60-252. Findings and conclusions by the court; judgment on partial findings. (a) Findings and conclusions. (1) In general. In an action tried on the facts without a jury or with an advisory jury or upon entering summary judgment, the court must find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately. The findings and conclusions may be stated on the record after the close of evidence, or may appear in an opinion or a memorandum of decision filed by the court. Judgment must be entered under K.S.A. 60-258, and amendments thereto.
(2) For an interlocutory injunction. In granting or refusing an interlocutory injunction, except in divorce cases, the court must similarly state the findings and conclusions that support its action.
(3) Effect of a master's findings. A master's findings, to the extent adopted by the court, must be considered the court's findings.
(4) Questioning the evidentiary support. A party may later question the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the findings, whether or not the party requested findings, objected to them, moved to amend them or moved for judgment on partial findings.
(5) Setting aside the findings. Findings of fact must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and the reviewing court must give due regard to the trial court's opportunity to judge the witness' credibility.
(b) Amended or additional findings. On a party's motion filed no later than 28 days after the entry of judgment, the court may amend its findings, or make additional findings, and may amend the judgment accordingly. The motion may accompany a motion for a new trial under K.S.A. 60-259, and amendments thereto.
(c) Judgment on partial findings. If a party has been fully heard on an issue during a nonjury trial and the court finds against the party on that issue, the court may enter judgment against the party on a claim or defense that, under the controlling law, can be maintained or defeated only with a favorable finding on that issue. The court may, however, decline to render any judgment until the close of the evidence. A judgment on partial findings must be supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by subsection (a).
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-252; amended by Supreme Court order dated July 28, 1976; L. 1997, ch. 173, § 27; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 123; July 1.
Source or prior law:
(a). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 290; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 297; R. S. 1923, 60-2921.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Advisory jury and trial by consent, see 60-239(c).
Enlargement of time limitation for motion to amend, see 60-206(b).
Report of master, filing and disposition of, see 60-253(e).
Motion to alter or amend a judgment, see 60-259(f).
Special verdicts, forms of special findings, see 60-249(a).
Stay of proceedings pending disposition of motion to alter or amend judgment or for new trial, see 60-262(b).
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Article concerning delay in the courts, George S. Reynolds, 12 W.L.J. 12, 24 (1972).
"Bench Decisions and Opinion Writing," Robert H. Miller, 47 J.B.A.K. 247, 249 (1978).
"Contested Estate Matters After Court Unification," Calvin J. Karlin, 48 J.B.A.K. 97, 103 (1979).
"Challenging and Defending Agency Actions in Kansas," Steve Leben, 64 J.K.B.A. No. 5, 22, 28, 36 (1995).
"A Kansas Approach to Custodial Parent Move-Away Cases," Steve Leben and Megan Moriarty, 37 W.L.J. 497 (1998).
"A practitioner's guide to summary judgment Part 1," Robert W. Parnacott, 67 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 36 (1998).
"Decedent's Estates: Complicating Kansas's Family Protection Law," JoAnn M. Stone, 38 W.L.J. 1005 (1999).
"Writing to the Kansas appellate courts: a lesson in appellate jurisdiction," Autumn Fox, 69 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 32 (2000).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-2921 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Court proceeding under oil and gas review statute must either adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law of commission or make its own, upon request of interested party. Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. State Corporation Comm., 192 Kan. 1, 16, 386 P.2d 266. Certiorari denied: 13 L. Ed. 2d 333.
2. Court upon request to make conclusions of fact not findings of evidentiary fact. Coffee-Rich, Inc. v. Kansas State Board of Health, 192 Kan. 431, 439, 388 P.2d 582.
3. Mentioned; when all the evidence is undisputed, the question is one of law and not of fact. Cain v. Grosshans & Petersen, Inc., 192 Kan. 474, 478, 389 P.2d 839.
4. Objection to court's findings of fact not prerequisite to appeal. Schoof v. Byrd, 197 Kan. 38, 46, 415 P.2d 384.
5. Mentioned; "motion for rehearing" suspended running of appeal time. Ten Eyck v. Harp, 197 Kan. 529, 532, 533, 419 P.2d 922.
6. Rule No. 116 of supreme court is not applicable to criminal trial. State v. Scott, 201 Kan. 134, 137, 439 P.2d 78.
7. Paragraph (a) applied; trial court's findings and judgment supported by evidence. Mountain Iron & Supply Co. v. Jones, 201 Kan. 401, 411, 441 P.2d 795. Rehearing denied, 201 Kan. 824, 443 P.2d 185.
8. Court's findings on conflicting evidence sufficient to resolve issue. Allen v. Schauf, 202 Kan. 348, 364, 449 P.2d 1010.
9. Court's compliance herewith discussed; ruling was "not in the best or the most understandable form." Brakensick v. Shaffer, 203 Kan. 817, 818, 457 P.2d 511.
10. Subsection (a) cited; case involving motion for involuntary dismissal by defendant under K.S.A. 60-241 (b). In re Estate of Ewers, 206 Kan. 623, 626, 481 P.2d 970.
11. Findings held sufficient; order of district court approving commissioner districts upheld. Andrews v. Board of County Commissioners, 207 Kan. 548, 555, 485 P.2d 1260.
12. Subsection (a) controlling on decision. Affirmative findings of trial court not to be set aside on appeal unless clearly erroneous. Short v. Sunflower Plastic Pipe, Inc., 210 Kan. 68, 73, 74, 500 P.2d 39.
13. Subsection (b) cited; no recovery allowed where findings of fact adverse to plaintiff; new trial granted. Commercial Credit Corporation v. Harris, 212 Kan. 310, 312, 510 P.2d 1322.
14. Subsection (a) cited; on appellate review trial court's findings of fact not set aside unless clearly erroneous. Funke v. Fieldman, 212 Kan. 524, 529, 512 P.2d 539.
15. Subsection (a) mentioned in requiring trial judge to find and state controlling facts in the action. Hukle v. City of Kansas City, 212 Kan. 627, 634, 512 P.2d 457.
16. Subsection (a) cited in contracts case; trial court's findings of fact not overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous. Phillips & Easton Supply Co., Inc. v. Eleanor International, Inc., 212 Kan. 730, 737, 512 P.2d 379.
17. Subsection (a) cited; finding of fact and conclusions of law held adequate for review. Duffin v. Patrick, 212 Kan. 772, 774, 512 P.2d 442.
18. Findings required by subsection (a) held to be inadequate to permit meaningful appellate review. Read v. Estate of Davis, 213 Kan. 128, 135, 136, 515 P.2d 1096.
19. Trial court failed to make findings of fact necessary to apply law relative to intrusion upon seclusion. Froelich v. Adair, 213 Kan. 357, 359, 516 P.2d 993.
20. Paragraph (a) not applicable to case heard on stipulation of facts. Westamerica Securities, Inc. v. Cornelius, 214 Kan. 301, 308, 520 P.2d 1262.
21. Findings by trial court mandatory; reasons for rules. Clithero v. Key Securities, Inc., 214 Kan. 380, 385, 386, 520 P.2d 1225.
22. Motion for rehearing hereunder; time limitation under K.S.A. 60-2103 extended. Heim v. Werth, 214 Kan. 855, 857, 522 P.2d 389.
23. Requirements noted; suit questioning validity of proceeding under general improvement and assessment law (K.S.A. 12-6a01 et seq.). Cherry v. Vanlahi, Inc., 216 Kan. 195, 197, 531 P.2d 66.
24. Subsection (a) cited; summary judgment exempt from controlling facts requirement. Scott v. Day and Zimmerman, Inc., 216 Kan. 458, 459, 532 P.2d 1111.
25. Compliance and noncompliance with statute noted in reversing order dismissing information charging aggravated kidnapping; no double jeopardy or denial or rights. State v. Dolack, 216 Kan. 622, 628, 631, 637, 533 P.2d 1282.
26. Provisions mandatory; failure to express controlling findings and principles of law error. Mies v. Mies, 217 Kan. 269, 274, 535 P.2d 432.
27. Questions of fact remained undetermined; summary judgment improper. Brown v. Wichita State University, 217 Kan. 661, 664, 538 P.2d 713. Affirmed: 219 Kan. 2, 4, 547 P.2d 1015.
28. Mentioned; failure to state reasons for dismissal order as required by rule 116 (K.S.A. 60-2702). Griffith v. Stout Remodeling, Inc., 219 Kan. 408, 411, 548 P.2d 1238.
29. Requirements of this section and Supreme Court Rule 116 (K.S.A. 60-2702) may not be waived. Henrickson v. Drotts, 219 Kan. 435, 441, 548 P.2d 465.
30. Overruling motion to amend and clarify judgment error; premature; action based on invasion of privacy. Rinsley v. Frydman, 221 Kan. 297, 301, 559 P.2d 334.
31. Applied; quiet title action; adverse possession requirements not met. Renensland v. Ellenberger, 1 Kan. App. 2d 659, 661, 574 P.2d 217.
32. Decision of district court fails to meet the standards of statute. Baker University v. K.S.C. of Pittsburg, 222 Kan. 245, 248, 254, 564 P.2d 472.
33. Requirement that judge state controlling fact not applicable to denial of motion to dismiss. Chee-Craw Teacher Association v. U.S.D. No. 247, 225 Kan. 561, 563, 593 P.2d 406.
34. This section and S. Ct. Rule No. 165 applied; findings of trial court in a proceeding to determine parental rights inadequate; new hearing ordered. In re Atwood, 2 Kan. App. 2d 680, 681, 587 P.2d 1.
35. Failure to object to findings and conclusions at trial level prevents raising issue at appellate level. Celco, Inc. of America v. Davis Van Lines, Inc., 226 Kan. 366, 369, 598 P.2d 188.
36. Reasons for decision need not be given in default judgments. Celco, Inc. of America v. Davis Van Lines, Inc., 226 Kan. 366, 368, 598 P.2d 188.
37. Specific findings not required where petition denied as matter of law; written defenses adopted by court and appeal to be de novo. In re Estate of Corson, 226 Kan. 673, 674, 678, 602 P.2d 1320.
38. Court noted no findings of fact and conclusions of law in trial court's sustaining of motion to suppress evidence; order granting motion reversed on other grounds. State v. Mezins, 4 Kan. App. 2d 292, 293, 605 P.2d 159.
39. Mandatory requirements of subsection (a) not complied with by trial court; case remanded. Pottratz v. Firkins, 4 Kan. App. 2d 469, 470, 609 P.2d 185.
40. Case remanded for further findings when appellate court finds them insufficient, even when not objected to before trial court. Burch v. Dodge, 4 Kan. App. 2d 503, 507, 608 P.2d 1032.
41. Evidence sufficient to support finding that mother's consent to adoption freely and voluntarily given. In re Adoption of Chance, 4 Kan. App. 2d 576, 580, 582, 609 P.2d 232.
42. Under K.S.A. 60-225, substitution for deceased litigant whose appeal is pending must be made within reasonable time or appeal will be dismissed. Long v. Riggs, 5 Kan. App. 2d 416, 417, 617 P.2d 1270.
43. Memorandum decision setting forth undisputed facts and controlling law guiding decision adequate; sufficient to guide parties and appellate court. Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of Hays v. City of Yates Center, 229 Kan. 330, 344, 624 P.2d 971.
44. Standard of review is whether findings of trial court are supported by substantial competent evidence and if findings support conclusions of law. Moore v. New Ammest, Inc., 6 Kan. App. 2d 461, 466, 630 P.2d 167 (1981).
45. Trial court failed to enter findings but record supported presumption that court found facts necessary to support parental severance judgment. In re Lett & Jackson, 7 Kan. App. 2d 329, 331, 338, 640 P.2d 1294 (1982).
46. Involuntary dismissal of case reversed; trial courts' conclusion of law erroneous. Baker v. R. D. Andersen Constr. Co., 7 Kan. App. 2d 568, 580, 644 P.2d 1354 (1982).
47. Failure of judge to find controlling facts in action tried without a jury held not prejudicial to defendant. Panhandle Agri-Service, Inc. v. Becker, 231 Kan. 291, 296, 644 P.2d 413 (1982).
48. Adequate statement of reason for trial judge's holding found. In re Dodge, 8 Kan. App. 2d 259, 261, 655 P.2d 135 (1983).
49. Dismissal of action under K.S.A. 60-237(d) not proper sanction for mere inability to permit discovery. Locke v. Kansas Fire & Cas. Co., 8 Kan. App. 2d 678, 682, 665 P.2d 776 (1983).
50. Cited; findings sufficient based on evidence in holding husband's oral consent to heterologous insemination actual consent. R. S. v. R. S., 9 Kan. App. 2d 39, 41, 670 P.2d 923 (1983).
51. Attorney fee issue is not a case of abuse of trial court discretion, but failure to comply herewith. Squires v. City of Salina, 9 Kan. App. 2d 199, 201, 203, 675 P.2d 926 (1984).
52. No error where memorandum opinion and journal entry addressed each issue and set forth facts and legal principles. Tip Top Credit Union v. Lies, 234 Kan. 925, 930, 677 P.2d 540 (1984).
53. Cited; premature filing of motion for rehearing in workers' compensation appeal tolls time for filing notice of appeal. Dieter v. Lawrence Paper Co., 237 Kan. 139, 144, 697 P.2d 1300 (1985).
54. Objections to journal entry constituted postjudgment motion to alter or amend and extended notice of appeal filing time. Andres v. Classen, 238 Kan. 732, 737, 714 P.2d 963 (1986).
55. Questions of punitive damages and interim relief only regarding arbitration (K.S.A. 5-401) hearings as being adequately covered examined. L.R. Foy Constr. Co. v. Professional Mechanical Contractors, 13 Kan. App. 2d 188, 196, 766 P.2d 196 (1989).
56. Cited; KCC order amending basic proration order for Kansas Hugoton gas field to allow infill drilling examined. Southwest Kan. Royalty Owners Ass'n v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n, 244 Kan. 157, 166, 769 P.2d 1 (1989).
57. Proper standard of review for involuntary dismissal (K.S.A. 60-241) examined. Mohr v. State Bank of Stanley, 244 Kan. 255, 770 P.2d 466 (1989).
58. Provisions herein relative to condemnation award mentioned. City of Manhattan v. Signor, 244 Kan. 630, 637, 772 P.2d 753 (1989).
59. Oil and gas leases, royalty interest, offensive collateral estoppel by plaintiff, contribution among defendants examined. Waltrip v. Sidwell Oil & Gas, Inc., 245 Kan. 55, 59, 774 P.2d 948 (1989).
60. Motion for additional finding of fraud examined where court disallowed damages for unreasonable denial of rezoning request. Jack v. City of Olathe, 245 Kan. 458, 460, 781 P.2d 1069 (1989).
61. Allocation of condemnation award between long-term lessee and landowners examined. City of Topeka v. Estate of Mays, 245 Kan. 546, 549, 781 P.2d 721 (1989).
62. Noted by dissent where K.S.A. 60-203 and 60-206 compared concerning extension of time for service and application of same. Read v. Miller, 247 Kan. 557, 565, 802 P.2d 528 (1990).
63. Finding that money paid by tortfeasor's insurer under workers compensation lien (K.S.A. 44-504) deductible from insured's underinsured motorist coverage (K.S.A. 40-284) challenged. Allied Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gordon, 248 Kan. 715, 722, 811 P.2d 1112 (1991).
64. Rulings by court necessary to satisfy findings and conclusion requirements examined; sanctions imposed against plaintiff for frivolous lawsuit. Reyna v. General Group of Companies, 15 Kan. App. 2d 591, 605, 814 P.2d 961 (1991).
65. Effect of partial adjudication of claims examined where final judgment not entered pursuant to K.S.A. 60-254(b); school's obligation to student considered. Honeycutt v. City of Wichita, 251 Kan. 451, 459, 836 P.2d 1128 (1992).
66. Summary judgment reversed, record does not preclude recovery on asserted strict liability, negligence or warranty theories. Elite Professionals, Inc. v. Carrier Corp., 16 Kan. App. 2d 625, 629, 827 P.2d 1195 (1992).
67. Trial court must explain on record reasons justifying waiver of mandatory treble damages award for passing worthless checks (K.S.A. 60-2610). Dillon's Food Stores, Inc. v. Brosseau, 17 Kan. App. 2d 657, 659, 842 P.2d 319 (1992).
68. District court's incorporation of ALJ's finding of fact satisfied statutory requirements. Scharfe v. Kansas State Univ. 18 Kan. App. 2d 103, 110, 848 P.2d 994 (1992).
69. Facts and controlling legal principles examined in dispute over termination of oil and gas leases. Tucker v. Hugoton Energy Corp., 253 Kan. 373, 378, 855 P.2d 929 (1993).
70. Expedited judicial process examined where no record provided for judicial review on appeal. In re Marriage of Case, 18 Kan. App. 2d 457, 464, 856 P.2d 169 (1993).
71. Cited in holding K.S.A. 60-259(f) applicable when motion for rehearing treated as motion to alter or amend. In re Marriage of Hansen, 18 Kan. App. 2d 712, 714, 858 P.2d 1240 (1993).
72. Procedures for granting summary judgment apply to will contests involving undue influence. In re Estate of Brodbeck, 22 Kan. App. 2d 229, 245, 915 P.2d 145 (1996).
73. Under facts, trial court adoption of party's findings and conclusions in their entirety did not violate section. Stone v. City of Kiowa, 263 Kan. 502, 505, 950 P.2d 1305 (1997).
74. Section's requirement of written findings of fact and conclusions of law inapplicable to limited action claims. Heckard v. Martin, 25 Kan. App. 2d 162, 163, 958 P.2d 665 (1998).
75. Where court's findings of fact are not fully stated in record, in absence of any objection reviewing court will presume trial court found all necessary facts. Blair Constr. Inc. v. McBeth, 273 Kan. 679, 44 P.3d 1244 (2002).
76. In ruling on motion for summary judgment, court is required to state facts and legal principles controlling the decision. Burcham v. Unison Bancorp, Inc., 276 Kan. 393, 77 P.3d 130 (2003).
77. Section requires trial court to make findings regarding facts and conclusion of law. Wentland v. Uhlarik, 37 Kan. App. 2d 734, 741, 159 P.3d 1035 (2007).
78. Section cited in discussion of trial judge's powers in granting motion for involuntary dismissal. Lyons v. Holder, 38 Kan. App. 2d 131, 134, 163 P.3d 343 (2007).
79. Mentioned; warrantless entry into residence was not justified by exigent circumstances. State v. Mell, 39 Kan. App. 2d 471, 491, 492, 182 P.3d 1 (2008).
80. Cited; time limit for filing appeal under probate code is tolled by filing postjudgment motion pursuant to K.S.A. 60-2103(a). In re Guardianship of Sokol, 40 Kan. App. 2d 57, 64, 189 P.3d 526 (2008).
81. Judgment as a matter of law discussed; no inferences in favor of nonmoving party required. Lewis v. R & K Ranch, 41 Kan. App. 2d 588, 204 P.3d 642 (2009).
82. When court's findings are objectionable on grounds other than sufficiency of evidence, an objection must be made. In re J.S., 42 Kan. App. 2d 113, 208 P.3d 802 (2009).
83. In making a summary determination under K.S.A. 59-29a11, court must enter findings and conclusions sufficient to enable meaningful review. In re Care & Treatment of Miles, 42 Kan. App. 2d 471, 213 P.3d 1077 (2009).
84. If litigants do not object to a district court's failure to make adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law to give the district court an opportunity to correct any alleged errors, the reviewing court will presume the district court made all the necessary factual findings to support its judgment, but the reviewing court may consider a remand if the lack of specific findings precludes meaningful appellate review. Bicknell v. Kan. Dep't of Revenue, 315 Kan. 451, 506, 509 P.3d 1211 (2022).
|
|