Printable Format20-3016. Request by court of appeals to transfer case to supreme court; certification of jurisdiction and findings; rules of supreme court; disposition of case by supreme court. (a) The court of appeals, prior to final determination of any case before it, may request that such case be transferred to the supreme court for its review and final determination by certifying to the supreme court that the case is within the jurisdiction of the supreme court and that the court of appeals has made one (1) or more of the following findings with respect to such case:
(1) One or more issues in such case are not within the jurisdiction of the court of appeals;
(2) the subject matter of the case has significant public interest;
(3) the case involves legal questions of major public significance; or
(4) the caseload of the court of appeals is such that the expeditious administration of justice requires such transfer.
(b) Any certification of findings and request for transfer of a case pursuant to subsection (a) shall be made in the manner and form prescribed by rules of the supreme court. The supreme court shall consider such certification and may accept the case for review and final determination or may decline jurisdiction and order that the case be determined by the court of appeals.
History: L. 1975, ch. 178, ยง 16; July 1.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Practicing Law in a Unified Kansas Court System," Linda Diane Henry Elrod, 16 W.L.J. 260, 274 (1977).
"Zoning and Planning: The Economics of State Land Use and the Balancing of Interests Test [Herrmann v. Board of County Commissioners of Butler County, 246 Kan. 152, 785 P.2d 1003 (1990)]," J. Scott MacBeth, 30 W.L.J. 148, 150 (1990).
"Negligence: Weakened Defenses To Nonclient Malpractice Claims or Jeopardizing Affordable Trusts [Pizel v. Whalen, 845 P.2d 37 (Kan. 1993)]," Michael Callahan, 34 W.L.J. 599, 603 (1995).
"Kansas Appellate Advocacy: An Inside View of Common-Sense Strategy," Patrick Hughes, 66 J.K.B.A. No. 2, 26 (1997).
"The State of Kansas Courts," Chief Justice Lawton R. Nuss, 79 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 8 (2010).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited; delay from authorized interlocutory appeal (K.S.A. 22-3603) should not count in determining defendant's constitutional right to speedy trial. State v. Galloway, 238 Kan. 100, 108, 708 P.2d 508 (1985).
2. Cited; constitutionality of mail ballot election act (K.S.A. 25-431 et seq.) examined and upheld. Sawyer v. Chapman, 240 Kan. 409, 410, 415, 729 P.2d 1220 (1986).
3. Admissibility of prior crimes evidence and preservation of issue on appeal examined. State v. Clements, 252 Kan. 86, 843 P.2d 679 (1992).