Repealed

79-1602. History: L. 1876, ch. 34, § 74; L. 1911, ch. 317, § 2; L. 1913, ch. 323, § 1; R.S. 1923, 79-1602; L. 1959, ch. 376, § 1; L. 1969, ch. 437, § 1; L. 1971, ch. 293, § 3; L. 1985, ch. 314, § 10; L. 1986, ch. 287, § 1; L. 1988, ch. 377, § 6; L. 1990, ch. 90, § 7; Repealed, L. 1992, ch. 282, § 21; January 1, 1993. Source or prior law: L. 1866, ch. 118, § 28; G.S. 1868, ch. 107, § 43. CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Board cannot arbitrarily raise valuation returned by assessor. Stanfield v. Boyd, 10 Kan. App. 265, 273, 62 P. 721. 2. Powers of county board in making equalization of personal property. Gillett v. Treasurer of Lyon Co., 30 Kan. 166, 167, 169, 1 P. 577. 3. Powers in equalizing valuation of real property; opportunity for hearing. A.T.&S.F. Rld. Co. v. Wilson, Treas. , 35 Kan. 175, 176, 10 P. 459. 4. County board may raise or lower assessment of any township. Fields v. Russell, Sheriff, 38 Kan. 720, 721, 17 P. 476. 5. Board cannot add additional property not already listed. Coal Co. v. Emlen, 44 Kan. 117, 121, 24 P. 340. 6. Irregularity in record made by clerk; board's proceedings valid. Fowler v. Russell, 45 Kan. 425, 25 P. 871. 7. Power to equalize assessments although assessments made under unlawful agreement; meeting and adjournment of board; when work must be completed. Challiss v. Rigg, 49 Kan. 119, 129, 131, 30 P. 190. 8. County clerk's record; methods and powers of board of equalization. Symns v. Graves, 65 Kan. 628, 634, 70 P. 591. 9. Equalization not subject to revision or control by the courts; construction of record of proceedings; informal entry. Electric Co. v. Jackson County, 81 Kan. 6, 7, 105 P. 453. 10. Cited in reviewing statutory tax procedure to provide state revenue. Clay County Comm'rs v. French, 139 Kan. 815, 816, 33 P.2d 312. 11. Escaped assessments are subject to equalization and review by county board. Beacon Publishing Co. v. Burke, 143 Kan. 248, 255, 53 P.2d 888; Allen v. Burke, 143 Kan. 257, 265, 53 P.2d 894. 12. Discussed in denying injunction to restrain collection on excessive assessment. Eureka B. & L. Ass'n v. Myers, 147 Kan. 609, 611, 78 P.2d 68. 13. Section mentioned; method of valuing surface when minerals separated held illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory. Hitch Land & Cattle Co. v. Board of County Commissioners, 179 Kan. 357, 361, 364, 295 P.2d 640. 14. Action to enjoin collection of taxes; constructive fraud; petition sufficient. Anderson v. Dunn, 180 Kan. 811, 814, 308 P.2d 154. 15. Where state board of equalization approves assessment it is essential party to action to enjoin tax collection. Builders, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners, 191 Kan. 379, 381, 383, 381 P.2d 527. 16. Mentioned; assessment of gas leaseholds. Mobil Oil Corporation v. McHenry, 200 Kan. 211, 224, 436 P.2d 982. 17. Assessment and valuation of property are administrative in character; absent evidence that assessment was arrived at fraudulently, arbitrarily or capriciously, a difference of opinion as to value doesn't warrant judicial interference. Cities Service Oil Co. v. Murphy, 202 Kan. 282, 284, 447 P.2d 791. 18. Cited in upholding validity of K.S.A. 79-306c. State, ex rel. , v. Dwyer, 204 Kan. 3, 4, 460 P.2d 507. 19. Mentioned; late filing penalty imposed by K.S.A. 79-332 upheld. Walkemeyer v. Stevens County Oil & Gas Co., 205 Kan. 486, 487, 470 P.2d 730. 20. Cited; case concerning taxing officials acting without statutory authority. Mobil Oil Corporation v. Medcalf, 207 Kan. 100, 107, 483 P.2d 1111. 21. Section considered in action involving directives issued for equalization of assessed values under K.S.A. 79-1446; held not to violate due process and equal protection provisions of federal and state constitutions. State, ex rel. , v. Dwyer, 208 Kan. 437, 439, 440, 443, 493 P.2d 1095. 22. Mentioned in action to recover taxes paid; protest of increased valuation held legally insufficient. Spalding v. Price, 210 Kan. 337, 338, 502 P.2d 713. 23. Board not arbitrary and capricious in rescinding order reducing assessed value of property below 30% of value. Shields Oil Producers, Inc. v. County of Russell, 229 Kan. 579, 580, 582, 629 P.2d 152 (1981). 24. Powers of county board of equalization discussed. Wirt v. Esrey, 233 Kan. 300, 306, 312, 662 P.2d 1238 (1983). 25. Noted in holding BOTA erred in allowing taxes on building improvements separate from underlying land, contrary to K.S.A. 79-412. In re Tax Protest of Spangles, Inc., 17 Kan. App. 2d 335, 337, 835 P.2d 699 (1992). 26. Whether county commission had statutory authority to unilaterally increase appraised property valuations examined. Kansans for Fair Taxation, Inc. v. Miller, 20 Kan. App. 2d 470, 475, 889 P.2d 154 (1995). 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