Source or prior law:

G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 16; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 15; R.S. 1923, 60-304 (4th clause).

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Inchoate Dower and the Marketable Title," David K. Fromme, 4 W.L.J. 240, 249 (1965).

Comment on creditor's remedies under civil procedure code in case of fraudulent conveyance, Charles L. Frickey, 17 K.L.R. 501, 506 (1969).

"Is Kansas Probate Non Claim Statute Unconstitutional?" John F. Kuether, 54 J.K.B.A. 115, 121 (1985).

"Survey of Kansas Law: Real Property," Michael J. Davis, 41 K.L.R. 669, 684 (1993).

"Too Much of a Good Thing: Kansas Law on Unwanted Water," Robert W. Coykendall, 66 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 24 (1997).

"Flooding of Private Property by the Construction of a Public Improvement: Isn't It Time for Kansas to Call It What It Really Is—A Compensable Taking?" Nicole M. Zomberg, 38 W.L.J. 209 (1998).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-304 (4th clause) and the 1961 Supp. thereto.

1. Petition alleging oral contract for conveyance of land by defendants and full performance by plaintiff is an action to recover real property. King v. Robbins, 193 Kan. 70, 72, 392 P.2d 154.

2. Cause of action not barred by statute of limitations. Smith v. Home Royalty Association, Inc., 209 Kan. 609, 614, 498 P.2d 98.

3. Considered in finding that a prescriptive easement was acquired barring action for inverse condemnation. Armstrong v. Cities Service Gas Co., 210 Kan. 298, 305, 502 P.2d 672.

4. Applied; remaindermen's cause of action barred; possessor satisfied requirements for adverse possession. Wallace v. Magie, 214 Kan. 481, 487, 522 P.2d 989.

5. Statute of limitation had run as to claims of half-breed Indians to quiet title against owners of former half-breed lands. Dennison v. Topeka Chambers Industrial Development Corporation, 527 F. Supp. 611, 623 (1981).

6. Treaty of 1825 between U.S. and Kaw half-breeds superseded by various federal acts. Dennison v. Topeka Chambers Indus. Development Corp., 724 F.2d 869, 870 (1983).

7. Where quiet title suit also seeks deed reformation, K.S.A. 60-511(5) applies unless silence on material knowledge tolls it. Ferrell v. Ferrell, 11 Kan. App. 2d 228, 230, 231, 719 P.2d 1 (1986).

8. The right to be enforced determines applicable statute; K.S.A. 60-507 proper where equitable estoppel to deny property interest sought. Potucek v. Potucek, 11 Kan. App. 2d 254, 260, 719 P.2d 14 (1986).

9. Challenge to additional tax creating lien under K.S.A. 79-1804 is adverse interest in property controlled hereunder. Crawford v. Board of Johnson County Comm'rs, 13 Kan. App. 2d 592, 593, 776 P.2d 832 (1989).

10. Running of statute in dispute over defeasible term mineral interest, subsequent case law as not reviving expired interest examined. Kneller v. Federal Land Bank of Wichita, 247 Kan. 399, 404, 799 P.2d 485 (1990).

11. K.S.A. 60-507 certified to U.S. district court as statute of limitations applicable to inverse condemnation proceedings. Hiji v. City of Garnett, 248 Kan. 1, 13, 804 P.2d 950 (1991).

12. Absent an ouster or other notice, a co-tenant may not obtain ownership of another co-tenant's property by adverse possession. Oxy USA, Inc. v. Red Wing Oil, 51 Kan. App. 2d 1028, 1036, 360 P.3d 457 (2015).

13. Misappropriation of royalties alone is not enough to establish adverse possession of a mineral interest. Oxy USA v. Red Wing Oil, 309 Kan. 1022, 1027, 442 P.3d 504 (2019).