Kansas Courts

Kansas Court System Chart You and the Courts History of Kansas Appellate Courts Appellate Practice Handbook Appellate Court Contacts District Court Contacts Photo Album

News Releases

01/11/13: Judicial Vacancy in the 9th Judicial District.
01/22/13: Sedgwick County Judge to Sit With Supreme Court
01/25/13: Supreme Court Orders New Trial in Topeka Capital Murder Case
01/31/13: State of Judiciary Released
02/01/13: Supreme Court Rules Topeka Helicopter Purchase, Deposit Void
02/25/13: 9th Judicial District Interviews Postponed
03/11/13: Court of Appeals Judge Swearing-In Friday
03/22/13: Nominees for 9th District Sent to Governor
05/03/13: Child Support Guidelines Advisory Committee Members Sought

See the Archives for new releases dating back to 1997

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 3, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

The Kansas Supreme Court is actively recruiting child support payors and recipients for appointment as community members to the Child Support Guidelines Advisory Committee. These appointees will be voting members on the committee and will serve four-year terms. The committee reviews the general rules governing how child support is established, evaluates the economic basis for the guidelines, and analyzes how courts may use adjustments to tailor child support obligations to meet the needs of a family.

These four community members will work with the committee to review the general rules governing how child support is established, evaluate the economic basis for the guidelines, and analyze how courts may use adjustments to tailor child support obligations to meet the needs of a family. The committee's meetings typically occur on the fourth Friday of each month during the review period. Because the guidelines are complex and committee members often present widely differing opinions, members must be able to work together, have good written and oral communication skills, and be able to attend most meetings.

The Court urges all interested and qualified persons to view additional details and submit the application found at kscourts.org.

The application for this position may be found here: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/KsCSGmembershipapplication2012

---

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 22, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

The 9th Judicial Nominating Commission has sent the following names to the governor for an appointment to succeed Judge Anderson: John Klenda and William Mills, both of McPherson, and Marilyn Wilder, Newton.

Judge Anderson, 66, had been the longest serving district judge in Kansas at the time of his retirement, which was effective January 12, 2013.

The 9th Judicial District encompasses both McPherson and Harvey counties and has four judges who go between the two counties. Anderson was the district court judge in McPherson County. He served as chief judge of the district for 10 of his 36 years on the bench.

Also applying were Gregory Bell, attorney from Hutchinson; David Harger, attorney with Wise & Reber, McPherson; Steve Hilgers, district magistrate judge from McPherson; JoAn Lindfors, attorney from Marquette; Gregory Nye, attorney in Newton; David Page, McPherson County attorney; Gary Price, attorney with Boyer and Price, McPherson; and David Yoder, Harvey County attorney.

---

 

26th Judicial District Court Judge Kim R. Schroeder

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 11, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

26th Judicial District Court Judge Kim R. Schroeder will be sworn in as a judge of the state Court of Appeals at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, March 15, in the Supreme Court Courtroom, it was announced today.

Judge Schroeder was appointed by Gov. Sam Brownback to succeed Judge Christel Marquardt of the 13-member court, who retired on January 14, 2013.  Judge Schroeder, who has been a district judge since 1999, will be presented to the Court of Appeals by Wayne R. Tate, an attorney from Hugoton, Kansas.

The ceremony will be webcast live from the courtroom, and made available to the public on the judiciary's website, www.kscourts.org, by following the link "Watch Supreme Court Live" on that page.  Court of Appeals Chief Judge Thomas Malone will preside at the ceremony.

 Judge Schroeder was first elected to the 26th Judicial District Court in 1998, and currently serves as a trial judge.  During his tenure, Judge Schroeder has presided over cases involving civil, criminal, juvenile & domestic issues.

 He is a past member of the Board of Governors Kansas Bar Association.  He is also a board member of the southwest Kansas Bar Association and has served as a member and its treasurer since 1992.

Prior to Judge Schroeder's election to the bench, he practiced law in Hugoton, KS with the law firm of Brollier, Wolf & Schroeder for almost 17 years in general practice of law.

 Judge Schroeder received his undergraduate degree from Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas, and his law degree from Washburn University in 1981.

Judge Schroeder is married and has two children.  He is a member of First Christian Church of Hugoton, KS.

---

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 25, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

Due to the approaching snow storm, the 9th Judicial District Nominating Commission has rescheduled interviews of applicants to succeed District Judge Carl B. Anderson, who died February 7th, has been postponed until March 19th, it was announced in Topeka today.

Judge Anderson, 66, had been the longest serving district judge in Kansas at the time of his retirement, which was effective January 12, 2013.

The 9th Judicial District encompasses both McPherson and Harvey counties and has four judges who go between the two counties. Anderson was the district court judge in McPherson County. He served as chief judge of the district for 10 of his 36 years on the bench.

The nominating commission had been scheduled to interview 11 candidates starting at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the McPherson County Courthouse. Following the March interviews that will begin at the same time and place, the commission will choose two to three names to present to Gov. Sam Brownback, who will pick the next judge within 30 days of receiving the recommendations.

Nominees include Gregory Bell, attorney from Hutchinson; David Harger, attorney with Wise & Reber, McPherson; Steve Hilgers, district magistrate judge from McPherson; John Klenda,  attorney with Karstetter and Klenda, McPherson; JoAn Lindfors  attorney from Marquette; William Mills, attorney in McPherson; Gregory Nye, attorney in Newton; David Page, McPherson County attorney; Gary Price, attorney with Boyer and Price, McPherson; Marilyn Wilder, attorney with Adrian and Pankratz, Newton; and David Yoder, Harvey County attorney.

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 1, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

The Supreme Court today upheld a Shawnee County decision that the City of Topeka's 2008 contract to purchase a $740,000 helicopter violated the state's cash basis law, because only five of the 10-member governing body voted for the lease-purchase, instead of six required under the law.

Today's unanimous decision also affirms Shawnee County District Judge Larry D. Hendricks' ruling in the case that a $74,000 deposit paid to Schreib-Air, the helicopter dealer, must be returned. The case arose in December 2007 when the city council voted 5-3 to authorize the city manager to enter into a lease-purchase agreement to buy a Robinson helicopter from Schreib-Air with financing by Municipal Services Group (MSG).

The city manager at the time subsequently signed the contract with Schreib-Air, but Topeka Mayor Bill Bunten vetoed the council action authorizing the contract. "Despite the veto, on January 4, 2008, Schreib-Air billed the city for the $74,000 deposit, which the city manager authorized MSG to pay," the Court ruled. The mayor also vetoed a follow-up council resolution that was approved 5-4 in April 2008 authorizing a lease-purchase agreement with MSG to finance the helicopter purchase. "Not surprisingly, that resolution was again vetoed by the mayor," the Court ruled.

The lawsuit was filed by former Shawnee County District Attorney Robert D. Hecht, but the City filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that the issues were moot because the helicopter was never actually purchased.

Schreib-Air contended on appeal that its contract with the City was valid at the time it was signed and that any violations of the case-basis law related to the City's financing agreement with MSG, not the contract for purchase. The company also contended that the payment it received was from MSG, not the City; therefore, Schreib-Air had no obligation to the City to return the deposit. Instead, it suggested that the City's obligation, if any, was to MSG alone.

But the Supreme Court ruled today that the facts clearly show that the lease-purchase agreement with MSG was never approved by six affirmative votes.

"The city council could only muster five votes in favor of the lease-purchase agreement with MSG, and the mayor repeatedly vetoed the agreement. Accordingly, the agreement with MSG was never validly authorized under the cash-basis law, rendering that agreement void. Consequently, without a valid means of financing the purchase of the helicopter, the City's agreement with Schreib-Air was…void and unenforceable due to the agreement being entered into in violation of the cash basis law," the Supreme Court ruled.

Decisions in other appeals filed today, include:

• Appeal No. 102,114: Milano's Inc. v. Kansas Department of Labor, Contributions Unit, affirming a Shawnee County District Court decision that exotic dancers are employees rather than independent contractors for purposes of unemployment insurance. (Unanimous decision authored for the Court by Justice Carol A. Beier, affirming an unemployment compensation claim by a Club Orleans dancer, saying that the Club Orleans dancers' tips qualified as wages, thus making them employees, not independent contractors.)
  
  
• Appeal No. 99,595: State v. Melvin H. Martinez, reversing a Johnson County decision denying the defendant's motion to suppress drug evidence that was obtained when law enforcement encountered Martinez while searching for a suspect in another matter.
  
  
• Appeal No. 100,178: State v. Anthony R. Murphy, affirming the defendant's Geary County convictions of possession of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of cocaine without a tax stamp.
  
  
• Appeal No. 103,028: State v. Bruno Edgar, reversing a Cowley County decision denying a motion to suppress evidence obtained during and following a preliminary breath test (PBT) that was submitted to after the arresting officer told the defendant he had no right to refuse the PBT. (Unanimous, authored for the Court by Justice Dan Biles.)
  
  
• Docket No. 108,494: In Re: John C. Davis, disbarring an Overland Park attorney based on his conversion of $83,000 of an elderly client's trust fund to pay his personal marital income tax liabilities. (The client was unable to communicate effectively after suffering strokes.)

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 31, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss Thursday suggested legislators create and fund 22 new judicial positions as an alternative to repealing a statute that mandates at least one judge be located in each of the state's 105 counties and essentially prevents the Judicial Branch from transferring some of those judges to where they are most needed.

The proposal was contained in the chief justice's 2013 State of the Judiciary Report, which was delivered to legislators in writing Thursday afternoon.

"For fiscal year 2014, the Supreme Court proposes that rather than eliminating these statutory restrictions on judge transfers, the Legislature instead can create and fund the 22 judicial positions and accompanying staff needed to meet judicial needs in the underserved areas identified by the weighted caseload study," (an historic exhaustive analysis of the state's judicial caseload led by the National Center for State Courts). "If the Legislature chooses not to do so, however, then these statutory restrictions should be removed," Chief Justice Nuss wrote in the annual report.

He noted that the extensive weighted caseload study revealed that "while Kansas has enough judges, some are not placed where they are most needed. That is partially due to a 30-year-old statute that absolutely requires at least one judge to reside in, and have principal office in, each county—regardless of the existing demands of the legal market there," Chief Justice Nuss wrote in the report.

The weighted caseload study was part of a statewide review of Judicial Branch operations that included a 24-member Blue Ribbon Commission, composed of citizens "from a variety of backgrounds and leadership positions from across the state."

Thursday's State of the Judiciary message outlined progress made the last twelve months in implementing the Commission's recommendations in 11 main categories, which include the development of statewide electronic filing (e-filing) of court cases. Nuss said current e-filing funding through the end of this fiscal year, including legislative appropriations and federal grants, will cover the two appellate courts and the district court in Shawnee County as well as pilot projects in Douglas, Leavenworth, and Sedgwick county district courts.

"Additional legislative funding [from the State General Fund] is being sought for fiscal year 2014 to allow full statewide implementation of EFS (e-filing system) by the end of calendar year 2015," Chief Justice Nuss wrote.

He said the Supreme Court ultimately intends to develop and implement a complete centralized statewide e-courts environment—EFS plus electronic case management systems (CMS) and document management systems (DMS).

"Upon completion, such a combination of statewide systems could allow court personnel in any location to work virtually on court business in any other location, once again allowing the Supreme Court to more effectively and efficiently manage the state's court system. Properly used, such statewide systems could help us to keep a functioning 'open for business' court clerk's office in all 105 counties.

"It might be suggested that these electronic systems are absolutely critical to keeping some of these offices open, and further suggested that keeping these offices open is absolutely critical to providing access to justice for our fellow Kansans living in those areas," Chief Justice Nuss wrote.

In his report's conclusion, Chief Justice Nuss observed that "Several themes have been emphasized recently in the State to set the course for the conduct of Kansas government. First, government should become more efficient, but still provide essential or core services to the people we all serve. Second, government should promote economic growth of existing businesses and those that Kansas hopes to attract to our state." He pointed out that the Kansas Judicial Branch is doing all of these.

Looking at these themes, Nuss noted increased efficiencies and the growing application of sound business management principles in the Judicial Branch. As for providing essential services, the Chief Justice wrote, "administering justice to all Kansans has been an original function of government performed by the Judicial Branch since 1861. Indeed, since 1861 the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights has provided that Kansans are entitled to 'remedy by due course of law' and [civil] 'justice administered without delay.' "

"Adequate court funding is critical to providing these essential services—while inadequate funding undermines not only access to justice, but also the people's belief in the justice system itself," the Chief Justice wrote.

The Chief Justice concluded that if promoting economic growth is now the set course for Kansas government, "then the Kansas Judicial Branch should be recognized as a vital factor in that formula for success." He emphasized that Kansas courts have been deciding business disputes since 1861.

Nuss further observed that the excellence of the Kansas courts was acknowledged in a 2012 business survey by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He pointed out the survey ranked our courts "fifth among the states in the overall ranking of state liability systems." The Chamber declared these rankings were important to the business community because "a state's litigation environment is likely to impact important business decisions . . . such as where to locate or do business."

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 25, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

The Supreme Court today ordered a new trial of Phillip D. Cheatham Jr.'s capital murder case, based on ineffective assistance of counsel, as well decisions in a medical malpractice and workers compensation appeal. Links to the full text of these decisions follow the summaries below:

Appeal No. 95,800: State v. Phillip D. Cheatham Jr.

The Supreme Court today remanded a Topeka capital murder case for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel for among other things volunteering to the jury that the defendant had a prior manslaughter conviction and repeatedly referring to his client as a "professional drug dealer" and "shooter of people."

The murder trial of Phillip D. Cheatham Jr. arose from the December 2003 shooting deaths of Annette Roberson and Gloria Jones and the severe wounding of Annetta Thomas at a Topeka residence. Following trial, the state agreed with the appellate defender that Cheatham received ineffective assistance of counsel during the penalty phase of the proceeding, but disputed that he received ineffective assistance during the guilt phase.

Following a previous remand in the appeal process, the Shawnee County District Court reversed the death penalty, based on the state's stipulation that the penalty phase was handled improperly, and said in its ruling that Cheatham's attorney, Ira Dennis Hawver, "had no business taking on a death penalty case."

Justice Dan Biles, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court said, "But despite those findings, the district court upheld Cheatham's convictions. We hold that trial counsel's representation denied Cheatham the fair trial he is guaranteed by both the federal and state constitutions.

"Specifically, we hold that counsel's performance was deficient in several respects, which were most seriously problematic when he volunteered to the jury that Cheatham had a prior voluntary manslaughter conviction and referred repeatedly to his client as a 'professional drug dealer' and 'shooter of people.' This denied Cheatham his right to a fair trial," Biles wrote for the Court.

"We hold further that under the circumstances in this case, counsel's fee arrangement created an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected the adequacy of Cheatham's defense. We reverse his convictions and remand the case for a new trial."

The Court noted the fee arrangement gave Hawver an incentive not to prepare adequately for Cheatham's trial and to reject offers by the Board of Indigents Defense Services to furnish co-counsel, investigators, consultants, and expert witnesses to assist in defense efforts. The Court characterized the 200 hours that Hawver spent on Cheatham's case as "appallingly low for a death penalty defense and even more stunning when all but 60 of those hours, as Hawver testified, were spent in trial."

Also Friday, the Supreme Court filed decisions in medical malpractice and workers compensation appeals, including:

• Appeal No. 104,951: Martha Fernandez v. McDonald's, affirming a Workers Compensation Appeals Board decision that Fernandez can be awarded disability benefits even though she was an unauthorized alien at the time of her workplace injury, which occurred at a Topeka McDonald's restaurant. (Unanimous, authored for the Court by Justice Lee A. Johnson.)
• Appeal No. 98,932: Donna Schlaikjer v. James D. Kaplan, M.D., reversing a Johnson County District Court decision granting summary judgment in favor of Kaplan in a case arising out of surgeries to treat the plaintiff's tracheal stenosis. (Unanimous decision, remanding for further proceedings to permit Schlaikjer's expert witness to testify about the standard of care relating to Kaplan's treatment of the plaintiff.)

---

 

Sedgwick County District Judge Joseph Bribiesca

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 22, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

Sedgwick County District Judge Joseph Bribiesca has been appointed to sit with the state Supreme Court Tuesday, January 29, to hear oral arguments in a review of a Court of Appeals decision affirming the dismissal of a Lyon County personal injury case.

The Supreme Court appointed Judge Bribiesca to join them for the appeal in place of Justice Marla Luckert. Judge Bribiesca will hear oral arguments in Appeal No. 102,662: Adam Simmons v. Richard W. Porter and Sarah M. Porter, doing business as Porter Farms, and then participate in the high court deliberations and opinion drafting.

Judge Bribiesca will join the Court to review an appeals court decision affirming the Lyon County District Court's grant of the Porter Farms' motion for summary judgment in a suit arising from a farm shop accident in which Simmons was severely burned. Simmons sued Richard and Sarah Porter, doing business as Porter Farms, contending Porter Farms was negligent by failing to provide him with a reasonably safe workplace.

Simmons was burned and permanently injured when a shop light fell and ignited gasoline that had been spilled during his removal of a fuel tank from a truck he had been working on. Simmons contends the district court improperly applied the assumption of risk doctrine in granting summary judgment to Porter Farms.

Judge Bribiesca has been on the Sedgwick County bench since 1994. Prior to becoming a district court judge, Bribiesca served 14 years as the Maize Municipal Court Judge, while maintaining a private law practice that began in 1977, upon his graduation from the Washburn University School of Law. A graduate of the Wichita State University with a BA in Spanish, he also holds an Associate of Arts degree from Hutchinson Community College.

During his career in private practice, Judge Bribiesca also served as a prosecutor for the cities of Mulvane and Wichita, as a guardian ad litem and judge pro tem in the Sedgwick County Juvenile Court and as a prosecutor for parental severance litigation in the legal department of the former Social and Rehabilitation Services.

---

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 11, 2013

For more information
contact Ron Keefover
Education-Information Officer

A nominating commission charged with naming candidates to fill a district judge vacancy in the 9th Judicial District has issued a request for assistance from the public.

The 9th Judicial District includes the counties of Harvey and McPherson.

The nine-member commission is responsible for submitting the names of two or three nominees to the Governor for the vacancy which was created by the retirement of District Judge Carl B. Anderson.

            “The nominating commission is especially interested in receiving recommendations of suggested nominees to fill the vacancy from the general public.  All of the citizens of the 9th Judicial District are requested to consider this matter and the names of suggested nominees submitted by the general public will be welcomed by the commission,”  according to Justice Carol A. Beier, departmental justice for the 9th Judicial District.

Kansas statutes require that a judge be a resident of the district in which selected, be at least 30 years of age, have been in the active practice of law for at least five years, and have been admitted to the practice of law within the State of Kansas.

Suggested nominees are requested to complete questionnaires for the position.  The completed forms should be returned to the Office of the Clerk of Appellate Courts, Attn: Julie Meyer, 301 SW 10th Ave., Topeka, KS  66612, no later than noon, February 1, 2013.  The forms are available in the office of the clerk of the district court in Harvey and McPherson Counties.

The nominating commission will convene at 9:00 a.m., February 22, in the McPherson County Courthouse, McPherson, to interview the suggested nominees.  The meeting will be open to the public; however, the commission has the authority to adjourn to executive session to discuss personal traits of the suggested nominees.

The law requires that the commission submit at least two names, but not more than three, to the Governor who may appoint any of the suggested nominees.

Notices of the vacancy have been mailed to every attorney in this judicial district by the chairman of the commission.

The 9th district judicial nominating commission includes Justice Beier, as the nonvoting chair, and Thomas A. Adrian, Newton; William E. Gusenius, Lindsborg; John S. Robb, Newton; Robert W. Wise, McPherson; Michael L. Androes, McPherson; Ronnie L. Krehbiel, Burrton; Harris G. Terry, McPherson; and George Rogers, Newton.

---