Court Opinion

ID: 9529353
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:50:05.769068+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:44.749098
License: Public Domain

BRAZIL, J.,
concurring: I concur that, if we must reach the merits, we must find that the district court erred in the interpretation of K.S.A. 19-204 and reverse.
However, I would find that this appeal should have been taken pursuant to K.S.A. 19-223 for a limited review, as this court held in Linsea v. Board of Chase County Comm'rs, 12 Kan. App. 2d 657, 753 P.2d 1292, rev. denied 243 Kan. 779 (1988). Failing to comply with the requirements of K.S.A. 19-223, plaintiffs have failed to perfect their appeal, and I would dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Brinson v. School District, 223 Kan. 465, Syl. ¶ 1, 576 P.2d 602 (1978), states:
“The right to an appeal in this state is neither a vested nor constitutional right, but is strictly statutory in nature. It may be limited by the legislature to any class or classes of cases, or in any manner, or it may be withdrawn completely. It lies within the legislative domain to determine from what orders or judgments an appeal may be taken.”
While I understand that Brinson recognizes the court’s inherent power for limited review of administrative decisions absent statutory authority, this is not such a case. K.S.A. 19-223 provides the authority and procedure for appeal from the Board’s decision.