez v. Unified Sch. Dist. 469, 339 P.3d 399 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).

Lamb v. State, 109 P.3d 1265 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).

Arceo v. City of Junction City, Kansas, 182 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (D. Kan. 2002).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(j) — 6 cases

Bradley v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 890 P.2d 1228 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).

Bradley v. Bd. of Butler Cnty. Comm'rs., 20 Kan. App. 2d 602 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).

Brock v. Richmond-Berea Cemetery Dist., 957 P.2d 505 (Kan. 1998). “75-6104(j) (now K.S.A. 75-6104[k]) applied to grant the city immunity.”

Gooch v. Bethel A.M.E. Church, 792 P.2d 993 (Kan. 1990).

Sisk Ex Rel. Sisk v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger, 647 F. Supp. 861 (D. Kan. 1986).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(k) — 12 cases

Brock v. Richmond-Berea Cemetery Dist., 957 P.2d 505 (Kan. 1998). “75-6104(j) (now K.S.A. 75-6104[k]) applied to grant the city immunity.”

Taylor v. Reno Cnty., 747 P.2d 100 (Kan. 1987).

Collins v. Heavener Props., Inc., 783 P.2d 883 (Kan. 1989).

Watson v. City of Kansas City, Kan., 80 F. Supp. 2d 1175 (D. Kan. 1999).

Patterson v. Cowley Cnty., Kansas, 388 P.3d 923 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(l) — 1 case

Sneath v. Bd. of Ellsworth Cnty. Comm'rs (Kan. Ct. App. 2021).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(m) — 17 cases

Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 40 P.3d 315 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 contains the *224 immunity exceptions to the general rule of governmental liability.”

Johnson v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 913 P.2d 119 (Kan. 1996).

Wellhausen v. Univ. of Kansas, 189 P.3d 1181 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(n) — 28 cases

Keiswetter v. State, 373 P.3d 803 (Kan. 2016).

Boaldin v. Univ. of Kansas, 747 P.2d 811 (Kan. 1987).

Nichols v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 400, 785 P.2d 986 (Kan. 1990).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(o) — 27 cases

Jackson Ex Rel. Essien v. Unified Sch. Dist. 259, 995 P.2d 844 (Kan. 2000). “In order to avoid liability, the governmental entity has the burden of proving that it falls within one of the enumerated exceptions found in K.S.A. 75-6104. Barber v. Williams, 244 Kan.”

Dunn v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 367, 40 P.3d 315 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “K.S.A. 1983 Supp. 75-6104 contains the *224 immunity exceptions to the general rule of governmental liability.”

Gonzales v. Bd. of Shawnee Cnty. Comm'rs, 799 P.2d 491 (Kan. 1990).

Lanning v. Anderson, 921 P.2d 813 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(q) — 1 case

Brock v. Richmond-Berea Cemetery Dist., 957 P.2d 505 (Kan. 1998). “75-6104(j) (now K.S.A. 75-6104[k]) applied to grant the city immunity.”

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(s) — 1 case

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(u) — 2 cases

Christopher v. State, 143 P.3d 685 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).

Osborn v. Kansas Dept. for Child. & Families (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).

— K.S.A. § 75-6104(v) — 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.