Printable Format13-1417. Abatement of nuisances. Any city may bring an action to enjoin and abate or prevent any nuisance that exists or is about to be created within the city or within three miles of its corporate limits.
History: L. 1903, ch. 122, § 189; March 18; R.S. 1923, § 13-1417.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Extra-territorial police power, Kenneth W. Wagner, 3 J.B.A.K. 193 (1935).
Cited in 1955-56 survey of Kansas law, James L. Postma, 5 K.L.R. 283, 288 (1956).
"Regulatory Takings after Lucas: The Kansas Nuisance Exception," Stephen P. Chinn and Neil R. Shortlidge, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 28, 38 (1993).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. City may exercise authority hereunder outside corporate limits. Topeka v. Cook, 72 Kan. 595, 597, 84 P. 376.
2. Removal of nuisance not proof that location is within city. Topeka v. Cook, 72 Kan. 595, 597, 84 P. 376.
3. City has authority to render streets and sidewalks reasonably safe. Kirkham v. Kansas City, 89 Kan. 651, 656, 132 P. 160.
4. Section cited in considering liability of city for injuries sustained. Kirkham v. Kansas City, 89 Kan. 651, 656, 132 P. 160.
5. City may bring action to abate or enjoin liquor nuisance. Breweries Co. v. Kansas City, 96 Kan. 731, 734, 153 P. 523.
6. Wash basin in school building is not a nuisance. Jones v. Kansas City, 176 Kan. 406, 408, 271 P. 803.
7. Rule as to duty of city to abate sandpit, attractive nuisance, state. Kalleher v. City of Wichita, 179 Kan. 513, 518, 296 P.2d 1062.
8. City found liable where defective sewer nuisance was maintained but not created by city. Morris v. City of Kansas City, 189 Kan. 52, 54, 366 P.2d 788.
9. Numerous statutory and constitutional claims against city for filing nuisance action were not supported by sufficient evidence. Martel v. City of Newton, Kan., 6 F. Supp. 2d 1243, 1248 (1998).