K.S.A. » Chapter 77
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 77-603 (2026)

Application and construction

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

77-603. Application and construction. (a) This act applies to all agencies and all proceedings for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions not specifically exempted by statute from the provisions of this act.

(b) This act creates only procedural rights and imposes only procedural duties. They are in addition to those created and imposed by other statutes.

(c) This act does not apply to agency actions:

(1) Of the prisoner review board concerning inmates or persons under parole or conditional release supervision;

(2) concerning the management, discipline or release of persons in the custody of the secretary of corrections;

(3) concerning the management, discipline or release of persons in the custody of the commissioner of juvenile justice;

(4) under the election laws contained in chapter 25 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and amendments thereto, except as provided by K.S.A. 25-4185, and amendments thereto;

(5) concerning pardon, commutation of sentence, clemency or extradition;

(6) concerning military or naval affairs other than actions relating to armories;

(7) governed by the provisions of the open records act and subject to an action for enforcement pursuant to K.S.A. 45-222, and amendments thereto; or

(8) governed by the provisions of K.S.A. 75-4317 et seq., and amendments thereto, relating to open public meetings, and subject to an action for civil penalties or enforcement pursuant to K.S.A. 75-4320 or 75-4320a, and amendments thereto.

History: L. 1984, ch. 338, § 3; L. 1986, ch. 318, § 2; L. 1988, ch. 369, § 7; L. 2005, ch. 9, § 1; L. 2009, ch. 109, § 24; L. 2012, ch. 16, § 39; L. 2015, ch. 95, § 15; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 100 cases (24 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Pieren-Abbott v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 106 P.3d 492 (Kan. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pieren-Abbott v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 106 P.3d 492 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 2× “In addition, K.S.A. 77-603(b) states the KJRA creates only procedural rights and duties that are “in addition to those created and imposed by other statutes.”
Lindenman v. Umscheid, 875 P.2d 964 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 3× “In accordance with K.S.A. 77-603, the KJRA establishes the exclusive means of judicial review of agency action.”
Ryser v. State, 284 P.3d 337 (Kan. 2012). · cites it 3× “of agency actions not specifically exempted by statute from the provisions of [the KJRA]”); K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 77-603(c) (containing no exemptions for agency actions under the Healing *459 Arts Act); K.”
Travelers Cas. Ins. v. Karns - (, 431 P.3d 301 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 7× “" 3 In 1993, K.S.A. 77-603 was substantially the same as it is now with a default in favor of KJRA review and a list of agency actions exempt from review.”
Ben J. v. City of Salina, 208 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2009). · cites it 2× “" K.S.A. 77-603(a). Furthermore, the legislature could have extended the substantial competent evidence scope of review to all projects covered by the Kansas Act, even if the displacement resulted from an action by a political subdivision of the state, by simply restating the…”
10th Street Med., Inc. v. State, 210 P.3d 670 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 77-603(a); K.S.A. 77-606.”
May v. Cline, 372 P.3d 1242 (Kan. 2016). “K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 77-603(c)(2) (exempting discipline of persons in the custody of the Secretaiy of Corrections from the Kansas Judicial Review Act).”
Amos v. Nelson, 923 P.2d 1014 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 4× “K.S.A. 77-603(b). The Act does not apply to agency actions concerning the management, discipline, or release of persons in the custody of the Secretary of Corrections.”
Kansas Gas & Elec. Co. v. Kansas Corp. Comm'n, 720 P.2d 1063 (Kan. 1986). · cites it 2× “(a) Except to the extent that this act or another statute provides otherwise: "(1) The burden of proving the invalidity of agency action is on the party asserting invalidity; and "(2) the validity of agency action shall be determined in accordance with the standards of judicial…”
Jones v. State, 109 P.3d 1166 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 77-603(a) states: “This act applies to all agencies and all proceedings for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions not specifically exempted by statute from the provisions of this act.”
Schall v. Wichita State Univ., 7 P.3d 1144 (Kan. 2000). · cites it 2× “In accordance with K.S.A. 77-603, the KJRA establishes the exclusive means of judicial review of agency action.”
Denning v. Johnson Sheriff's Civil Serv., 266 P.3d 557 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “77-602(a); K.S.A. 77-603(a); Frick v. City of Salina, 289 Kan.”
Show all 100 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 77-603(a) — 72 cases
Ben J. v. City of Salina, 208 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2009). “" K.S.A. 77-603(a). Furthermore, the legislature could have extended the substantial competent evidence scope of review to all projects covered by the Kansas Act, even if the displacement resulted from an action by a political subdivision of the state, by simply restating the…”
10th Street Med., Inc. v. State, 210 P.3d 670 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 77-603(a); K.S.A. 77-606.”
Travelers Cas. Ins. v. Karns - (, 431 P.3d 301 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “" 3 In 1993, K.S.A. 77-603 was substantially the same as it is now with a default in favor of KJRA review and a list of agency actions exempt from review.”
Denning v. Johnson Sheriff's Civil Serv., 266 P.3d 557 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). “77-602(a); K.S.A. 77-603(a); Frick v. City of Salina, 289 Kan.”
Lindenman v. Umscheid, 875 P.2d 964 (Kan. 1994). “In accordance with K.S.A. 77-603, the KJRA establishes the exclusive means of judicial review of agency action.”
— K.S.A. § 77-603(b) — 7 cases
Pieren-Abbott v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 106 P.3d 492 (Kan. 2005). “In addition, K.S.A. 77-603(b) states the KJRA creates only procedural rights and duties that are “in addition to those created and imposed by other statutes.”
Amos v. Nelson, 923 P.2d 1014 (Kan. 1996). “K.S.A. 77-603(b). The Act does not apply to agency actions concerning the management, discipline, or release of persons in the custody of the Secretary of Corrections.”
Pittsburg State Univ. v. Kansas Bd. of Regents, 36 P.3d 853 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001).
Kansas Sunset Assocs. v. Kansas Dep't of Health & Env't, 818 P.2d 797 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991).
Kuenstler v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 197 P.3d 874 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 77-603(b)(2) — 1 case
Amos v. Nelson, 923 P.2d 1014 (Kan. 1996). “K.S.A. 77-603(b). The Act does not apply to agency actions concerning the management, discipline, or release of persons in the custody of the Secretary of Corrections.”
— K.S.A. § 77-603(c) — 8 cases
Ryser v. State, 284 P.3d 337 (Kan. 2012). “of agency actions not specifically exempted by statute from the provisions of [the KJRA]”); K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 77-603(c) (containing no exemptions for agency actions under the Healing *459 Arts Act); K.”
Travelers Cas. Ins. v. Karns - (, 431 P.3d 301 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “" 3 In 1993, K.S.A. 77-603 was substantially the same as it is now with a default in favor of KJRA review and a list of agency actions exempt from review.”
Jones v. State, 109 P.3d 1166 (Kan. 2005). “K.S.A. 77-603(a) states: “This act applies to all agencies and all proceedings for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions not specifically exempted by statute from the provisions of this act.”
10th Street Med., Inc. v. State, 210 P.3d 670 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 77-603(a); K.S.A. 77-606.”
City of Wichita v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd. of the Kansas Dep't of Human Resources & Teamsters Union Local 795, 913 P.2d 137 (Kan. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 77-603(c)(1) — 1 case
Battrick v. State, 985 P.2d 707 (Kan. 1999).
— K.S.A. § 77-603(c)(2) — 4 cases
May v. Cline, 372 P.3d 1242 (Kan. 2016). “K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 77-603(c)(2) (exempting discipline of persons in the custody of the Secretaiy of Corrections from the Kansas Judicial Review Act).”
Anderson v. McKune, 937 P.2d 16 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
Smith v. Schnurr (Kan. Ct. App. 2022).
Erwin v. Zmuda (Kan. Ct. App. 2026).
— K.S.A. § 77-603(c)(6) — 1 case
State, Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs. v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd. of the Kansas Dep't of Human Resources, 815 P.2d 66 (Kan. 1991).
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.