Case Name: David W. Carson, Appellant, v. Joseph H. McDowell, Mayor; Earl B. Swarner, Commissioner of Finance and Public Property; Joseph Regan, Commissioner of Boulevards and Parks; The City of Kansas City, Kansas, and Gary Smith, Intervenor, Appellees
Court: Kansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1969-04-12
Citations: 203 Kan. 138
Docket Number: No. 45,293
Parties: David W. Carson, Appellant, v. Joseph H. McDowell, Mayor; Earl B. Swarner, Commissioner of Finance and Public Property; Joseph Regan, Commissioner of Boulevards and Parks; The City of Kansas City, Kansas, and Gary Smith, Intervenor, Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Kansas Reports
Volume: 203
Pages: 138–139

Head Matter:
No. 45,293
David W. Carson, Appellant, v. Joseph H. McDowell, Mayor; Earl B. Swarner, Commissioner of Finance and Public Property; Joseph Regan, Commissioner of Boulevards and Parks; The City of Kansas City, Kansas, and Gary Smith, Intervenor, Appellees.
(452 P. 2d 831)
Opinion filed April 12, 1969.
John Ii. Fields, of Kansas City, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellant.
Edward H. Powers and Donald H. Corson, Jr., both of Kansas City, argued the cause and were on the brief for the intervenor.
C. W. Brenneisen, Jr., and Matthew Podrebarac, both of Kansas City, were on the brief for the appellee city of Kansas City.

Opinion:
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Harman, C.:
Although this zoning appeal differs in certain aspects not here material, the controlling issue is identical with that in a companion case (Nos. 45,210 and 45,292, consolidated) Carson v. McDowell, 203 Kan. 40, 452 P. 2d 828, this day decided.
The property sought to be rezoned here is a small tract near the two tracts in the companion case. The zoning action directed toward it was started and conducted separately about three months after the proceedings in the companion case; however, upon appeal to the district court all were consolidated and tried together.
The critical dates here are: The planning commissions statutory (then K. S. A. 1965 Supp. 12-708) notice of public hearing was published in the official city newspaper March 22, 1966. The date fixed for hearing was April 11, 1966. Thus only nineteen clear days elapsed between the date of publication and the date of hearing .instead of the requisite twenty.
Under authority of the companion case, supra, the publication notice was fatally defective, and the judgment appealed from is reversed.
APPROVED BY THE COURT.