Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Register
KBA Search
KBA Advocate
Blog Home All Blogs
The KBA Advocate is the weekly KBA legislative newsletter that contains up-to-date information on legislation that impacts your practice. It is only published when the legislature is in session and is sent to all KBA members electronically via the KBA Weekly.

 

Search all posts for:   

 

Top tags: legislature  Brownback  Supreme Court  budget  Gannon  Hard 50  judicial branch  Special Session  2016 Session  Alleyne  Court of Appeals  Kansas Supreme Court  school finance  Senate  Caleb Stegall  election  HCR 5005  legislators  merit selection  Montoy  opening  State of the Judiciary  2014 Session  2015 Session  2015-16  annual  Brown v. Board of Education  Call to Action  civil rights  conference 

Lawyer and Law-Trained Legislators 2017 Kansas Legislature

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Updated: Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Lawyer and Law-Trained Legislators
2017 Kansas Legislature

KANSAS SENATOR

Senator David Haley
Senate District No. 4
D-Kansas City

Senator Haley is the managing partner of Village East, a redevelopment company in Kansas City, Kansas. He served in the Kansas House of Representatives from 1994-2000 and elected to the Kansas Senate in 2000. He was reelected in 2004, 2008 and 2012. Senator Haley is the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and the Senate Committee on Public Health and Welfare. He is also a member of other joint committees. Senator Haley received his J.D. from Howard University.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/sen_haley_david_1/


KANSAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Rep. John Barker
House District No. 70
R-Abilene

Representative Barker is a farmer, retired District Court Judge, and U.S. Army veteran. Rep. Barker served 25 years as a judge for the Eighth Judicial District covering Dickinson, Geary, Marion, and Morris counties. Rep. Barker has been recognized for his work with Kansas youth - championing initiatives to prevent drug and alcohol abuse, working with local school districts to reduce truancy rates, and working with juvenile offender programs. Rep. Barker and his wife of 30 years, live in Dickinson County where they raised their two children.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_barker_john_1/


Rep. Steve Becker
House District No. 104
R-Buhler

Representative Becker is a retired District Court Judge for Reno County. Rep. Becker was appointed in June 1981 and retired in January 2007. Prior to his appointment, Rep. Becker practiced in Hutchinson, KS. Rep. Becker graduated from Washburn Law School in 1975.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_becker_steven_1/


Rep. John Carmichael
House District 92
D-Wichita

Representative Carmichael represents the 92nd District in Wichita. He earned is Political Science degree from University of Kansas in 1979, his Administration of Justice degree from Wichita State University in 1980 and his law degree from KU School of Law in 1982. Rep. Carmichael is Of Counsel with the law firm of Conlee, Schmidt and Emerson, LLP in Wichita. Rep. Carmichael has been a member of the Wichita Bar Association and the Kansas Bar Association for over 30 years. Rep. Carmichael will serve as ranking minority member on the House Judiciary, as a member on Elections and Energy/Environment and local gov. committees this session.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_carmichael_john_1/


Rep. Erin Davis
House district No. 15
R- Olathe

Erin Davis represents the 15th House District in Olathe, Kansas. She was reelected in 2016. She is a recent graduate of the University of Kansas Law School. She is a member of the Rokusek Law Office, LLP in Lenexa, KS specializing in family law, including divorce, custody, Child in Need of Care parent’s attorney and Guardian ad Litem, juvenile offender and adult criminal work.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_davis_erin_1/


Rep. Blaine Finch
House District No. 59
R-Ottawa

Representative Finch is majority owner and President of Green, Finch& Covington, Chtd. His practice covers a broad spectrum of legal issues including municipal law, real estate, contracts, corporate law and estate planning. He also teaches at Ottawa University as an adjunct faculty member in the fields of History, Political Science and Pre-Law. Finch is a former city commissioner and Mayor of the City of Ottawa. Rep-Elect Finch graduated Summa Cum Laude from Ottawa University with degrees in History, Political Science and Psychology. Finch is a member of the Kansas Bar Association and a member and past president of the Franklin County Bar Association. He attended Washburn University School of Law.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_finch_blaine_1/


Rep. Dennis “Boog” Highberger
House District No. 46
D-Lawrence

Representative Highberger graduated from University of Kansas Law School in 1992. His areas of private practice have included wills, estates, contracts, family law, federal communications law, and general civil practice. Highberger served on the Lawrence City Commission from 2003 to 2009 and was Mayor in 2005/2006. He has been an active member of the Lawrence community, and currently serves on the Douglas County Food Policy Council, the City of Lawrence’s Public Incentives Review Committee (PIRC) and Sustainability Advisory Board (SAB), and the boards of directors of Independence, Inc., the Community Mercantile Education Foundation (CMEF), and the East Lawrence Neighborhood Association (ELNA).

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_highberger_dennis_1/


Rep.-Elect Tim Hodge
House District No. 72

R-North Newton

Representative-elect Hodge is member of the Adrian & Pankratz law firm in Newton Kansas. Hodge has developed his practice in diverse areas such as tax law, real estate, business law, secured transactions, and Medicaid Planning. He has served as an adjunct professor of business law at Tabor College. During law school, he clerked for the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals and the Kansas National Education Association. Before law school, Mr. Hodge served as a teacher and a coach at Peabody High School. He and his wife reside in North Newton with their three children. His wife is a teacher in the Newton School District. Hodge graduate Magana cum laude from Tabor College in 1999 and received is JD from Washburn Law School in 2003. Hodge also attended the Oxford Honours Program in 1998. He is a KBA member since 2004.


Rep.-Elect Susan Humphries
House District No. 99
R-Wichita

Representative-elect Humphries joined the Kansas Bar in 2014, after graduating from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law earlier that year. During law school Humphries had clinical experience in Mediation and at the Rocky Mountain Children’s Law Center. Humphries practices at Shultz Law Office, P.A., in Wichita, with a focus on adoption and general law. Humphries is the coordinator for Wichita Christian Legal Aid, which offers free legal aid at three non-profits. Humphries married Cary after graduating from TCU, and they proceeded to live in (and enjoy!) five states and two foreign countries. They moved to Kansas for the first time in 1981, and have considered it their married home ever since. They have four adult children (two are married), and one grandson. Humphries will serve as Representative for the 99th district, which includes Andover and east Wichita.


Rep.-Elect Leonard Mastroni
House District No. 117
R-La Crosse

Representative-elect Mastroni is currently a Rush County Commissioner, serving in that capacity since 2011. Prior to his service as a county commissioner he was a District Magistrate Judge where he served on the KDMJA Legislative committee for 12 years. Mastroni also served a chairman of the KDMJA Legislative committee and its educational committee. Mastroni attended Fort Hays University where he received his BA in political science. Mastroni also attended University of Nevada at Reno where he graduated from the national judicial college.


Rep.-Elect Vic Miller
House District No. 58
D-Topeka

Representative-Elect Vic Miller is returning to the Kansas House. He previously served for three-terms. Miller also served as Shawnee County Commissioner (15 yrs.) Topeka City Councilman (8 yrs.), once acting as Topeka Deputy Mayor. Miller also served as Topeka Municipal Judge and Kansas Property Valuation Director. Miller has spent his legal career as a sole practitioner. Miller graduated from Emporia State and Washburn University School of Law.


Rep. Fred Patton
House District No. 50
R-Topeka

Representative Patton graduated from the University of Kansas Law School before joining the legal research staff at the Shawnee County District Court. Currently, Patton owns and operates Patton Law Offices, LLC in North Topeka with a varied practice area including banking, business/corporate, construction, estate planning, general civil, probate, and real estate. Patton is very active in the community having leadership roles in over 15 local groups.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_patton_fred_1/


Rep.-Elect Bradley Ralph
House District No. 119
R-Dodge City

Representative-elect Ralph is currently the City Attorney for Dodge City, Kansas. Prior to this position he was in private practice with the firm of Williams, Malone & Ralph for 25 years. His private practice focused on representation of insurance companies, healthcare providers, schools, and municipalities. Ralph has been active in his community in leadership positions with his church and the Community Foundation of Southwest Kansas. He has also served the legal profession on several professional committees, including the Professional Ethics Committee. He is a graduate of St. Mary of the Plains College and Washburn University School of Law. Ralph and his wife Shannon have three adult children.


Rep. Jim Ward
House District No. 86
D-Wichita

Representative Ward is the owner of the Law offices of James Ward of Wichita. He was appointed to the Kansas Senate to fill a vacancy in 1992. He was later elected to the Kansas House in 2002 and reelected every two years through 2012. Representative Ward serves as the Assistant House Minority Leader and is a member of the House Committees on Calendar and Printing, Health and Human Services, Interstate Cooperation, Judiciary and Legislative Budget, as well as several joint committees. He received his J.D. from Washburn University School of Law.

http://kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/members/rep_ward_jim_1/


Rep.-Elect John Wheeler
House District No. 123
R-Garden City

Representative-elect Wheeler is the former Finney County Attorney, first elected in 1993. He was elected to the House in 2016 to his first term. He is a graduate of Fort Hays State College (1969) with a degree in political science and pre-law. He graduated from Washburn School of Law in 1976. Prior to being elected as Finney County Attorney, Rep. Wheeler was in private practice with Calihan, Green, Calihan and Loyd, Associate, 1976-1979, then Soldner & Wheeler, Partner, 1979-1987, and finally with John P. Wheeler, Attorney at Law, Solo Practitioner, 1988-1992. Rep. Wheeler is a proud member of Harry H. Renick American Legion Post #9, Past Commander; Garden City Salvation Army Advisory Board; Garden City Noon Lions Club; and the Finney County Historical Society.


2017 Kansas Legislature

Kansas Senate:

  • 31 Republicans
  • 9 Democrats

Kansas House of Representatives:

  • 85 Republicans
  • 40 Democrats

Additional Information

The official state website for the Kansas Legislature

www.kslegislature.org

From that site, you can find information on the House and Senate members and contact information, calendars, bill introductions, committee activity, minutes of committees, committee memberships and virtually anything related to the Kansas Legislature.

Governor Sam Brownback

The website for Governor Sam Brownback and Lt. Governor Jeff Colyer is:

http://www.kansas.gov/

Attorney General Derek Schmidt

http://ag.ks.gov

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Election 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg
Email

With all the votes tallied Kansas will find itself in a familiar position come 2017. While both chambers remain Republican-heavy, they have moved to the center which will help with those big-ticket items sure to eat up legislative days next session. The final count looks like 85 republicans will coexist with 40 Democrats. Democrats improved their position by 12 seats. Equally important are the big wins by moderate republicans in the primary and general elections. Several big-name incumbents losing last night were Rep. Marc Rhoades, Rep. Amanda Grosserode, Rep. Chuck Smith, and Rep. Sue Boldra. Rep.-Elect Eber Phelps defeated Sue Boldra, reclaiming his seat and the title of only democrat in Western Kansas.

Several lawyer/legislators were defeated: Rep. Jan Pauls, Rep. Lane Hemsley and Rep. James Todd failed to retain their seats, and Senate candidate and lawyer Bill Hutton lost to Sen. Fitzgerald by 500 votes. If my math is correct and I didn’t miss anyone, there 14 lawyer/legislators remain in the legislature. The most surprising result is the Republicans have no licensed attorney to chair Senate Judiciary Committee.

The statewide seats all remained in Republican hands as U.S. Sen. Moran, U.S. Rep. Pompeo, U.S. Rep. Jenkins, U.S. Rep. Yoder and Representative-Elect Marshall all won going away. These Kansans will work closely with the President-Elect Trump who won a close election last night against former U.S. Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In huge news, all Kansas appellate court judges/justices were retained. The margin for Kansas Supreme Court Justices ran from a high of 71% (Stegall) to 55% (Nuss). While the ten point spread for Chief Justice Nuss was slim, it still outperformed the retention election results from two years ago where Justice Johnson and Justice Rosen received 52.7% and 52.6% respectively.

The raw numbers saw Justice Stegall, Judge Gardner and Judge Bruns outpace the historical margins with positive votes of more than 715,000. The remaining justices and judges hovered around 600,000 positive votes. Nevertheless, they retained their positions.

The most interesting retention data point came from Sedgwick County where voters decided to retain all judges/justices with the lowest margin being 54% / 46% for Justice Biles. This jurisdiction voted against retaining Justice Rosen and Justice Johnson in 2014.

For complete unofficial election results please visit – http://www.sos.ks.gov/ent/kssos_ent.html

Tags:  election 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Today, Nov. 8, is Election Day. Polls are Open Till 7 p.m.

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, November 8, 2016

To locate your polling place please visit - https://myvoteinfo.voteks.org/VoterView/PollingPlaceSearch.do

Please get out and vote – remember to finish the ballot.

Tags:  election  election day 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Remember Retention

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, October 4, 2016
Updated: Tuesday, October 4, 2016

Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg
Email

The countdown to Election Day has begun! With six weeks to go until Election Day, it’s time to make sure you are prepared to vote! If you have not registered to vote in the general election the deadline is Tuesday, Oct. 18. To register for the general election, a link to the Kansas Voter Registration Instruction can be found here- http://www.sos.ks.gov/forms/elections/voterregistration.pdf

Advance voting will begin on October 19. To vote in person please contact your local county election office to find out when and where – http://www.kssos.org/elections/elections_registration_ceo.asp

This election is an important one for our state as it allows each citizen the opportunity to choose a new president, a new State representative, State senator, and to decide if 11 appellate court judges/justices should retain their position--the outcome is in your hands.

The KBA would like to encourage Kansans to vote in this very important retention election as it is the greatest confirmation a judge or justice will receive. Biographies can be found on court websites, accessible through http://www.kscourts.org/kansas-courts/supreme-court/justice-bios/default.asp.

To learn more about the judges’/justices’ performance please visit – www.kansasjudgereview.org to review a survey sponsored by Kansas civic organizations.

The Kansas Constitution requires Kansas Supreme Court Justices and Court of Appeal Judges to be placed on the general election ballot every six years (4 yrs. for the COA); so voters can determine whether these judges/justices should remain on their courts for another term. This year, five Supreme Court Justices and six Court of Appeal Judges will be on the ballot.

The Judges and Justices:

Kansas Supreme Court Justices

  • Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss
  • Justice Marla J. Luckert
  • Justice Carol A. Beier
  • Justice Dan Biles
  • Justice Caleb Stegall

Kansas Court of Appeal Judges

  • Judge Steve Leben
  • Judge G. Joseph Pierron
  • Judge David E. Bruns
  • Judge G. Gordon Atcheson
  • Judge Karen Arnold-Burger
  • Judge Kathryn A. Gardner

Retention elections are a vital component to the merit selection process for selecting appellate court justices. However, they are different than partisan elections because, unlike partisan elections, judges are not running against opponents or each other. Merit retention elections are nonpartisan were the judges/justice appear on the ballot without reference to any political party, (e.g. Democrat or Republican).

Tell your family, friends, neighbors and colleagues that information on the retention election can be found at www.ourkansascourts.org.

If you would like a non-partisan KBA official to speak to your group about the elections contact:

Meg Wickham
Director of Member and Communication Services
mwickham@ksbar.org
Direct: (785) 861-8817

Tags:  judicial branch  judicial retention 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Frequently Asked Questions About Kansas Retention Elections

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Updated: Monday, September 12, 2016

Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg
Email

  1. Why am I being asked to vote on judges?

    The Kansas Constitution requires Kansas Supreme Court justices and Court of Appeal judges to be placed on the ballot every six years (4 yrs. for the COA) so voters can determine whether they should remain on their courts for term. These are called “retention” elections. This year, five Supreme Court justices and six court of appeal judges will be on the ballot.
  2. What do “Yes” and “No” votes mean?

    A “Yes” vote means you want the judge or justice to remain on the court for another six-year term. A “No” vote means you want the judge or justice removed from the court. The majority of voters in the November general election decides.
  3. Do Supreme Court justices have opponents?

    No. Your vote determines whether each justice should remain on the court. They are not running against opponents or each other. Merit retention elections are nonpartisan. In nonpartisan elections, candidates appear on the ballot without reference to any political party, (e.g. Democrat or Republican).
  4. How do Supreme Court justices get on the court?

    For the Supreme Court, the governor appoints justices from lists submitted by Kansas Judicial Nominating Commission, which screens candidates and make recommendations based on the candidate’s merits – legal writing, temperament, references and experience. Newly appointed judges appear on the next statewide ballot. If the voters retain them, they then go on the ballot again every six years.
  5. Which courts are subject to merit retention elections?

    The Kansas Supreme Court, Kansas Court of Appeals and a little more than half of all district court judges are subject to merit retention elections.
  6. Can judges who commit unethical acts be removed from office?

    Yes. This can happen after an investigation by the Kansas Commission of Judicial Qualifications. The KSJQ (http://www.kscourts.org/Appellate-Clerk/general/commission-on-judicial-qualifications/default.asp is an independent agency created to investigate alleged misconduct by Kansas judges and justices. Through this system, judges have been removed from office.
  7. Can Kansas Supreme Court justices state their views on issues that may come before them?

    No, Judicial Cannon #4 of the Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct forbids judges and justices from saying how they will decide future cases. Judges and justices must remain impartial and decide cases without regard to their personal views or beliefs. (See, http://www.kscourts.org/rules/Judicial_Conduct/Canon%204.pdf)
  8. Can I read the opinions of the judges and justices in cases they decided?

    Yes. Case opinions can be found on the Cases & Opinions page of the websites for the Kansas Judicial Branch, http://www.kscourts.org/Cases-and-Opinions/default.asp
  9. Can I watch videos of the justices and appeals court judges at work?

    Yes. Court arguments are webcast live and archived on the court websites.
  10. How can I learn more about judges’ and justices’ backgrounds?

    Biographies are on court websites, accessible through http://www.kscourts.org/kansas-courts/supreme-court/justice-bios/default.asp.
  11. How did Kansas decide to use the merit retention election system?

    In the 1956, Kansas experienced a highly controversial appointment of Gov. Fred Hall to the Kansas Supreme Court in what has been called the “triple play”. In that, incumbent Governor Fred Hall was defeated in the 1956 Republican primary by Warren Shaw, who lost in the general election to George Docking. Then Chief Justice Smith resigned from the Supreme Court due to ill health on December 31, Hall quickly resigned as governor on January 3, 1957, and Lieutenant Governor McCuish became governor for the next eleven days. McCuish immediately appointed Hall to the newly vacated Supreme Court seat. While perfectly legal, this sequence of actions was considered by many to be highly unethical. In response to the "triple play," the 1957 Kansas legislature passed a resolution for a constitutional amendment concerning the way judges are appointed, creating the merit selection process. The amendment was passed in the 1958 general election.
  12. Where can I find results from prior merit retention elections?

    Past retention election results can be found on the Kansas Secretary of State’s website. www.kssos.org
  13. Which judges and justices are up for retention election this year?

    The following individuals are up for nonpartisan retention election this November:

    Kansas Supreme Court Justices

    • Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss;
    • Justice Marla J. Luckert;
    • Justice Carol A. Beier;
    • Justice Dan Biles; and;
    • Justice Caleb Stegall.

    Kansas Court of Appeal Judges

    • Judge Steve Leben;
    • Judge G. Joseph Pierron;
    • Judge David E. Burns;
    • Judge G. Gordon Atcheson;
    • Judge Karen Arnold-Burger;
    • Judge Kathryn A. Gardner
  14. Does the state put out any information on the justices, who are up for retention, performances?

    No, the state of Kansas previously held surveys administered by the Kansas Judicial performance commission. Due to budget issues and the high cost of these surveys, the commission was dissolved in 2012. A group of civic organizations have taken over this role and their results can be found at www.kansasjudgereview.org.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Supreme Court Accepting Comments on New Rules

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, September 6, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Supreme Court is now accepting comments on new rules 11.01, 147 and 148.  These rules are required to be amended as a result of changes to KSA 2016 Supp. 75-764.  These changes concern notice to the Kansas Attorney General’s Office or prosecuting attorney when there is a challenge to the validity of a Kansas law on grounds that the law violates the state constitution, federal constitution, or federal law.

Ag Schmidt stated that, “the problem this bill seeks to address is not the outcome of those disputes – it is the process that allowed the disputes to be decided before the attorney general’s office was told they were underway.”

Attorney General Derek Schmidt proposed the new law after two instances where a law was found unconstitutional, and the attorney general did not have an opportunity to be heard. Ag Schmidt stated that, “the problem this bill seeks to address is not the outcome of those disputes – it is the process that allowed the disputes to be decided before the attorney general’s office was told they were underway.”  Senate Bill 334 is a belt-and-suspenders measure aimed at plugging the procedural gaps that allowed these two cases to fall through the cracks. It is intended to reaffirm and clarify the public policy that when the validity of a state statute is being tested in court, the attorney general, as the state’s chief legal officer, is to receive notice of the dispute and have the timely opportunity to appear in relation to the statute’s validity. It also provides an after-the-fact mechanism so that if the notice requirements are violated, an order invalidating a state statute may be set aside once the attorney general learns of the matter. See; http://kslegislature.com/li/b2015_16/committees/ctte_s_jud_1/documents/testimony/20160127_02.pdf

As such, the Kansas Supreme Court will accept comments on this issue. It is important to recognize that the above cited rules will take effect on September 6, 2016 but the court will review comments and input to determine if the rules should be further amended.  You can view the rule here: http://www.kscourts.org/rules/Rules_Open_for_Public_Comment/default.asp

The court will receive comments until 5 p.m. Sunday, October 2, 2016.

Tags:  Kansas Supreme Court  New Rules  Rules 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Noise on Retention Election Picks Up

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, August 30, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

On November 8, Kansans will head to the polls to pick a new president. In addition, they will vote for a U.S. Senator, all four U.S. Congressional members, 40 state senate seats and 125 House offices.  As election cycles go, this one has seen its fair share of controversy, especially on the national stage. But here in Kansas, election year politics have ticked up a notch. The most contentious isn’t any of the 170 elected offices listed above, but on five nonpartisan retention elections at the bottom of the ballot.

This election focuses on the Kansas Supreme Court Justices. The Kansas Constitution requires Kansas Supreme Court justices to be placed on the ballot in nonpartisan elections every six years, so voters can determine whether they should remain on their courts for another six-year term. These are called “retention” elections. This year Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss, Justice Marla J. Luckert; Justice Carol A. Beier, Justice Dan Biles, and Justice Caleb Stegall are on the ballot.

Retention elections are different than partisan elections, because your vote determines whether each justice should remain on the court. They are not running against opponents or each other. Merit retention elections are nonpartisan. In nonpartisan elections, candidates appear on the ballot without reference to any political party, (e.g. Democrat or Republican). To retain their seats, the judge or justice must garner more than 50% of the vote.

Two years ago Justice Eric Rosen and Justice Lee Johnson won their retention elections with a little over 53% of the vote, the smallest margin of victory in Kansas history.

Now the push to unseat four of five justices up for retention is picking up. This is not a new topic, but just one with more urgency this cycle.  Earlier this year it was reported that bad blood existed between the Supreme Court and conservatives in the Capitol over several issues which include; school finance, abortion and the death penalty. http://kcur.org/post/get-ready-raucous-kansas-supreme-court-retention-race#stream/0 - KCUR, May 24, 2016

Non retain

A major player in retention elections is a group representing the victims of the Carr brothers.  They have created a website calling for the removal of four of five justices due to their previous rulings on the death penalty. http://www.kansansforjustice.com/  

They have been at this for a while, and was the primary reason Justice Rosen and Justice Johnson did not gain a majority in Sedgwick county.  See; http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/elections/election_results/Gen14/index.html

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article2651289.html - Wichita Eagle, Oct 10, 2014;

however, the non-retain camp is more than Kansans for Justice but also include Kansas House GOP, Better Judges for Kansas, See; http://www.betterjudgesforkansas.org/ and a group from Iowa called the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) who filed an ethics complaint against Justice Beier just last week. See; http://www.factdc.org/single-post/2016/08/19/FACT-Files-Kansas-Judicial-Ethics-Complaint.

Several news outlets have also picked up the issue. See; https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/08/24/kansas-judges-should-be-recalled-before-they-do-any-further-harm/ - PJ Media, Aug 24, 2016

http://cjonline.com/news/2016-08-22/iowa-organization-files-complaint-against-kansas-supreme-court-justice cjonline.com, Aug 22, 2016

Retain

Those supporting the justices have countered with a number of letters to the editor and news articles blasting the non-retain effort as a power grab by the governor. See; http://www.kake.com/story/32754982/ward-judicial-retention-vote-a-power-grab - KAKE, Aug 14, 2016

Last week a number of LTE appeared in newspapers around the state each urging retention of the Kansas Supreme Court justices. See all; http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/editorials/article98180512.html - Kansas City Star, Aug 27th

http://www.hutchnews.com/opinion/editorials/growing-effort-to-unseat-justices-warrants-critical-examination/article_b2c69545-b4ce-5689-ad1c-0d856a807054.html - Hutchnews, Aug 20, 2016

http://www.kcchamber.com/News-Room/Chamber-News/KC-Chamber-Board-Says-Keep-Kansas-Courts-Nonpoliti.aspx - KC Chamber, Aug 25, 2016

http://www.gctelegram.com/opinion/columnists/people-must-control-process/article_80c44f14-0a05-56a9-b14d-66e3c1dc835e.html - Garden City Telegram, Aug 24, 2016

For their part the justices have been out around the state hearing cases. 

http://www.ctnewsonline.com/news/article_c29904de-5b69-11e6-a99c-072da5306278.html - Cowley Courier, Aug 5, 2016

They plan another hearing on October, 2016 in Hutchinson.

It is quite obvious that retention elections are going to be hotly contested this cycle. We have 10 weeks left before the general election so there is still time to educate yourself about the process and learn more about each judge or justice on the ballot.  You can find more information about the process and the justices and judges up for retention by visiting the Kansas Bar Foundation site www.ourkansascourts.org . You can also view the results of a survey competed by a number of civic organizations about the individuals on the ballot this November.  That site is http://www.kansasjudgereview.org/.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Special Session 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Updated: Wednesday, July 13, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature reconvened last week to begin discussing a resolution to the school finance issue. Both chambers were in session and several committees held hearings. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed out a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Kansas Supreme Court from closing schools. See http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/measures/scr1602/.  This is the same proposal discussed during the Joint Meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committee. The KBA submitted testimony opposing this proposal at the Joint Meeting. See http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/2016SpecialSession-Testimony.html

The Senate debated this resolution but was unable to garner the requisite votes need to pass it. The measure failed 26-13. This basically ended the discussion of limiting the court’s power in the Senate. See http://bit.ly/28Xg6nc

The House Judiciary Committee introduced a constitutional amendment that would limit school funding to no more than 45 percent of the state budget and remove the word “suitable” from the Article 6 Section 6 of the Kansas Constitution. See http://bit.ly/28Z71Qo. This proposal was introduced by Rep. John Rubin (R-Shawnee) who is not seeking reelection.

Rep. Craig McPherson (R-overland Park) introduced HB 2002 that would create the superior court of Kansas and limit the power of the Kansas Supreme Court. The superior court would hear all cases assigned by law and be the court of final appellate review in cases under its court’s jurisdiction. See http://bit.ly/28XDogT

Rep. Barker did not set a committee meeting to hear either of these proposals.  So both died without debate.

Both chambers debated the school finance bill.  The House discussed HB 2003 and the Senate debated SB 3.  Both bills are designed to shift current appropriations around to fund the equity portion of the school finance case. The total money being discussed is $38 million. Some money comes from tobacco funds ($4.1 million), some from the extraordinary needs fund ($7.2 million), virtual schools ($2.8 million) and a cut for base state aid ($13 million). The cut to base state aid will take operation money and shift that to property tax relief. See http://bit.ly/28Z6NbT

After some thoughtful reflection and some prodding from Johnson County lawmakers, the idea to cut school funding by $13 million was dumped and replaced with monies from the sale of the Kansas Bioscience Authority. Should this sale not produce the needed revenue, the equity portion of the school finance issue would be buoyed by the extraordinary needs fund. All parties, including the plaintiffs in the case, agreed that this solves the equity issue. See http://bit.ly/28YqKvP, http://bit.ly/291VLQE, and http://bit.ly/298jdLd

With the passage of the school finance bill, the 2016 Special Session came to an end. A constitutional crisis was averted and the courts withstood early challenges to its powers.  The focus now shifts to August primaries, then general elections.  Look for anti-court/non-retain ads and information to begin appearing all over the state—It should be an interesting summer.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Legislative Bills Become Law

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, July 5, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

July 1 marks the day when the majority of bills signed into law the previous session become effective.  There are circumstances when that can be moved up but for the most part July 1st is the date to look for. Over the next few weeks the KBA Advocate will highlight some of the more noteworthy bill/laws that will impact the legal practice.

With that in mind, below are three bills concerning the courts, docket fees, notice requirements and the supreme court nominating commission that all officially became law last week. These summaries can be found at http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Policy.html.

Courts and Filling Judicial Vacancies; House Sub. for SB 128

House Sub. for SB 128 amends statutes governing municipal courts and filling judicial vacancies.

Municipal Courts

The bill amends the statutes governing expungement for convictions of city ordinances or state laws, as well as arrests, to provide that when an expungement is ordered for a case appealed from a municipal court, the district court clerk must send a certified copy of the expungement order to the municipal court, which shall order the case expunged once the copy of the order is received. Similarly, the bill amends the statute governing appeals from municipal courts to require the district court to send notice of dismissal, conviction, or acquittal to the municipal court clerk at the end of the case.

Judicial Vacancies

The bill also amends and enacts law related to the filling of judicial vacancies, including the method used to select the lawyer members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions, the applicability of the Kansas Open Meetings Act (KOMA) and Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) to nominating commissions, and the number of nominees a district judicial nominating commission will be required to nominate.

Selection of Lawyer Members of Nominating Commissions

The bill requires applicants for admission to practice law to provide the following information: name, place of residence, date of birth, sex, and the last four digits of the person’s social security number or the person’s full driver’s license or nondriver identification card number. A pending applicant must notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court (Clerk) in writing of any change in name or address within ten days of such change. The bill requires any person whose application is pending as of the effective date of the bill to provide the correct information required above to the Clerk within 60 days of the effective date of the bill and requires the Clerk to send notice of this requirement within 30 days of the effective date.

A new section requires the Clerk to maintain a roster of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas, including the information required above and the congressional and judicial districts of residence for each person. Similar to requirements for pending applicants, the bill requires any Kansas licensed attorney to notify the Clerk of any change in name or residential address within ten days of such change. Further, the bill requires any Kansas licensed attorney whose information as required above is not correct on the roster as of the effective date of the bill to provide the correct information within 60 days of the effective date of the bill and requires the Clerk to send notice of this requirement within 30 days of the effective date.

To be eligible to nominate or receive and cast ballots for the lawyer members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, the bill requires attorneys to be licensed and residing in Kansas (and, for Commission members, the appropriate congressional district) on or before the February 15 prior to the selection of such positions. The same requirement applies with regard to elections of lawyer members of district judicial nominating commissions, except the relevant date is November 15.

On or before the February 20 preceding the selection of the chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, the Clerk must transmit a certified copy of the roster of Kansas licensed attorneys to the Secretary of State, containing the voter information set forth above for those residing in Kansas (or within the relevant congressional district for a member election) as of February 15, in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State, who then will append the unique voter identification number for each person listed on the roster having such a number. The same procedure is required on or before the November 20 preceding the election of a lawyer member of a district judicial nominating commission, with the same voter information required for each person residing within the judicial district as of November 15.

The bill amends the statute governing voting procedures to select members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission to require the Clerk to use the certified roster of attorneys as provided to the Secretary of State and to preserve qualification certificates for five years and then destroy the certificates. Within 14 days after a selection is certified, the Clerk must create a list containing the position and year of the selection and the names and residential addresses of all persons who returned a ballot with a signed certificate. The Clerk then will transmit a certified copy of this list to the Secretary of State, in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State.

The bill provides the names, residential addresses, dates of birth, unique voter identification numbers, and dates of licensure to practice law in Kansas of all persons on the certified rosters; the qualification certificates; and the lists of persons returning a ballot are subject to a KORA request. These provisions apply to all selections of a chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission that have not been canvassed, regardless of whether the selections are scheduled, upcoming, or pending as of the effective date of the bill.

Applicability of KORA and KOMA

The bill deems the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions to be public bodies subject to KOMA. Further, the bill prohibits the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions from recessing for any closed or executive meeting except for the purpose of discussing sensitive financial information contained within the personal financial records or official background check of a judicial nomination candidate. These provisions do not supersede a nominating commission’s discretion to close a record or portion of a record pursuant to any applicable KORA exception.

The bill includes the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, or their designees, as the canvassers for any election of the chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission or any election of lawyer members of a district judicial nominating commission, instead of two or more members of the bar residing in Kansas designated by the Chief Justice. The Clerk remains a canvasser.

For elections of lawyer members of a district judicial nominating commission, the bill requires the Clerk to use the certified roster to ascertain eligibility for ballots or membership on the district judicial nominating commission. In such elections, a ballot not accompanied by the signed certificate of the voter will not be counted. The Clerk is required to preserve the ballots for six months after the results are certified and to preserve the certificates for five years. The bill permits inspection of the ballots only upon order by the Supreme Court and requires the Clerk to destroy the ballots and certificates at the end of the preservation periods. As with the Supreme Court Nominating Commission elections, for such elections, the Clerk must provide the same list of persons returning a ballot with a signed certificate to the Secretary of State, and such lists and certificates are subject to KORA requests.

The bill amends the statute governing the appointment of judges of the Court of Appeals to require the Governor (or the Chief Justice, if making an appointment because the Governor failed to make an appointment) to make each applicant’s name and city of residence available to the public once applications are no longer accepted, but not less than ten days before making the appointment.

Number of Nominees

Finally, the bill requires the Supreme Court Nominating Commission to make nominations of three persons to fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court and certify the names of the nominees to the Governor. For district judicial nominating commissions, the bill changes the number of nominees for each vacancy from two or three to three, four, or five and amends the section governing what occurs if there are not at least two qualified attorneys willing to accept a nomination, to change two to three.

Court Docket Fees; Electronic Filing and Management Fund; House Sub. for SB 255

House Sub. for SB 255 creates new law and amends, revives and amends, or repeals various statutes related to Kansas court docket fees.

The bill creates the Electronic Filing and Management Fund. All expenditures from this fund shall be for the purposes of creating, implementing, and managing an electronic filing and centralized case management system for the state court system.

A statute regarding the remitting of moneys by the Clerk of the Supreme Court is revived and amended to redirect remittances previously made to the State General Fund to the Judicial Branch Docket Fee Fund instead.

Statutes regarding the Dispute Resolution Fund, the Access to Justice Fund, the Protection from Abuse Fund, the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, and the Kansas Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Trust Fund are revived and amended to remove references to disposition of docket fee statutes. The statute regarding the Kansas Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Trust Fund also is amended to update references to the Secretary of Corrections.

A statute establishing the Indigents’ Defense Services Fund is revived and amended to remove a provision directing the charge of a $0.50 fee in various cases to be credited to this fund.

A statute regarding expungement is amended to resolve a conflict with other versions of the statute regarding the sunset date for the Judicial Branch surcharge.

Finally, the bill repeals several additional statutes, including those regarding:

  • Disposition of docket fees (previously repealed in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338);
  • The Electronic Filing and Management Fund (as created in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338); and
  • Conflicting versions of docket fee and expungement statutes (previously repealed in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338).

Notice to and Opportunity for Attorney General to Intervene before Statute or Constitutional Provision Declared Invalid or Unconstitutional; SB 334

SB 334 enacts new law and amends existing law related to the ability of the Attorney General to be fully heard before any Kansas statute or constitutional provision is determined by a Kansas court to be invalid or unconstitutional.

The new section begins by declaring the public policy of Kansas is the Attorney General should have notice and the opportunity to be fully heard before any Kansas statute or constitutional provision is determined by the Judicial Branch to be invalid or unconstitutional under the Kansas Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, or any provision of federal law.

Before declaring or making any such determination, enjoining any statute or constitutional provision for such invalidity, or entering any judgment or order determining or declaring such invalidity, a district court or district court judge, whether acting in judicial or administrative capacity, must require:

  • In any criminal case, the State has been given notice of the disputed validity and an opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity. The notice must be served by the party disputing validity on the prosecuting attorney representing the State in the case. If the prosecuting attorney fails to respond, the court must notify the Attorney General of such failure and provide the Attorney General with the opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity; and;
  • In any civil case and all other matters, that notice of the disputed validity has been served on the Attorney General by the party disputing validity or by the court, and that the Attorney General has been given an opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Special Session 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Monday, June 27, 2016
Updated: Monday, June 27, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature reconvened last week to begin discussing a resolution to the school finance issue. Both chambers were in session and several committees held hearings. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed out a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Kansas Supreme Court from closing schools, See http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/
measures/scr1602/
. This is the same proposal discussed during the Joint Meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committee. The KBA submitted testimony opposing this proposal at the Joint Meeting. See http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/2016SpecialSession-Testimony.html

The Senate debated this resolution but was unable to garner the requisite votes need to pass it.  The measure failed 26-13. This basically ended the discussion of limiting the court’s power in the Senate. See http://bit.ly/28Xg6nc

The House Judiciary Committee introduced a constitutional amendment that would limit school funding to no more than 45 percent of the state budget and remove the word “suitable” from the Article 6 Section 6 of the Kansas Constitution. See http://bit.ly/28Z71Qo. This proposal was introduced by Rep. John Rubin (R-Shawnee) who is not seeking reelection.

Rep. Craig McPherson (R-overland Park) introduced HB 2002 that would create the superior court of Kansas and limit the power of the Kansas Supreme Court. The superior court would hear all cases assigned by law and be the court of final appellate review in cases under its court’s jurisdiction. See http://bit.ly/28XDogT

Rep. Barker did not set a committee meeting to hear either of these proposals. So both died without debate.

Both chambers debated the school finance bill. The House discussed HB 2003 and the Senate debated SB 3. Both bills are designed to shift current appropriations around to fund the equity portion of the school finance case. The total money being discussed is $38 million. Some money comes from tobacco funds ($4.1 million), some from the extraordinary needs fund ($7.2 million), virtual schools ($2.8 million) and a cut for base state aid ($13 million). The cut to base state aid will take operation money and shift that to property tax relief. See http://bit.ly/28Z6NbT

After some thoughtful reflection and some prodding from Johnson County lawmakers the idea to cut school funding by $13 million dollars was dumped and replaced with monies from the sale of the Kansas Bioscience Authority. Should this sale not produce the needed revenue the equity portion of the school finance issue would be buoyed by the extraordinary needs fund.  All parties, including the plaintiffs in the case, agreed that this solves the equity issue. See http://bit.ly/28YqKvP see also http://bit.ly/291VLQE and http://bit.ly/298jdLd

With the passage of the school finance bill the 2016 Special Session came to an end. A constitutional crisis was averted and the courts withstood early challenges to its powers. The focus now shifts to August primaries and then the general elections. Look for anti-court/non-retain ads and information to begin appearing all over the state. It should be an interesting summer.

Tags:  2016 Session  Special Session 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 1 of 11
1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  >   >>   >| 
more Calendar

12/6/2016
KBA Webinar: Looking for Answers: Using Ethics to Guide Your Law Practice Management Decisions

12/8/2016
Lunch & Learn: Ethical Issues for Attorneys on Non-profit Boards

Featured Members

Online Surveys
Membership Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal