Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Survey of labor law, Robert J. Fowks, 10 K.L.R. 257 (1961).

"Liquor Regulation, Racial Discrimination, and Private Clubs in Kansas," Elizabeth Dyson, 13 K.L.R. 135 (1964).

Discrimination against Indians, Jerry L. Bean, 20 K.L.R. 468, 475, 482, 485 (1972).

Summary of 1972 legislature, Robert F. Bennett, 41 J.B.A.K. 7, 10 (1972).

"State Control of Local Government in Kansas: Special Legislation and Home Rule," Barkley Clark, 20 K.L.R. 631, 659 (1972).

"Employment Discrimination in Kansas," 13 W.L.J. 511, 513 (1974).

"Women Under the Law: The Pedestal or the Cage?" Louise A. Wheeler, 43 J.B.A.K. 25, 53 (1974).

Private employer's denial of disability benefits for pregnancy leave, 16 W.L.J. 745, 753 (1977).

"The Law and Handicapped Persons: Achieving Equality Through New Rights," Karl Menninger II and William J. Dittmeier, 47 J.B.A.K. 181, 185 (1978).

"Constitutional Law: Standing Under the Fair Housing Act," Mary Beth Mudrick, 19 W.L.J. 359, 364 (1980).

"Wrongful Discharge: Erosion of the Employment at Will Doctrine," Sheila Janicke, Marilyn Crabtree, Vol. VIII, No. 2, J.K.T.L.A. 6 (1984).

"Private Sector Drug Testing: Employer Rights, Risks and Responsibilities," L. Camille Hebert, 36 K.L.R. 823, 849 (1988).

"Personnel Policy Manuals as Legally Enforceable Contracts: The Implied-in-Fact Contract—A Limitation on the Employer's Right to Terminate at Will," Michael D. Strong, 29 W.L.J. 368, 373 (1990).

"Statutory Interpretation: Boy Scouts in the Bible Belt; Boy Scouts' Rejection of Atheist Not Illegal in Kansas, [Seabourn v. Coronado Area Council, Boy Scouts of America, 891 P.2d 385 (Kan. 1995)]," 35 W.L.J. 359, 367 (1996).

"1999 Legislative Wrap Up," Ron Smith, 68 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 16 (1999).

"Twenty Years After Murphy v. City of Topeka: An overview of Kansas Retaliatory and Public Policy Wrongful Discharge Law," Michael L. Matula, 72 J.K.B.A. No. 2, 20 (2003).

"Immigration Law Update for Employment, Corporate and Business Lawyers," Kathleen Harvey, Alfred Huff and Mira Maivani, 74 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 6, 45 (2005).

"The Supreme Court Lowers the Bar on Unlawful Retaliation Claims in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White," Aida M. Alaka 76 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 19 (2007).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Unlawful discriminatory practices; application to Rotary clubs. 87-96.

County attorney's office required to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act. 2001-23.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Act bars discrimination, does not require integration; school board is not required to transfer teachers to obtain integration of faculty; discrimination defined. Londerholm v. Unified School District, 199 Kan. 312, 313, 330, 332, 430 P.2d 188.

2. Act does not conflict with city human relations ordinance; civil rights in employment matters not preempted from local action. Hutchinson Human Relations Comm. v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., 213 Kan. 308, 314, 315, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 517 P.2d 158.

3. Motion to dismiss sustained in action to obtain records; not an appeal; trial court lacked jurisdiction. City of Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, Office of State Employment Service, 213 Kan. 399, 402, 517 P.2d 117.

4. Violation of act charged; subpoena powers not limited by K.S.A. 44-1004 or 44-1005. Yellow Freight System, Inc. v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 214 Kan. 120, 121, 519 P.2d 1092.

5. Referred to in setting aside injunction and judgment; administrative remedies not exhausted. Jarvis v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 902, 903, 528 P.2d 1232.

6. Applied in determining amended notice of investigation sufficient; specificity in charges not required until adjudicatory stage. Atchison, T.&S.F. Rly. Co. v. Commission on Civil Rights, 215 Kan. 911, 916, 927, 529 P.2d 666; original opinion adhered to, 217 Kan. 15, 535 P.2d 917.

7. Subpoena issued under K.S.A. 44-1004 for arrest and conviction records not constitutionally impermissible as violative of employee's right of privacy. Atchison, T.& S.F. Rly. Co. v. Lopez, 216 Kan. 108, 121, 531 P.2d 455.

8. Unfair credit practices held to be within the purview of the act. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 216 Kan. 306, 310, 311, 532 P.2d 1263.

9. Complaint filed under act; K.S.A. 44-1004 (5) construed and applied; subpoena duces tecum; signature, service and hearing provisions; modification. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights v. Carlton, 216 Kan. 735, 736, 533 P.2d 1335.

10. Act does not cover governmental conduct other than employment, public accommodations and housing. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights v. Howard, 218 Kan. 248, 250, 252, 256, 544 P.2d 791.

11. Act did not cover investigation of municipal police department where failure to advise subject of investigation. City of Independence v. Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, 218 Kan. 243, 244, 544 P.2d 799.

12. Referred to in determining validity of antenuptial agreement (dissenting opinion). Ranney v. Ranney, 219 Kan. 428, 434, 548 P.2d 734.

13. No right to appeal "no probable cause" determination of investigating commissioner under K.S.A. 44-1011. Bush v. City of Wichita, 223 Kan. 651, 652, 653, 655, 576 P.2d 1071.

14. Mentioned; no appeal from "no probable cause" determination by Civil Rights Commission. Van Scoyk v. St. Mary's Assumption Parochial School, 224 Kan. 304, 305, 580 P.2d 1315.

15. Time for appeal from district court decision under this act governed by K.S.A. 44-1011, not by K.S.A. 60-2103(a). Everett v. Blue Cross-Blue Shield Ass'n, 225 Kan. 63, 587 P.2d 873.

16. Cited as governing equal employment opportunities for school district job applicants and employees; not negotiable under K.S.A. 72-5413 et seq. Tri-County Educators' Association v. Tri-County Special Education Cooperative, 225 Kan. 781, 786, 594 P.2d 207.

17. Judgment affirmed in sex discrimination case; subpoena power of commission cannot be unreasonable or oppressive. Cessna Aircraft Co. v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 229 Kan. 15, 16, 17, 34, 622 P.2d 124.

18. Showing of relevancy must be made if trial court is to have basis to determine if subpoena is unreasonable or oppressive. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights v. Chance Mfg. Co., 6 Kan. App. 2d 61, 627 P.2d 332.

19. Claim based on act dismissed; court held pendent jurisdiction should not be exercised. Davis v. Modine MFG. Co., 526 F. Supp. 943, 958 (1981).

20. Nonhiring of handicapped person upheld; job-related physical condition not "physically handicapped" for purposes of hereof. U.S.D. No. 259 v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 7 Kan. App. 2d 319, 640 P.2d 1291 (1982).

21. Complainant has burden of proving unlawful discrimination; commission has no authority to award compensatory or punitive damages. Woods v. Midwest Conveyor Co., 231 Kan. 763, 767, 775, 776, 777, 782, 648 P.2d 234 (1982).

22. No authority in collection proceeding to join parties who were not parties to original proceedings before the KCCR. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights v. Service Envelope Co., 233 Kan. 20, 21, 22, 26, 660 P.2d 549 (1983).

23. Though complainant must initially present prima facie case of discrimination, respondent may overcome by preponderance of evidence. Reber v. Mel Falley, Inc., 235 Kan. 562, 565, 683 P.2d 229 (1984).

24. Burden of proof and scope of appellate review of trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law considered. Woods v. Midwest Conveyor Co., 236 Kan. 734, 736, 697 P.2d 52 (1985).

25. Myopia corrected to 20/20 vision not substantial disability; no violation in failing to hire as police officer. Padilla v. City of Topeka, 238 Kan. 218, 228, 708 P.2d 543 (1985).

26. Statutory authority pertaining to KCCR does not include award of compensatory damages. State ex rel. Secretary of S.R.S. v. Fomby, 11 Kan. App. 2d 138, 143, 715 P.2d 1045 (1986).

27. Cited; failure to seek judicial review of teacher employment termination under K.S.A. 72-5436 et seq. precludes complaint hereunder. Neunzig v. Seaman U.S.D. No. 345, 239 Kan. 654, 655, 662, 722 P.2d 569 (1986).

28. Cited; exhaustion of administrative remedies following employment termination (K.S.A. 75-2949) before pursuing independent civil action (K.S.A. 75-2929) examined. Mattox v. Department of Transportation, 12 Kan. App. 2d 403, 747 P.2d 174 (1987).

29. KCCR; lacks jurisdiction to investigate complaints of discrimination in public schools. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights v U.S.D. No. 501, 243 Kan. 137, 755 P.2d 539 (1988).

30. Order issued under act not res judicata for civil action arising out of same incident and same statutory authority. Parker v. Kansas Neurological Institute, 13 Kan. App. 2d 685, 778 P.2d 390 (1989).

31. Act provides an adequate and exclusive state remedy for violations of public policy enunciated therein. Polson v. Davis, 895 F.2d 705, 706, 709 (1990).

32. Review by trial and appellate courts noted; shifting burden of proof in sex (K.S.A. 44-1009) and age (K.S.A. 44-1113) discrimination complaints examined. Kansas State Univ. v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 14 Kan. App. 2d 428, 429, 796 P.2d 1046 (1990).

33. Poor credit record of female applicant for firefighter position as reason for rejection constituted gender discrimination. Scott v. City of Topeka Police & Fire Civil Serv., 739 F. Supp. 1434 (1990).

34. Employee as not assuming risk of rape at place of employment noted, notwithstanding knowledge of risk. Perkins v. Spivey, 911 F.2d 22 (1990).

35. Exception to employment-at-will doctrine not recognized; plaintiff had remedy under federal or state law. Harris v. Board of Public Utilities of Kansas City, 757. 1185, 1193, 1194 (1991).

36. State law F. Supp claim may not be brought in federal civil rights action; state remedies adequate and exclusive. Guliford v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 768 F. Supp. 313, 320 (1991).

37. Plaintiff's cause of action for outrage not preempted by Kansas Act Against Discrimination. Laughinghouse v. Risser, 786 F. Supp. 920, 930 (1992).

38. Sectarian corporation not employer for purposes of act; (16 Kan. App. 2d 237, 821 P.2d 334 (1991) aff'd.). Zion Lutheran Church v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 251 Kan. 206, 830 P.2d 536 (1992).

39. Cited; construction and application of time allowed for filing petition with KCCR. United Steelworkers of America v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 17 Kan. App. 2d 863, 866, 845 P.2d 89 (1993).

40. Act requires petition for reconsideration (K.S.A. 44-1010) by agency as prerequisite to action in district court. United Steelworkers of America v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 253 Kan. 327, 330, 855 P.2d 905 (1993).

41. HRC lacks jurisdiction to fine or penalize a nonprofit association or corporation not coming within definition herein. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n v. Topeka Golf Ass'n, 18 Kan. App. 2d 581, 586, 856 P.2d 515 (1993).

42. Claimant must file motion to reconsider KHRC order to satisfy administrative exhaustion doctrine. Simmons v. Vliets Farmers Coop Ass'n, 19 Kan. App. 2d 1, 861 P.2d 1345 (1993).

43. Whether terminated plaintiff who claims illegal age discrimination can also claim breach of implied contract of employment examined. Conyers v. Safelite Glass Corp., 825 F. Supp. 974, 975 (1993).

44. Whether plaintiff must receive unfavorable determination from KHRC before litigating KAAD (K.S.A. 44-1001 et seq.) claims examined. Dorner v. Polsinelli, White, Vardeman and Shalton, 856 F. Supp. 1483, 1489 (1994).

45. Whether employer discharged employee for economic reasons precluding employee's age discrimination claim examined. Malek v. Martin Marrietta Corp., 859 F. Supp. 458, 459 (1994).

46. Whether federal trial court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over KAAD claim arising from termination of state employee examined. Brinkman v. State, Dept. of Corrections, 863 F. Supp. 1479, 1488 (1994).

47. Whether plaintiff met burden of proof that gender discrimination was substantial factor in termination examined. Garcia-Pax v. Swift Textiles, Inc., 873 F. Supp. 547, 557 (1995).

48. Whether aggrieved party may bring tort action against employer for sexual harassment under KAAD examined. Schweitzer-Reschke v. Avent, Inc., 874 F. Supp. 1187, 1198 (1995).

49. Whether plaintiff's KAAD claims were barred by failure to exhaust administrative remedies examined. Davidson v. MAC Equipment, Inc., 878 F. Supp. 186, 189 (1995).

50. Whether plaintiff met burden of proof with respect to the possibility of reasonable accommodation examined. McDonald v. State of Ks. Dept. of Corrections, 880 F. Supp. 1416, 1424 (1995).

51. Whether former employees failed to present evidence sufficient to support gender discrimination claim examined. Castleberry v. Boeing, 880 F. Supp. 1435, 1440 (1995).

52. Whether anatomically male transsexual established prima facie case of sex discrimination in reverse discrimination claim examined. James v. Ranch Mart Hardware, Inc., 881 F. Supp. 478, 480 (1995).

53. Claim of outrage not preempted by KAAD. Oliphant v. Perkins Restaurants Operating Co., 885 F. Supp. 1486, 1493 (1995).

54. Employee was required to file KAAD complaint within six months after termination. Aramburu v. Boeing Co., 911 F. Supp. 1377, 1390 (1995).

55. Employee's allegations regarding retaliatory discharge sufficient to state claim under KAAD. Spillman v. Carter, 918 F. Supp. 336, 343 (1996).

56. Employee failed to exhaust administrative remedies on KAAD (K.S.A. 44-1001 et seq.) claim. Grady by and through Gaddy v. Four B Corp., 953 F. Supp. 331, 334 (1997).

57. Plaintiff failed to prove he was discharged on account of carpal tunnel syndrome. Aramburu v. The Boeing Co., 112 F.3d 1398, 1412 (1997).

58. Whistleblower claim by plaintiff in employee retaliatory termination case was not preempted by KAAD. Garcia-Harding v. Bank Midwest, N.A., 964 F. Supp. 1492, 1506 (1997).

59. Employee was estopped from claiming she could perform essential functions of job without reasonable accommodation. Hiebert v. IFR Systems, Inc., 977 F. Supp. 1095 (1997).

60. Employee failed to establish prima facie race discrimination claim under act. Randolph v. Board of Public Utilities, Kansas City, 983 F. Supp. 1008, 1014 (1997).

61. Arbitration ruling awarding employee KAAD damages which did not display manifest disregard for law upheld. Durkin v. Cigna Property & Cas. Corp., 986 F. Supp. 1356, 1357 (1997).

62. Fact issue regarding whether reason for termination was pretext for race discrimination precluded summary judgment. Richardson v. Topeka Metro Transit Authority, 987 F. Supp. 887, 890 (1997).

63. Employee failed to state claim of retaliatory discharge under act. Barnard v. ADM Milling Co., Inc., 987 F. Supp. 1337, 1344 (1997).

64. Substantial competent evidence supported district court's ruling in racial discrimination/hostile work environment/constructive discharge case brought hereunder. Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n, 265 Kan. 484, 961 P.2d 696 (1998).

65. Plaintiff was precluded from filing KAAD claim because of failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Gazaway v. Makita U.S.A., Inc., 11 F. Supp. 2d 1281, 1285 (1998).

66. Issue concerning whether age was a factor in employee's termination precluded summary judgment. Schindler v. Bierwith Chrysler/Plymouth, Inc., 15 F. Supp. 2d 1054, 1055 (1998).

67. Issue concerning whether university's proffered reason for not hiring applicant was national origin discrimination precluded summary judgment. Mohankumar v. Dunn, 59 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1131 (1999).

68. Termination of employee was for legitimate reason and not for race discrimination. Papin v. Lotton, 72 F. Supp. 2d 1264, 1270 (1999).

69. Dealer's sales event did not create hostile work environment. Temple v. Auto Banc of Kansas, Inc., 76 F. Supp. 2d 1124, 1128 (1999).

70. Issue concerning city's response to alleged sexual harassment precluded summary judgment. Dunegan v. City of Council Grove, Kan. Water Dept., 77 F. Supp. 2d 1192, 1202 (1999).

71. Injured employee terminated when unable to return to prior position; claim for failure to accommodate must be under Kansas act against discrimination not workers compensation act. Thidsorn v. Excel Corporation, 27 Kan. App. 2d 735, 8 P.3d 49 (2000).

72. Events predating period of limitations may provide a basis for recovery because they were part of a continuing pattern of discrimination. Rebarchek v. Farmers Co-op Elevator & Mercantile Ass'n, 28 Kan. App. 2d 104, 13 P.3d 17 (2000).

73. Claimant who filed state suit after receiving federal right to sue letter did not exhaust administrative remedies. Ratts v. Board of County Com'r, Harvey County, KS., 141 F. Supp. 2d 1289, 1298 (2001).

74. Employee precluded from pursuing state common law claim under public policy exception to the employment at-will doctrine. Williams v. Prison Health Services, Inc., 159 F. Supp. 2d 1301, 1315 (2001).

75. Ex parte communications between plaintiff's attorney and city official warranted award of fees and disqualification of attorney. Hammond v. City of Junction City, Kansas, 167 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1272 (2001).

76. Returned to trial court upon overturning summary judgment but only employer, not supervising employee, may be liable in retaliatory discharge action. Rebarchek v. Farmers Co-op Elevator & Mercantile Ass'n, 272 Kan. 546, 35 P.3d 892 (2001).

77. Material fact issue concerning whether workplace constituted hostile work environment precluded summary judgment. Munoz v. Western Resources, Inc., 225 F. Supp. 2d 1265, 1266 (2002).

78. Plaintiff failed to state prima facie case of race discrimination under KAAD. Tomita v. University of Kansas Medical Center, 227 F. Supp. 2d 1171, 1180 (2002).

79. Employee plaintiff exhausted administrative remedies before filing federal title VII claim. Budenz v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P., 230 F. Supp. 2d 1261, 1272 (2002).

80. Material fact issue concerning whether plaintiff was not chosen for position because of gender precluded summary judgment. Berroth v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., Inc., 232 F. Supp. 2d 1244, 1248 (2002).

81. Material fact issue concerning whether plaintiff was subjected to racially hostile work environment precluded summary judgment. Watson v. City of Topeka, 241 F. Supp. 2d 1223, 1230 (2002).

82. Trial court applied same standards and burdens to employee's KAAD claim as to ADA claim. Holopirek v. Kennedy and Coe, LLC, 303 F. Supp. 2d 1223, 1229 (2004).

83. Plaintiff's allegations of sexual harassment sufficient to be considered by jury. Labra v. Mid-Plains Constr., Inc., 32 Kan. App. 2d 821, 90 P.3d 954 (2004).

84. Same standards and burdens applied to ADA claims are also applied to KAAD claims. Kinchion v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 504 F. Supp. 2d 1137, 1142 (2007).

85. Plaintiff's reasonable accommodation and termination ADA claims affirmed; dismissed on summary judgment. Proctor v. United Parcel Service, 502 F.3d 1200 (10 th Cir. 2007).

86. Age discrimination under Kansas law evaluated using same criteria as federal act. Anderson v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 529 F. Supp. 2d 1270, 1272, 1277 (2008).

87. Federal decisions applying Title VII are persuasive authority in construing KAAD claims. Allen v. Garden City Co-op, Inc., 651 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (D. Kan. 2009).

88. Alternative remedies doctrine precluded cause of action for violation of public policy of Kansas Act Against Discrimination. Daniels v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 797 F. Supp. 2d 1163 (D. Kan. 2011).

89. No adverse employment action found in the termination of African-American employee for time-records falsification. Skar v. Spirit Aerosystems, Inc., 798 F. Supp. 2d 1204 (D. Kan. 2011).