Printable Format77-614. Petition; filing and contents; responsive pleading, filing and service. (a) A petition for judicial review shall be filed with the clerk of the court.
(b) A petition for judicial review shall set forth:
(1) The name and mailing address of the petitioner;
(2) the name and mailing address of the agency whose action is at issue;
(3) identification of the agency action at issue, together with a duplicate copy, summary or brief description of the agency action;
(4) identification of persons who were parties in any adjudicative proceedings that led to the agency action;
(5) facts to demonstrate that the petitioner is entitled to obtain judicial review;
(6) the petitioner's reasons for believing that relief should be granted; and
(7) a request for relief, specifying the type and extent of relief requested.
(c) Failure to include some of the information listed in subsection (b) in the initial petition does not deprive the reviewing court of jurisdiction over the appeal. Leave to supplement the petition with omitted information required by subsection (b) shall be freely given when justice so requires.
(d) Within 30 days after service on the agency or notice to other parties of the petition as provided in K.S.A. 77-615, and amendments thereto, a party to judicial review proceedings may file an answer or other responsive pleading and shall serve a copy of any such answer or pleading in the manner provided by subsection (e) of K.S.A. 77-613, and amendments thereto, upon all parties to the proceedings.
(e) In any method of serving process, substantial compliance shall effect valid service of process if the court finds that, notwithstanding some irregularity or omission, the party served was made aware that the petition or appeal had been filed.
History: L. 1984, ch. 338, § 14; L. 1986, ch. 318, § 7; L. 1995, ch. 175, § 11; L. 2009, ch. 109, § 26; July 1.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Challenging and Defending Agency Actions in Kansas," Steve Leben, 64 J.K.B.A. No. 5, 22, 34, 35, 36 (1995).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Whether defendant who fails to raise specificity requirement waives issue by requesting a move definite statement examined. University of Kansas v. Department of Human Resources, 20 Kan. App. 2d 354, 355, 887 P.2d 1147 (1995).
2. Petition not in compliance herewith; failure to dismiss or order more specific petition not error. Karns v. Kansas Bd. of Agriculture, 22 Kan. App. 2d 739, 743, 750, 923 P.2d 78 (1996).
3. Failure to comply with pleading requirements of section precludes litigant's statutory right of appeal; held appellant complied with requirements of section. Pittsburg State University v. Kansas Bd. of Regents, 30 Kan. App. 2d 37, 36 P.3d 853 (2001).
4. Statutory provision of de novo appeal does not preclude strict compliance with pleading requirements; strict compliance standard is consistent with overall legislative intent of the KJRA. Bruch v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 282 Kan. 764, 777, 781, 148 P.3d 538 (2006).
5. Appellants required to strictly comply with pleading requirements of K.S.A. 77-614 to invoke district court jurisdiction. White v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 38 Kan. App. 2d 11, 13, 14, 163 P.3d 320 (2007).
6. Section provides specific pleading requirements, strict compliance is necessary. Ashley v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 38 Kan. App. 2d 421, 166 P.3d 1060 (2007).
7. Petition for judicial review held to comply with pleading requirements of K.S.A. 77-614(b). Kingsley v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 288 Kan. 390, 204 P.3d 562 (2009).
8. Under K.S.A. 77-614 a petition for judicial review requires petitioner's reasons for relief, not factual bases. Rebel v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 288 Kan. 419, 204 P.3d 551 (2009).
9. Pleading requirements under K.S.A. 77-614 discussed and applied in driver's license suspension proceeding. Rivera v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 41 Kan. App. 2d 949, 206 P.3d 891 (2009).
10. When a petition gives notice to the court and the parties that the petitioner is challenging the validity of the officer's certification and notice of suspension form, the district court has jurisdiction to consider and resolve that question. Brungardt v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 58 Kan. App. 2d 284, 287, 468 P.3d 791 (2020), review denied (Nov. 24, 2020).