Printable Format60-521. Limitations applicable to public bodies. As to any cause of action accruing to the state, any political subdivision, or any other public body, which cause of action arises out of any proprietary function or activity, the limitations prescribed in this article shall apply to actions brought in the name or for the benefit of such public body in the same manner as to actions by private parties, except in (1) actions for the recovery of real property or any interest therein, or (2) actions to recover from any former officer or employee for his or her own wrongdoing or default in the performance of his or her duties.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-521; January 1, 1964.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Some Comments on the New Code of Civil Procedure," Emmet A. Blaes, 12 K.L.R. 75, 77 (1963).
Survey of tort liability, Patty Griffin and Harold J. Pickler, 15 W.L.J. 397, 406 (1976).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Civil Procedure," Jerry G. Elliott, 27 K.L.R. 185, 190 (1979).
"Statutes of Limitation, Statutes of Repose and Continuing Duties under the Kansas Product Liability Act," Steve R. Fabert, 36 W.L.J. 367 (1997).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Assessments for county sewer system services not barred by statute of limitations. 95-74.
Application of statutes of limitation to functions of the commission; functions governmental in nature. 98-16.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Action by county to recover overcharges and penalties under K.S.A. 19-232; this section and K.S.A. 60-514 inapplicable. Board of County Commissioners v. Lewis, 203 Kan. 188, 189, 190, 194, 195, 453 P.2d 46.
2. Applied; action for damages to bridge under K.S.A. 8-5,124; two-year statute of limitations inapplicable. State Highway Commission v. Steele, 215 Kan. 837, 838, 839, 528 P.2d 1242.
3. Statutes of limitations do not run against state when action arises out of governmental function. State, ex rel. Schneider v. McAfee, 2 Kan. App. 2d 274, 275, 578 P.2d 281.
4. Suit for saltwater contamination lies in tort; subject to limitations of K.S.A. 60-513(a)(4). City of Attica v. Mull Drilling Co., 9 Kan. App. 2d 325, 326, 329, 676 P.2d 769 (1984).
5. Refusal to dismiss fraud claim upheld; state's immunity from limitations unaffected by abolition of governmental immunity for negligent acts. State ex rel. Stephan v. GAF Corp., 12 Kan. App. 2d 123, 129, 130, 736 P.2d 465 (1987).
6. Cited; general civil and criminal statutes of limitations as inapplicable to habitual violator proceedings examined. State v. Graham, 12 Kan. App. 2d 803, 807, 758 P.2d 247 (1988).
7. Cited in opinion certifying to U.S. district court that K.S.A. 60-507 is statute of limitations applicable to inverse condemnation proceedings. Hiji v. City of Garnett, 248 Kan. 1, 10, 804 P.2d 950 (1991).
8. Whether the city's cause of action arises out of a governmental function for statute of limitations purposes examined. City of Wichita, Kan. v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 828 F. Supp. 851, 858, 861 (1993).
9. Plaintiff not entitled to sovereign immunity against statute of limitations defenses. City of Wichita, Kan. v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 72 F.3d 1491, 1497 (1995).
10. The actions of a county hospital in constructing and leasing a medical office building is a proprietary and not a governmental function. Newman Mem. Hospital v. Walton Constr. Co., 37 Kan. App. 2d 46, 64, 149 P.3d 525 (2007).