77-612.
Exhaustion of administrative remedies.
A person may file a petition for judicial review under this act only after exhausting all administrative remedies available within the agency whose action is being challenged and within any other agency authorized to exercise administrative review, but:
(a) A petitioner for judicial review of a rule or regulation need not have participated in the rulemaking proceeding upon which that rule and regulation is based, or have petitioned for its amendment or repeal;
(b) a petitioner for judicial review need not exhaust administrative remedies to the extent that this act or any other statute states that exhaustion is not required;
(c) a petitioner for judicial review need not seek reconsideration unless a statute makes the filing of a petition for reconsideration a prerequisite for seeking judicial review; and
(d) the court may relieve a petitioner of the requirement to exhaust any or all administrative remedies to the extent that the administrative remedies are inadequate or would result in irreparable harm.
History:
L. 1984, ch. 338, § 12; L. 1995, ch. 175, § 9; L. 2009, ch. 109, § 25; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Hamlin v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 204 P.3d 562 (Kan. 2009).
· cites it 11× “77-611), (2) exhaustion of administrative remedies (K.S.A. 77-612) and (3) time for filing the petition for judicial review (K.”
United Steelworkers of Am. v. KAN COMM'N ON CIVIL RIGHTS, 855 P.2d 905 (Kan. 1993).
· cites it 9× “) K.S.A. 77-612 provides in part: “A person may file a petition for judicial review under this act [the Act for Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement of Agency Actions] only after exhausting all administrative remedies available within the agency whose action is being challenged…”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Bremby, 189 P.3d 494 (Kan. 2008).
· cites it 2× “K.S.A. 77-612, which requires that persons exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a petition for judicial review under the KJRA, states as an exception to this requirement that “[a] petitioner for judicial review of a rule or regulation need not have participated in…”
Bd. of Com'rs of Sumner Cnty. v. Bremby, 189 P.3d 494 (Kan. 2008).
· cites it 2× “K.S.A. 77-612, which requires that persons exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a petition for judicial review under the KJRA, states as an exception to this requirement that "[a] petitioner for judicial review of a rule or regulation need not have participated in…”
Hill v. State, 388 P.3d 122 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 5× “” K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 77-612. Nevertheless, once an appeal is taken, K.”
Ryser v. State, 284 P.3d 337 (Kan. 2012).
· cites it 2× “65-2839a(b)(l) before filing her application for judicial review, thus failing to exhaust her administrative remedies as required by K.S.A. 2011 Supp. 77-612; and (2) tire Board’s issuance of the subpoena was a nonfinal agency action and Ryser failed to seek to file an…”
Heiland v. Dunnick, 19 P.3d 103 (Kan. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Moreover, the submission of the claim to the Joint Committee would not toll the time for fifing a petition for review under the provisions of K.S.A. 77-612, which requires exhaustion of remedies available within the agency whose action is being challenged or the reviewing agency…”
Cochran v. State, 249 P.3d 434 (Kan. 2011).
· cites it 2× “The KJRA does require that one exhaust his or her administrative remedies, (see K.S.A. 77-612), but that statute provides: "A person may file a petition for judicial review under this act only after exhausting all administrative remedies available within the agency whose action…”
Cole v. Mayans, 80 P.3d 384 (Kan. 2003).
“K.S.A. 77-612 requires the exhaustion of administrative remedies before a party can seek review under the Act for Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement of Agency Actions, K.”
Friedman v. Kansas State Bd. of Healing Arts, 199 P.3d 781 (Kan. 2009).
“” K.S.A. 77-612; see K.S.A. 77-607(a). Friedman does not contend that he exhausted his administrative remedies, but rather he argues that a person may petition for review of jurisdictional questions at any time, i.”
Friedman v. Kan. State Bd. of Healing Arts, 199 P.3d 781 (Kan. 2009).
“" K.S.A. 77-612; see K.S.A. 77-607(a). Friedman does not contend that he exhausted his administrative remedies, but rather he argues that a person may petition for review of jurisdictional questions at any time, i.”
— K.S.A. § 77-612(a) — 3 cases
Hamlin v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 204 P.3d 562 (Kan. 2009).
“77-611), (2) exhaustion of administrative remedies (K.S.A. 77-612) and (3) time for filing the petition for judicial review (K.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Bremby, 189 P.3d 494 (Kan. 2008).
“K.S.A. 77-612, which requires that persons exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a petition for judicial review under the KJRA, states as an exception to this requirement that “[a] petitioner for judicial review of a rule or regulation need not have participated in…”
Bd. of Com'rs of Sumner Cnty. v. Bremby, 189 P.3d 494 (Kan. 2008).
“K.S.A. 77-612, which requires that persons exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a petition for judicial review under the KJRA, states as an exception to this requirement that "[a] petitioner for judicial review of a rule or regulation need not have participated in…”
— K.S.A. § 77-612(b) — 1 case
— K.S.A. § 77-612(c)(7) — 1 case
— K.S.A. § 77-612(d) — 3 cases
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.