Printable Format8-138.
History: L. 1929, ch. 81, § 16; L. 1933, ch. 21, § 1 (Special Session); L. 1955, ch. 294, § 2; L. 1957, ch. 57, § 3; Repealed, L. 1968, ch. 180, § 7; July 1.
Source or prior law:
8-109.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"The Tenth Circuit's Obscured Vision: Losing Sight of the Importance of Requiring Clearly Visible License Plates [United States v. Edgerton, 438 F.3d 1043 (10th Cir. 2006)]," David J. Stucky, 46 W.L.J. 633 (2007).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Constitutionality of act raised but not determined. State v. Teeslink, 177 Kan. 268, 270, 273, 278 P.2d 591.
2. Construed; conditions under which exemption may be granted determined. State v. Teeslink, 177 Kan. 268, 270, 273, 278 P.2d 591.