Court Opinion

ID: 9791765
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:17:17.299964+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:38.347713
License: Public Domain

Fontron, J.,
dissenting: Although I joined the opinion in Topeka Presbyterian Manor v. Board of County Commissioners, 195 Kan. 90, 402 P. 2d 802, I felt at the time we had proceeded in the direction of charitable exemptions about as far as we could rationally go. That feeling persists today. Hence, I do not favor extending the boundaries of that case.
In my judgment there are sufficient differences in the case before us now to distinguish it from Presbyterian Manor. Several distinctions are mentioned in the court’s opinion although most of them, it must be conceded, are differences in degree rather than in kind.
In addition, the record reflects a suggestion of commercialism which was absent in the Manor case. There is also a vague hint of possible dispossession in certain letters addressed to residents whose financial resources were rapidly being depleted. Finally, the plaintiff has not been approved for nor has it been granted tax exemption status within the purview of U. S. C. Title 26, § 501 (c) or Title 26, § 170 (a).
Perhaps no one of the matters noted above would, standing alone, be of sufficient significance to warrant withholding tax exempt status under Kansas law. Taken together, however, they are sufficient in total, as I view them, to justify the trial court in its conclusion. I would affirm the judgment.
O’Connor, J., joins in the foregoing dissent.