13-202.
History: L. 1903, ch. 122, § 9; R.S. 1923, § 13-202; Repealed, L. 1974, ch. 56, § 7; March 28.
Source or prior law:
L. 1862, ch. 46, art. 5, § 7; G.S. 1868, ch. 18, § 34; L. 1881, ch. 37, § 8; L. 1887, ch. 99, § 1; L. 1891, ch. 74, § 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Land not platted; ordinance including same within boundary not effective. City of Topeka v. Gillett, 32 Kan. 431, 438, 4 P. 800.
2. Power to extend boundaries considered; approval by district court. Hurla v. Kansas City, 46 Kan. 738, 742, 27 P. 143.
3. Unplatted land within city subject to city taxes. Hurla v. Kansas City, 46 Kan. 738, 742, 27 P. 143.
4. Inclusion of unplatted territory; protest; circumscribed by platted territory. U.S. Rly. Co. v. Kansas City, 42 Kan. 497, 22 P. 633.
5. Statute held valid; findings and judgment of district court considered. Huling v. City of Topeka, 44 Kan. 577, 24 P. 1110.
6. Completed proceedings for enlargement of territory cannot be questioned collaterally. Topeka v. Dwyer, 70 Kan. 244, 78 P. 417.
7. Act not unconstitutional as denying equal protection of laws. City of Kansas City v. Railway Co., 59 Kan. 427, 429, 53 P. 468. Affirmed: Clark v. Kansas City, 176 U.S. 114, 20 S. Ct. 284, 44 L. Ed. 392.
8. Proceedings annexing territory can only be questioned in direct proceedings. Chaves v. Atchison, 77 Kan. 176, 177, 93 P. 624.
9. Facts to support annexation ordinance presumed in absence of proof. The State, ex rel., v. City of Atchison, 92 Kan. 431, 433, 140 P. 873.
10. Body of land belonging to different persons may be annexed. Mason v. Kansas City, 103 Kan. 275, 173 P. 535.
11. Only the state may question validity of annexation ordinance. Mason v. Kansas City, 103 Kan. 275, 173 P. 535.
12. Property annexed in July; city tax not collectible that year. City of Hutchinson v. Stewart, 105 Kan. 743, 744, 185 P. 740.
13. Discussed; ordinances vacating territory considered and held void. Atchison & Eastern Bridge Co. v. Atchison County Comm'rs, 150 Kan. 24, 30, 91 P.2d 34.
14. City has no authority to annex under guise of straightening boundary when annexation would compound irregularity. State, ex rel., v. City of Overland Park, 192 Kan. 654, 657, 658, 391 P.2d 128.
15. Repeal of section mentioned in determining K.S.A. 12-525 should have been severed from annexation statute. State, ex rel., v. City of Overland Park, 215 Kan. 700, 712, 713, 527 P.2d 1340.
|
|