Relief on final disposition

77-622. Relief on final disposition. (a) The court may award damages or compensation only to the extent expressly authorized by another provision of law. (b) The court may grant other appropriate relief, whether mandatory, injunctive or declaratory; preliminary or final; temporary or permanent; equitable or legal. In granting relief, the court may order agency action required by law, order agency exercise of discretion required by law, set aside or modify agency action, enjoin or stay the effectiveness of agency action, remand the matter for further proceedings, render a declaratory judgment or take any other action that is authorized and appropriate. (c) The court may also grant necessary ancillary relief to redress the effects of official action wrongfully taken or withheld, but the court may award attorney's fees or witness fees only to the extent expressly authorized by other law. (d) If the court sets aside or modifies agency action or remands the matter to the agency for further proceedings, the court may make any interlocutory order it finds necessary to preserve the interests of the parties and the public pending further proceedings or agency action. History: L. 1984, ch. 338, § 22; July 1. Law Review and Bar Journal References: "Challenging and Defending Agency Actions in Kansas," Steve Leben, 64 J.K.B.A. No. 5, 22, 30, 35 (1995). CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Attorney fees not recoverable in dispute over Medicaid reimbursement following transfer of licensed care facilities to new owner. Americare Properties, Inc. v. S.R.S., 241 Kan. 607, 612, 738 P.2d 450 (1987). 2. Limitations on KDHR secretary to dismissal of complaint where no prohibited practice (K.S.A. 72-5430) exists examined. Garden City Educators' Ass'n v. U.S.D. No. 457, 15 Kan. App. 2d 187, 196, 805 P.2d 511 (1991). 3. Act is exclusive means for judicial review of agency actions unless the agency is specifically exempted. Kansas Sunset Assocs. v. Kansas Dept. of Health & Environment, 16 Kan. App. 2d 1, 3, 818 P.2d 797 (1991). 4. Refund for overpayment of franchise tax denied; appellant must exhaust administrative remedies. Farmers Banshares of Abilene Inc. v. Graves, 250 Kan. 520, 523, 826 P.2d 1363 (1992). 5. Tax-exempt status of church property examined where caretaker's house built on church campgrounds. Midwest Presbytery v. Jefferson County Appraiser, 17 Kan. App. 2d 676, 677, 843 P.2d 277 (1992). 6. Cited in review of Kansas water authority's water transfer order on statutory, jurisdictional and administrative procedure grounds. Water District No. 1 v. Kansas Water Authority, 19 Kan. App. 2d 236, 245, 866 P.2d 1076 (1994). 7. Whether act was plaintiff's exclusive remedy in multicount action resulting from administrative license suspension examined. Lindenman v. Umscheid, 255 Kan. 610, 617, 875 P.2d 964 (1994). 8. Whether Kansas board of healing arts has the capacity to be sued under KTCA (K.S.A. 75-6101 et seq.) and ordered to pay damages examined. Corder v. Kansas Board of Healing Arts, 256 Kan. 638, 665, 889 P.2d 1127 (1994). 9. District court did not err in granting relief requested after BOTA expressly refused court's direction on remand. League of Kansas Municipalities v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rs, 24 Kan. App. 2d 294, 305, 944 P.2d 172 (1997). 10. Civil service board may affirm, modify, reverse or order any other action the board deems appropriate in personnel appeal. Kansas Dept. of Transportation v. Humphreys, 266 Kan. 179, 184, 967 P.2d 759 (1998). 11. Department's failure to promulgate regulations was a failure to "follow prescribed procedures"; refusal to certify appellant as eligible for tax benefits was arbitrary and unreasonable. Hallmark Cards, Inc. v. Kansas Dept. of Commerce & Housing, 32 Kan. App. 2d 715, 88 P.3d 250 (2004). 12. Sexual predator treatment program participant challenges lack of formal disciplinary procedure, KJRA held applicable, not K.S.A. 60-1501 or 60-1701. Williams v. DesLauriers, 38 Kan. App. 2d 629, 635, 172 P.3d 42 (2007). 13. Cited; appellant failed to exhaust administrative remedies before seeking district court action; appeal dismissed. Friedman v. Kansas State Bd. of Healing Arts, 287 Kan. 749, 755, 199 P.3d 781 (2009). 14. Breach of contract claims against state agency must be brought under Kansas act for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions. 10th Street Medical v. State, 42 Kan. App. 2d 249, 210 P.3d 670 (2009). 15. This section provides broad authority to the district court to enter appropriate relief when it finds that an agency action is invalid under K.S.A. 77-621. Manzano v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 50 Kan. App. 2d 263, 324 P.3d 321 (2014). 16. Appellant failed to establish that state agency erred in granting a stay and limiting the scope of remand proceedings to only those issues subject to remand order issued by the Kansas supreme court. Sierra Club v. Mosier, 305 Kan. 1090, 1106-1108, 391 P.3d 667 (2017). Previous | Next LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL General Policies 2026 Archived LCC Documents Archived LCC Meetings REVISOR OF STATUTES Archived Session Documents Archived School Finance Documents USEFUL LINKS Session Laws Kansas Administrative Regulations OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES Kansas Legislature Administrative Services Division of Post Audit Research Department Contact Us PDF Help www.ksrevisor.gov 2026