Kansas Court of Appeals Hears Oral Arguments at Washburn Law on September 17, 2013
Washburn University School of Law, the Center for Law and Government, and the Center for Excellence in Advocacy host the Kansas Court of Appeals on Tuesday, September 17, 2013, for a special U.S. Constitution Day session in the Robinson Courtroom and Bianchino Technology Center.
See the docket of hearings (72 KB PDF).
Panel of judges:
Briefs of appellants and appellee will be posted when available.
Tuesday 9:00 a.m. docket:
- 108,615 – State of Kansas v. James M. Eden
- Brief of Appellant (1.6 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (2.4 MB PDF)
- Reply Brief of Appellant (815 KB PDF)
- Summary: A jury convicted James M. Eden of one count of violating the Kansas Offender Registration Act. The district court sentenced Eden to 36 months' probation with an underlying sentence of 120 months' imprisonment. This is Eden's direct appeal from his conviction and sentence.
- Did Eden's conviction violate his rights under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution because he attempted to register but was prevented from doing so by the actions of the Shawnee County Sheriff's Department?
- Did the district court err in refusing to instruct the jury on the definition of general intent?
- Was there sufficient evidence to support Eden's conviction of violating the Kansas Offender Registration Act?
- Did the district court violate Eden's rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution when it sentenced him based in part on his criminal history without first requiring that the prior convictions be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury?
- 108,792 – State of Kansas v. Cathy L. Hendry
- Brief of Appellant (1.6 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (1.9 MB PDF)
- Summary: Cathy L. Hendry was convicted of attempted first degree murder after she pointed a loaded shotgun at her boyfriend and squeezed the trigger. On direct appeal from her conviction and sentence, Hendry raises several issues.
- Was there sufficient evidence that Hendry committed an "overt act" toward perpetration of the crime of murder?
- Did the district court err in denying Hendry's motion for a mistrial after a prospective juror revealed during jury selection that he had interactions with Hendry in prison, suggesting Hendry was in custody at some point?
- Were Hendry's constitutional rights violated when the court sentenced her to an increased penalty by requiring her to register as an offender?
- 108,788 – MCJS, Inc. DBA Reed's Ringside Sports Bar and Grill v. Kansas Department of Revenue
- Brief of Appellant (1.4 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (1.4 MB PDF)
- Reply Brief of Appellant (2.1 MB PDF)
- Summary: After a minor told police that he had been drinking beer at Reed's Ringside Sports Bar and Grill (Reed's), the Kansas Department of Revenue, Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), issued an administrative citation and fined Reed's $500 for violating K.S.A. 41-2615(a), which prohibits any licensee, permit holder, owner, officer, or employee thereof from knowingly or unknowingly permitting a minor to possess or consume alcoholic liquor or cereal malt beverage on the premises, except when an employee over 18 years old serves the beverage under the on-premises supervision of a licensee, permit-holder, or employee aged 21 or older. On appeal, the Secretary of the Kansas Department of Revenue and the district court affirmed the citation.
- Does K.S.A. 41-2615(a) impose strict liability?
- Was there sufficient evidence to support the finding that the minor possessed or consumed beer at Reed's?
- 109,576 – Animal Care, Inc., By and Through Debra K. Anderson, D.V.M. D/B/A Westport Animal Clinic v. Roger Shumaker and Shumaker Development Company, LLC
- Brief of Appellant (2 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (3.2 MB PDF)
- Summary: This appeal involves a dispute over ownership of an approximately 10 foot wide grassy strip of property located between two businesses in Topeka. Animal Care, Inc. commenced an action to quiet title to the disputed property under the theory of adverse possession, or in the alternative, that its use amounted to a prescriptive easement. Animal Care, Inc. also alleged separate claims of tortious interference with a business relationship and harassment. The parties filed competing motions for summary judgment. Animal Care, Inc. now appeals the district court's order granting judgment as a matter of law to Roger Shumaker and Shumaker Development Company, LLC on all counts.
- Did the district court erroneously apply the standard of review for a motion for summary judgment?
- Did the district court erroneously apply the statutory requirements in analyzing Animal Care, Inc.'s adverse possession claim?
- Did the district court erroneously interpret city ordinances and disregard evidence in ruling on Animal Care, Inc.'s harassment claim?
Tuesday 1:30 p.m. docket:
- 109,308 – Ottawa Education Association v. The Secretary of the Kansas Department of Labor, and Board of Education of U.S.D. No. 290, Franklin County, Kansas
- Brief of Appellant (1.5 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (1.5 MB PDF)
- Reply Brief of Appellant (907 KB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee, Secretary of the Kansas Department of Labor (1 MB PDF)
- Summary: The Ottawa Education Association filed a prohibited practice complaint against the Board of Education of U.S.D. No. 290, Franklin County (BOE), alleging the BOE had made a unilateral change in the mandatory topic of "salary and wages" when it implemented, without negotiating, a Key Return Policy with a monetary penalty that charged teachers up to $500 for lost building keys. The Secretary of the Kansas Department of Labor found that no prohibited practice had been committed. The district court affirmed the lower decisions.
- Is the monetary penalty for lost keys mandatorily negotiable under the professional negotiations act?
- Did the BOE commit a prohibited practice when it failed to negotiate the Key Return Policy?
- 109,393 – Linda Spivey v. Brewster Place, and Kansas Association of Homes for the Aging Insurance Group, Inc.
- Brief of Appellant (2.3 MB PDF)
- Brief of Appellee (1.9 MB PDF)
- Summary: Linda Spivey worked for Brewster Place as a certified medication aide. She was leaving work one evening when a metal bar fell from an automatic door-closer and hit her on the head. The next day, she went to the emergency room complaining of a headache and blurred vision and was diagnosed with a head contusion. In the years following her work injury, she visited many doctors and was ultimately diagnosed with severe psychological problems. She appeals the decision of the Workers Compensation Board (the Board), which found that her work injury was not compensable.
- Did the Board err by reversing the ALJ's workers compensation award? Specifically, does substantial evidence support the Board's finding that Spivey's work injury caused no physical or psychological impairment?