Appellate System in Kansas

• NCJ Number: 82116
• Author(s): M J Hudson
• Date Published: 1980
• Length: 33 pages
• Grant Number(s): 78-DF-AX-0021; 79-DF-AX-0082
• Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice; Charles E Culpeper Foundation
• Corporate Author: National Ctr for State Courts
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Technical Assistance Report Number 2 in the Appellate Justice Improvement Project

Annotation

The Kansas appellate system was examined to identify actual and potential problems related to the roles of the court of appeals and the State supreme court, delays involved in the handling of cases, and the quality of judges and other staff. Solutions to these problems are recommended.

Abstract

Information was gathered by means of discussions with the chief justice of the supreme court, members of the supreme court and the court of appeals, and support staff. Since 1977, Kansas has had both a court of appeals, which functions as an intermediate appellate court, and a supreme court, which previously was the only appellate court in Kansas. The court of appeals is considered to be responsible mainly for cases which require only a decision with a statement of the case sufficient to satisfy the litigants that the case was properly identified and reviewed for error. The supreme court is responsible mainly for cases requiring a more thorough review of the relevant legal principles as well as a greater likelihood of restatement of those principles. Although the persons interviewed agreed that the current judges are of high quality, several actual and potential problems in the appellate system were identified, including the excessive length of some court of appeals decisions, a strained relationship with the legislature, and confusion concerning the court of appeals' appropriate role. Additional problems include the potential for a breakdown in the system due to delays in preparing transcripts, a crisis in the relationship between the court of appeals and the supreme court, and a lowering of the quality of court of appeals judges due to inadequate salaries. Recommendations to rectify these problems include increasing salaries to attract necessary personnel, increasing support staff, use of alternative disposition methods, changed procedures for ordering a transcript, and making judgeships on the court of appeals a stepping stone to the supreme court. No references are cited.