Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Huffman v. City of Maize

Court of Appeals of Kansas

September 22, 2017

Kevin Huffman d/b/a Huffman Mobile Management, et al., Appellants,
v.
City of Maize, Kansas, Appellee.

         SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

         1.

         The constitutionality of a municipal ordinance is a question of law, over which appellate courts have de novo review.

         2.

         When determining the constitutionality of a municipal ordinance, appellate courts are required to presume that the ordinance is constitutional; resolve all doubts in favor of validating the ordinance; uphold the ordinance if there is a reasonable way to do so; and strike down the ordinance only if it clearly appears to be unconstitutional.

         3.

         Municipalities have broad police powers to enact ordinances regulating or restricting certain activities to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Under the Home Rule Amendment to the Kansas Constitution, Kan. Const. art. 12, § 5, municipalities have the power to adopt such ordinances provided the legislature has not addressed the issue.

          4.

         A municipal ordinance does not violate equal protection if there is any set of facts that may reasonably justify its objective.

         5.

         The enactment of a municipal ordinance must implicate legitimate goals, and the means chosen must bear a rational relationship to those goals so that it treats all similarly situated people alike.

         6.

         Although not a practice to be encouraged, a district court does not violate K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-252(a)(1) or Supreme Court Rule 165 (2017 Kan. S.Ct. R. 214) when it adopts a party's findings of fact and conclusions of law in their entirety as long as the district court individually considers each finding and conclusion.

         Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; Christopher M. Magana, judge. Opinion filed September 22, 2017. Affirmed.

          Nicholas R. Grillot, of Hinkle Law Firm, LLC, of Wichita, for appellants Justin Westhoff and Steven Westhoff.

          Joseph H. Cassell, of Eron Law, P.A., of Wichita, for appellant Kevin Huffman.

          Stephen E. Robison, Lyndon W. Vix, and T. Chet Compton, of Fleeson, Gooing, Coulson & Kitch, L.L.C., of Wichita, for appellee.

          Before Malone, P.J., Pierron and Bruns, JJ.

          ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.