Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-212

When matters outside the pleadings are presented on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the motion may be treated as one for summary judgment, and the parties should receive a reasonable opportunity to present pertinent material.

Stratmann v. Stratmann · filed 1970-03-07(c)

If matters outside the pleadings are presented to the court on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the motion may be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K. S. A. 60-256. In such case the parties should be given reasonable opportunity to present all material pertinent to the questions involved. (K. S. A. 60-212 (c).) This was not done in the present case.

Under subsection (c), a motion to dismiss must be treated as a motion for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings are considered.

Voth v. Coleman · filed 1997-10-10(c)

Voth argues that because the trial court considered matters outside the pleadings, the motion to dismiss must be treated as one for summary judgment under K.S.A. 60-212(c). We agree.

Section 60-212(b) permits a court to exclude materials outside the pleadings and decide a motion to dismiss without treating it as a motion for summary judgment.

Goldbarth v. Kansas State Board of Regents · filed 2000-07-26(b)

The district judge’s knowledge of fácts other than those contained in the pleadings is not grounds for a reversal here. He ultimately decided he would not consider documents outside the petition. We find no error in the district court’s procedural ruling.

When a district court considers matters outside the pleadings, its decision is reviewed under the summary judgment standard.

Miller v. KVC Behavioral Healthcare, Inc. · filed 2022-01-28(d)

Because the district court considered matters outside the pleadings in rendering its decision, we apply the same standard of review as we do for summary judgment. See Fairfax Portfolio LLC v. Carojoto LLC, 312 Kan. 92, 94, 472 P.3d 53 (2020); K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(d).

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal based on an affirmative defense only when the defense clearly appears on the face of the petition.

Weaver v. Frazee · filed 1976-03-06(b)(6)

It is only when such defenses clearly appear on the face of the petition that it is subject to dismissal under 60-212 (b) (6) (as amended) for failure to state a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court to consider whether a petition’s allegations support relief on any possible legal theory, even if they do not support the plaintiff’s chosen theory.

Monroe v. Darr · filed 1974-04-06(b)(6)

“The complaint should not be dismissed merely because plaintiff’s allegations do not support the legal theory he intends to proceed on, since the court is under a duty to examine the complaint to determine if the allegations provide for relief on any possible theory.” ... The federal view appears sound in principle because all that is required of a petition is that it contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief (K. S. A. 60-208 [a]) and, accordingly, we adopt that view.

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal when a complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; the court evaluates the well-pled facts and reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor.

E.H. v. Kansas Dept. for Children and Families · filed 2021-09-10(b)(6)

In response to a petition, a defendant can file a motion asserting the complaint fails to "state a claim upon which relief can be granted." K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(b)(6). "'When a defendant uses [K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6)] to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, the court must decide the issue based only on the well-pled facts and allegations, which are generally drawn from the petition. Courts must resolve every factual dispute in the plaintiff's favor when determining whether the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate that the plaintiff does not have a claim. Halley v. Barnabe, 271 Kan. 652, 656, 24 P.3d 140 (2001) (citing Ripley v. Tolbert, 260 Kan. 491, 493, 921 P.2d 1210 [1996], and Bruggeman v. Schimke, 239 Kan. 245, 247-48, 718 P.2d 635 [1986]). Likewise, appellate courts reviewing a district court's decision to grant a motion to dismiss will assume as true the well-pled facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, dismissal is improper. Cohen v. Battaglia, 296 Kan. 542, 545-46, 293 P.3d 752 (2013).' Steckline Communications, Inc. v. Journal Broadcast Group of KS, Inc., 305 Kan. 761, 767-68, 388 P.3d 84 (2017)." Williams, 310 Kan. at 784.

A motion to dismiss for legal insufficiency is decided from the plaintiff’s well-pleaded facts and may be treated as the modern equivalent of a demurrer.

Robertson v. McCune · filed 1970-07-17(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K. S. A. 60-212 (b) (6), [now 1969 Supp.], raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff’s petition. The motion in such case may be treated as the modem equivalent of a demurrer.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal of legally insufficient pleadings even when the pleaded facts are taken as true.

Hokanson v. Lichtor · filed 1981-03-27(b)(6)

The purpose of K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) is to dismiss legally insufficient pleadings even though everything they plead is taken as true.

Subsection (b)(6) requires a court reviewing a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim to decide the motion from the petition's well-pleaded facts, assumed true.

Robertson v. City of Topeka · filed 1982-05-08(b)(6)

Whether dismissal pursuant to K.S.A. 60-212( b )(6) was appropriate must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff's petition. Weil & Associates v. Urban Renewal Agency, 206 Kan. 405, 413, 479 P.2d 875 (1971); Robertson v. McCune, 205 Kan. 696, 700, 472 P.2d 215 (1970); Knight v. Neodesha Police Dept., 5 Kan. App.2d 472, 475, 620 P.2d 837 (1980). For purposes of review, this court assumes the facts pleaded to be true.

A dismissal under K.S.A. 60-212(h)(6) for failure to state a claim is an adjudication on the merits with res judicata effect.

Wirt v. Esrey · filed 1983-04-29(h)(6)

Therefore, clearly the court rendered the decision pursuant to 60-212(h)(6) — failure to state a claim. The basic difference among the various 60-212(h) motions is that 60-212(h)(6) alone necessitates a ruling on the legal sufficiency of plaintiff s claim; the others deal with procedural defects. Because of this, the plaintiff is afforded the safeguard of having all its allegations taken as true and all inferences favorable to plaintiff will be drawn. ... This court must, therefore, conclude that the judgment in Case No. 49,941 was “on the merits,” with res judicata effect.

Subsection (h)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim, and the court must examine the petition for any possible theory of relief.

Dutoit v. Board of Johnson County Comm'rs · filed 1983-07-15(h)(6)

“Disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss for failure of the petition to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. ... Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.” ... The court is under a duty to examine the petition to determine whether its allegations state a claim for relief on any possible theory.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition's allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim for relief, while requiring consideration of any possible legal theory supported by the pleaded facts.

Wicina v. Strecker · filed 1987-12-11(b)(6)

When a district judge sustains a motion to dismiss a plaintiff s petition, we are under a duty to examine the petition to determine whether its allegations state a claim for relief on any possible theory. It is not necessary for the petition to spell out a legal theory for relief so long as an opponent is apprised of the facts that entitle the plaintiff to relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim must be denied unless the petition, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, clearly shows that the plaintiff cannot obtain relief under any provable set of facts.

Palmer v. Brown · filed 1988-03-25(b)(6)

A motion to dismiss for failure of the plaintiff to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), must be denied unless the allegations in the petition, viewed in the most favorable light to the plaintiff, clearly demonstrate the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts which could be proved in support of the claim.

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim when, accepting the allegations as true, the petitioner could prove no set of facts entitling the petitioner to relief.

Shepherd v. Davies · filed 1990-04-13(b)(6)

A petition may be dismissed under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim when it appears “beyond doubt” petitioner can prove no set of facts which would entitle him to relief. ... All allegations in the petition must be taken as true and “ ‘[t]he question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in plaintiffs favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief.’ ”

On a motion under § 60-212(b)(6), the court considers the petition’s well-pleaded facts and draws inferences in the plaintiff’s favor to determine whether the petition states any valid claim for relief.

Gillespie v. Seymour · filed 1990-05-04(b)(6)

As previously stated, when ruling on a motion to dismiss pursuant to K. S.A. 60-212(b)(6), the motion must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of a plaintiffs petition. The question to be decided is whether, in the light most favorable to a plaintiff, the petition states any valid claim for relief.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion challenging the legal sufficiency of a claim to be decided from the well-pleaded facts, treating the motion as the modern equivalent of a demurrer.

Noel v. Pizza Hut, Inc. · filed 1991-02-15(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiffs petition. The motion in such case may be treated as the modem equivalent of a demurrer.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when, accepting well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor, the petition clearly states no valid claim for relief.

Blevins v. Board of Douglas County Comm'rs · filed 1992-07-10(b)(6)

“ ‘When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiffs petition. The motion in such cáse may be treated as the modem equivalent of a demurrer.’ Syl. ¶ 1. ... “ ‘Disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss for failure of the petition to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in plaintiffs favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.’ Syl. ¶ 2. ... Considering all the facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs, we hold the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Section 60-212(b)(6) tests the legal sufficiency of a claim from the petition’s well-pleaded facts and permits the motion to be treated as the modern equivalent of a demurrer.

Lindenman v. Umscheid · filed 1994-06-03(b)(6)

“ “When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff’s petition. The motion in such case may be treated as the modem equivalent of a demurrer.’ Syl. ¶ 1.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition's well-pleaded facts, viewed favorably to the plaintiff, show no valid claim for relief.

Kansans for Fair Taxation, Inc. v. Miller · filed 1995-02-03(fc)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(fc)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff’s petition. The motion in such case may be treated as the modem equivalent of a demurrer. ... Disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss for failure of the petition to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in plaintiff’s favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition's allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim, based on the well-pleaded facts.

Miller v. Sloan, Listrom, Eisenbarth, Sloan & Glassman · filed 1999-04-23(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiffs complaint. K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.

A motion under § 60-212(b)(6) tests legal sufficiency from the complaint’s well-pleaded facts, and dismissal is proper only when the allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim.

Grindsted Products, Inc. v. Kansas Corporation Comm'n · filed 1997-04-25(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff’s complaint. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits a defendant to seek dismissal for failure to state a claim and directs that the motion be treated as a summary-judgment motion under § 60-256.

McCormick v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rs · filed 2001-12-07(b)(6)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), a defendant may move for dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Procedurally, such a motion “shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256 and amendments thereto . . . .” In the absence of an understandable statement by McCormick that Long’s actions were outside the scope of her employment, we hold that Long is entitled to dismissal of the state tort law claims under the discretionary function exception to the KTCA.

A petition should seldom be dismissed under subsection (b)(6) before discovery, and the court must determine whether the pleaded facts and inferences state a claim under any possible theory.

Families Against Corporate Takeover v. Mitchell · filed 2000-03-10(b)(6)

Dismissal of a petition on a K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) motion before utilization of discovery is seldom warranted.

On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, disputed facts are not resolved; the petition is viewed favorably to the plaintiff, and dismissal is proper only when the allegations clearly show that no claim exists.

McCormick v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rs · filed 2001-03-30(b)(6)

“Disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss for failure of the petition to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in plaintiff s favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.”

A motion under § 60-212(b)(6) tests whether the petition states a legally sufficient claim, and dismissal is premature when the well-pleaded allegations and reasonable inferences support a claim.

Nelson Energy Programs, Inc. v. Oil & Gas Technology Fund, Inc. · filed 2006-08-25(b)(6)

To the extent the district court dismissed Nelson’s action based upon the understanding that Nelson had no partitionable interest, the court’s dismissal must be characterized as a judgment on the pleadings that Nelson failed to state a claim for relief. See K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), (c).

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss challenging legal sufficiency to be decided from the well-pleaded facts in the plaintiff’s petition.

Rector v. Tatham · filed 2008-01-11(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) contests the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff s petition.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires the legal sufficiency of a claim to be decided from the complaint’s well-pleaded facts, and dismissal is proper only when those allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim.

Estate of Beckner v. Jensen · filed 2001-05-11(b)(6)

“When a motion to dismiss raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiffs complaint. K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim. [Citation omitted.]”

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal only when the petition's well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences fail to state any valid claim for relief.

Knop v. GARDNER EDGERTON UNIFIED SCH. DIST. · filed 2009-04-10(b)(6)

"When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issues concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff's petition." ... "A district court may not dismiss a petition under K.S.A. 60-212(b) unless the facts and inferences fail to state a claim on any possible theory."

On a motion under subsection (b)(6), the court decides legal sufficiency from the well-pleaded facts, and dismissal is proper only when the allegations clearly show no claim.

Hemphill v. Shore · filed 2012-12-07(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff s petition. K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). Dismissal is justified only when the plaintiff s allegations clearly demonstrate that plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits a defendant to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, requiring the court to credit well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences and dismiss only when the allegations clearly show that no claim for relief exists.

Williams v. C-U-Out Bail Bonds · filed 2019-10-11(b)(6)

"When a defendant uses [K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6)] to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, the court must decide the issue based only on the well-pled facts and allegations, which are generally drawn from the petition. Courts must resolve every factual dispute in the plaintiff's favor when determining whether the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate that the plaintiff does not have a claim. Halley v. Barnabe, 271 Kan. 652, 656, 24 P.3d 140 (2001) (citing Ripley v. Tolbert, 260 Kan. 491, 493, 921 P.2d 1210 [1996], and Bruggeman v. Schimke, 239 Kan. 245, 247-48, 718 P.2d 635 [1986]). Likewise, appellate courts reviewing a district court's decision to grant a motion to dismiss will assume as true the well-pled facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, dismissal is improper. Cohen v. Battaglia, 296 Kan. 542, 545-46, 293 P.3d 752 (2013)."

Subsection (b)(6) permits a court to dismiss a petition that fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Crosby v. ESIS Insurance · filed 2020-10-30(b)(6)

K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) allows a court to dismiss a petition that "fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." Motions brought under this provision test the legal tenability of the plaintiff's claims. For this reason, we exercise unlimited review over a district court's grant of a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(b)(6). We interpret a petition's pleaded facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and assume that those facts are true (along with any inferences reasonably drawn from them). If the pleaded facts and inferences therefrom state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim, but a petition survives when its well-pled facts and reasonable inferences state any claim for relief.

Mattice v. City of Stafford · filed 2021-09-17(b)(6)

The City argues Mattice has failed to adequately state a claim pursuant to K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). We find that the Amended Petition states a claim for retaliatory discharge for whistleblowing sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss.

Subsection (b)(6) authorizes dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Danzman v. Herington Municipal Hosp. Bd. of Trustees · filed 2022-09-09(b)(6)

We, therefore, reverse and remand to the district court with directions to dismiss this action without prejudice under K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal when a petition fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted, and such a dismissal is typically without prejudice when no insurmountable legal bar appears on the face of the petition.

Miles v. State · filed 2022-11-10(b)(6)

In summary, we conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing Miles' petition under K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim of false imprisonment on which relief can be granted. However, we note that the district court's memorandum decision and order is silent on whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. Based on our review of Miles' short petition, we see no insurmountable legal bar to the claim as it appears on the face of the petition. In that circumstance, a dismissal for failure to state a claim under K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) typically would be without prejudice. As a result, we construe the dismissal to be without prejudice and affirm on that basis.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim, but the court generally considers only the petition and reasonable inferences, with a narrow exception for an undisputedly authentic written instrument central to the claim; it may not resolve factual disputes or rely on non-central documents at that stage.

Rogers v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. · filed 2024-06-07(b)(6)

These decisions demonstrate that when a plaintiff asserts a claim based on a written instrument, courts will consider an undisputedly authentic copy of that written instrument attached to a motion to dismiss without converting the motion to a request for summary judgment. But courts will not resolve factual questions surrounding those instruments as part of a K.S.A. 60-212(b) motion. Nor will courts consider documents attached to a motion to dismiss that are not central to the plaintiff's claim or when there is a reasonable question about their applicability or authenticity.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires courts ruling on a failure-to-state-a-claim motion to accept factual allegations as true, but not legal conclusions.

T.R. v. University of Kansas Med. Ctr. · filed 2024-07-05(b)(6)

KUMC sought dismissal under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. When considering a motion under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), a court must accept the plaintiff's factual allegations as true, but "there is nothing which requires a court to treat legal conclusions contained within the petition as also being true." Duckworth v. City of Kansas City, 243 Kan. 386, 391, 758 P.2d 201 (1988).

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; when reviewing such a dismissal, the court accepts the plaintiff's alleged facts and reasonable inferences as true and determines whether they state a claim under the asserted or another possible theory.

Harding v. Capitol Federal Savings Bank · filed 2024-10-04(b)(6)

When a district court has granted a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, an appellate court must accept the facts alleged by the plaintiff as true, along with any inferences that can reasonably be drawn therefrom. The appellate court then decides whether those facts and inferences state a claim based on plaintiff's theory or any other possible theory. If so, the dismissal by the district court must be reversed.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires dismissal only when the petition's well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences fail to state a viable claim under any legal theory, with the allegations viewed in the plaintiff's favor.

Brull v. Kansas Dept. for Aging and Disability Svcs. · filed 2024-11-01(b)(6)

The Kansas standard asks whether the factual assertions in the petition state a viable claim under any legal theory—not just the ones the plaintiff has identified. In considering a motion to dismiss, the district court must credit as true both the well-pleaded factual allegations in the plaintiff's petition and any reasonable inferences drawn from those assertions. The district court should not dismiss if those allegations and inferences present any viable legal claim. ... In reviewing a district court's decision to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), we apply the same standard and assess the allegations of the petition without any deference to that decision.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal at the outset when a petition fails to state a legally cognizable claim for relief.

Circle Bear v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte Co./Kansas City, KS · filed 2024-12-20(b)(6)

K.S.A. 2023 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) allows a petition to be dismissed if it "fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Under this provision, a district court may dismiss a petition at the outset of litigation when the petition raises no legally cognizable claims. Minjarez-Almeida v. Kansas Bd. of Regents, 63 Kan. App. 2d 225, 232, 527 P.3d 931 (2023). ... The district court did not err when it dismissed Circle Bear's claims against the State under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6).

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal only when the petition and reasonable inferences fail to state a claim under any possible legal theory.

McGarrah v. Connell · filed 2025-05-02(b)(6)

We agree that a district court may not dismiss a petition under K.S.A. 60-212(b) unless the facts and inferences fail to state a claim on any possible theory.

Subsection (b)(6) supplies the Kansas standard for deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, which is more liberal than the federal plausibility standard.

Greene v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue · filed 2025-09-26(b)(6)

Instead, the district court should have used the standard the Kansas Supreme Court has recognized for considering motions to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). League of Women Voters of Kansas, 318 Kan. at 793. This mistake did not impact the district court's analysis, but even if it had, this error is neutralized by the de novo standard of review exercised by this court on appeal.

On a motion to dismiss, the court must accept the petition's factual allegations and reasonable inferences as true, and dismissal is proper only when they support no possible claim for relief.

In re Eugene Parks Wise Trust · filed 2026-01-02(b)(6)

A petition may be dismissed if it "fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." K.S.A. 2024 Supp. 60-212(b)(6). When a defendant requests dismissal under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), the district court "'must resolve every factual dispute in the plaintiff's favor.'" Kudlacik v. Johnny's Shawnee, Inc., 309 Kan. 788, 790, 440 P.3d 576 (2019). The district court must assume all the factual allegations in the petition—along with any reasonable inferences from those allegations—are true. The district court then determines whether the plaintiff has stated a claim "based on [the] plaintiff's theory or any other possible theory." See Cohen v. Battaglia, 296 Kan. 542, 546, 293 P.3d 752 (2013). Dismissal is appropriate only when the well-pleaded facts and inferences therefrom fail to support "'any claim upon which relief can be granted.'" Kudlacik, 309 Kan. at 790.

A court may dismiss a claim before discovery when the pleadings and associated documents show that, even assuming the pleaded facts are true, no relief is available.

Bogina v. 5700 Barton · filed 2026-04-03(b)(6)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6), this type of dismissal occurs before discovery and is based on the district court's review of the pleadings and associated documents. A dismissal for failure to state a claim means that even assuming the accuracy of the pleadings, there is no available relief.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court reviewing a motion to dismiss to view well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences favorably to the plaintiff and treat them as true; dismissal is proper when those facts do not state a claim.

T.U. v. Baker · filed 2026-06-18(b)(6)

The well-pleaded facts are viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, and we assume as true those facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If these facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, dismissal is improper.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal only when the petition’s allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no valid claim for relief.

Weil & Associates v. Urban Renewal Agency · filed 1971-01-23(b)(6)

Obviously, disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss for failure of the petition to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in plaintiff’s favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court assessing the legal sufficiency of a claim to use the complaint’s well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences.

Amundson & Associates Art Studio, Ltd. v. National Council on Compensation Insurance · filed 1999-09-17(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of plaintiff s complaint. A court must accept the plaintiff s description of the events, along with any inferences reasonably to be drawn therefrom.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion challenging the legal sufficiency of a claim to be decided from the well-pleaded facts of the petition.

Dye v. WMC, INC. · filed 2007-11-16(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) contests the legal sufficiency of a claim, the question must be decided from the well-pleaded facts of a plaintiff s petition.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the plaintiff cannot obtain relief under any facts that could be proved in support of the claim.

Keith v. Schiefen-Stockham Insurance Agency, Inc. · filed 1972-06-10(b)(6)

A petition will not be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, unless it appears to a certainty that plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any state of facts which could be proved in support of the claim.

When review is confined to the petition, a motion for summary judgment is treated as a motion to dismiss under subsection (b)(6) and may be granted only if the petition’s allegations clearly show no claim for relief.

Continental Insurance v. Windle · filed 1974-04-06(b)(6)

In such circumstances defendant’s motion is tantamount to a motion to dismiss under K. S. A. 1973 Supp. 60-212 (b) (6) and may be sustained only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate plaintiff does not have a claim for relief (Keith v. Schiefenstockham Insurance Agency, Inc., 209 Kan. 537, 498 P. 2d 265).

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires courts to view the petition in the plaintiff’s favor and permits dismissal only when its allegations clearly show no valid claim for relief.

Woolums v. Simonsen · filed 1974-05-11(b)(6)

Disputed issues of fact cannot be resolved or determined on a motion to dismiss such as this, and the question for determination is whether in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and with every doubt resolved in the plaintiff’s favor, the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is justified only when the allegations of the petition clearly demonstrate that the plaintiff does not have a claim.

A motion to dismiss under subsection (b)(6) is decided from the petition’s allegations.

Gardner v. McDowell · filed 1969-03-08(b)(6)

The motion appears to be a motion to dismiss under K. S. A. 1968 Supp. 60-212 (b) (6) and as such must be determined from the allegations of the petition.

A petition survives a motion to dismiss under subsection (b)(6) when its short and plain statement gives the defendant fair notice of the claim and its grounds.

Kahn v. Denison State Bank · filed 2016-02-19(b)(6)

To survive dismissal under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-212(b)(6), all that is required "is a short and plain statement of a claim that will give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the ground upon which it rests." Rinsley, 221 Kan. at 302. Given that Kahn asserted that the loan-to-value ratio exceeded 100 percent, the district court should have accepted Kahn's assertion and denied the Bank's motion to dismiss.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal of a fraud claim that lacks sufficient particularity, even when the petition is read liberally.

Tuckness v. Shawnee Co. Appraiser's Office · filed 2016-06-17(b)(6)

Even if Tuckness' petition were to be read to infer that he intended to file a cause of action for fraud against the County, dismissal under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) would still be warranted. ... Even if we read Tuckness' petition liberally, as we should, it would be impossible to convert it to a civil action for tortious fraud simply because it does not have sufficient particularity to survive scrutiny.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court considering dismissal for failure to state a claim to give the alleged facts the required deference.

JP Morgan Chase Bank v. Helmstetter · filed 2016-08-12(b)(6)

No further finding or explanation was provided to give this court a basis to assess whether the dismissal was made with the required deference to the alleged facts that is required in ruling on a motion made under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-212(b)(6).

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition’s allegations and reasonable inferences do not state a legally cognizable claim.

T.H. and C.C. v. University of Kansas Hosp. Auth. · filed 2017-01-06(b)(6)

On appeal, this court provides similar review, upholding the district court's decision to grant a motion if the "allegations contained in [the petition] were not legally cognizable." 283 Kan. at 559.

To survive a motion to dismiss when malice is required, a petition must allege facts supporting an inference of malice; the court cannot infer it without factual support.

T.H. and C.C. v. University of Kansas Hosp. Auth. · filed 2017-01-06(b)(6)

But the district court cannot infer malice without some allegation of fact to support such a claim. ... Accordingly, we find that the district court did not err in dismissing Parents' claim on the basis that it was not legally cognizable.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires courts to assess a motion to dismiss on the well-pled allegations, resolve factual disputes in the plaintiff's favor, and dismiss only when those allegations clearly show no claim.

Steckline Communications, Inc. v. Journal Broadcast Group of Kansas, Inc. · filed 2017-01-27(b)(6)

When a defendant uses K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, the court must decide the issue based only on the well-pled facts and allegations, which are generally drawn from the petition. Courts must resolve every factual dispute in the plaintiff's favor when determining whether the petition states any valid claim for relief. Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate that the plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) tests the legal sufficiency of a claim based on the well-pleaded facts in the complaint.

Merryfield v. State · filed 2017-03-10(b)(6)

But under the relevant statute, K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60- 212(b)(6), the legal sufficiency of a claim is determined based on the well-pleaded facts stated in the plaintiff's complaint.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires notice and an opportunity to be heard before dismissal for failure to state a claim; the plaintiff should then have a chance to amend unless an insuperable legal bar appears on the petition's face.

Merryfield v. Kansas Dept. for Aging & Disability Svcs. · filed 2017-03-24(b)(6)

Putting that problem aside, the district court should not have ruled on some hypothetical motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60- 212(b)(6) or for summary judgment under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-256 without first giving the parties notice and an opportunity to be heard. Even having done so, a district court then dismissing an action for failure to state a claim should give the plaintiff a chance to amend his or her petition to cure the deficiencies unless an insuperable legal bar appears on the face of the pleading.

Under § 60-212(b)(6), well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences are taken as true; dismissal is improper if they state any claim for relief.

Matson v. State ex rel. Roberts · filed 2017-07-28(b)(6)

We are permitted to review whether the district court erred by granting the motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim because this is a question of law subject to unlimited appellate review. We view the well-pleaded facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff and assume as true those facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them; if those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then the dismissal was improper.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires courts deciding a motion to dismiss to accept well-pleaded factual allegations as true, but not legal conclusions.

Williams v. C-U-Out Bail Bonds · filed 2017-08-18(b)(6)

Although our standard for considering a motion to dismiss requires us to accept the well-pleaded factual allegations contained in a petition as true, nothing requires us to treat the legal conclusions contained within the petition as also being true.

On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the court must accept the plaintiff's account and reasonable inferences from it.

Macias v. Norwood · filed 2018-03-23(b)(6)

In considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim for relief under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(b)(6), a court must accept the plaintiff's description of that which occurred, along with any inferences reasonably drawn therefrom.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the petition’s well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences, taken as true, do not state a claim for relief.

Endres v. Young – Hill · filed 2018-04-20(b)(6)

During our review, caselaw commands that we must view the well-pleaded facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff and assume as true those facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper. ... The Plaintiffs have stated a claim for the purposes of K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the petition’s allegations establish that the plaintiff has no valid claim.

In re Guardianship of E.C. · filed 2018-07-06(b)(6)

Dismissal for failure to state a claim under K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) is permissible only when the allegations in plaintiff's petition establish that plaintiff does not have a valid claim. ... In summary, Grandparents' petition stated a claim upon which relief could be granted. Therefore, regardless of the trial court's reasoning for denying D.C.'s motion for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted below, the trial court correctly denied D.C.'s motion.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court assessing a claim’s legal sufficiency to rely on the well-pled facts and allegations in the petition.

Kudlacik v. Johnny's Shawnee, Inc. · filed 2019-05-10(b)(6)

When a defendant uses K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, the court must decide the issue based only on the well-pled facts and allegations, which are generally drawn from the petition.

Section 60-212 permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences do not state any claim for relief.

James v. Dodge City Community College · filed 2019-12-06(b)(6)

If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper. K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-212.

Dismissal for failure to state a claim is improper if the pleaded facts and reasonable inferences state any claim for relief.

Allen v. Kansas Association of Counties · filed 2020-05-01(b)(6)

If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a district court to decide a motion to dismiss from the well-pleaded facts of the petition.

Davis v. Schnurr · filed 2020-12-04(b)(6)

A district court considering a motion to dismiss filed under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) must decide the motion from the well-pleaded facts of the petition.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition’s alleged facts, even if true, state no violation of law.

Keeler v. Peh · filed 2021-01-29(b)(6)

We note, however, that a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) asserts that even if all the facts the plaintiff alleges in the petition are true, no violation of law has been stated.

When reviewing a dismissal for failure to state a claim under § 60-212(b), a court accepts the petition’s factual allegations as true, views them in the plaintiff’s favor, and decides whether dismissal is appropriate as a matter of law.

Wheeler v. Rental Management Solutions · filed 2021-04-02(b)

In reviewing a district court's order granting a motion to dismiss, we are to consider the facts set forth in the petition in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and determine if dismissal as a matter of law is appropriate. K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(b); Cohen v. Battaglia, 296 Kan. 542, 545-46, 293 P.3d 752 (2013). For the purposes of this appeal, we accept the factual allegations asserted by Wheeler in his petition to be true.

Section 60-212(b)(6) does not permit a court to resolve factual disputes on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

Kucharski-Berger v. Hill's Pet Nutrition · filed 2021-08-20(b)(6)

A court cannot resolve factual disputes on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal only when the petition's allegations, taken as true with favorable inferences, fail to state a claim for relief.

Osborn v. Kansas Dept. for Children and Families · filed 2022-05-13(b)(6)

The statute, K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(b)(6), requires us to examine the issues here in a unique way. Since we are reviewing a judgment entered only on the pleadings, we will review all factual allegations in those pleadings in a light most favorable to Osborn. We will assume those facts are true, as well as any inferences we may draw from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then we will rule the court's dismissal of the petition was improper. The rule is clear—at this point, dismissal of the lawsuit is proper only when the allegations in the petition demonstrate the plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal for failure to state a claim only when the petition's allegations show the plaintiff has no claim for relief.

Towne v. Unified School District No. 259 · filed 2022-10-21(b)(6)

Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition show the plaintiff does not have a claim. Kudlacik v. Johnny's Shawnee, Inc., 309 Kan. 788, 790, 440 P.3d 576 (2019); K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6).

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court reviewing a motion to dismiss to accept well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true; dismissal is proper only when the petition clearly shows no claim for relief.

Bott v. State · filed 2022-11-10(b)(6)

When K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) is used to challenge the legal sufficiency of a claim, the appellate court will view the well-pleaded facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff and assume as true those facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper. Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate the plaintiff does not have a claim.

Under subsection (b)(6), dismissal is proper only when the petition’s allegations show that the plaintiff has no claim, taking well-pleaded facts and reasonable inferences as true.

Macomber v. State · filed 2023-12-15(b)(6)

We view the well-pleaded facts in a light most favorable to the plaintiff and assume as true those facts and any inferences reasonably drawn from them. If those facts and inferences state any claim upon which relief can be granted, then dismissal is improper. Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition demonstrate the plaintiff does not have a claim. Kudlacik v. Johnny's Shawnee, Inc., 309 Kan. 788, 790, 440 P.3d 576 (2019); see K.S.A. 2022 Supp. 60-212(b)(6).

Under subsection (b)(6), dismissal is proper only when the petition's allegations clearly show that the plaintiff has no claim.

Baker v. Blue Valley School Board · filed 2024-02-23(b)(6)

Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate the plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal only when the petition’s allegations show that the plaintiff has no claim.

Moeder v. U.S.D. No. 512 · filed 2024-06-28(b)(6)

Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition demonstrate the plaintiff does not have a claim.

Section 60-212(b)(6) does not permit a court to resolve factual disputes on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

I-135 Auto Auction v. McMaster · filed 2024-07-05(b)(6)

Factual disputes cannot be resolved or decided on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.

Under subsection (b)(6), dismissal is proper only when the petition's allegations clearly show the plaintiff has no claim.

Elliott v. Centurion of Kansas · filed 2025-02-14(b)(6)

Dismissal is proper only when the allegations in the petition clearly demonstrate the plaintiff has no claim. Kudlacik v. Johnny's Shawnee, Inc., 309 Kan. 788, 790, 440 P.3d 576 (2019); see K.S.A. 2023 Supp. 60-212(b)(6).

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a court deciding whether a claim is legally sufficient to consider only the well-pled facts and allegations drawn from the petition.

Spear v. Mayes · filed 2022-09-02(b)(6)

When a defendant moves to dismiss under K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) challenging the legal sufficiency of a claim, a court must decide the issue based only on the well-pled facts and allegations generally drawn from the petition.

Subsection (b)(6) permits dismissal when the petition’s allegations fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Gatlin v. Hartley, Nicholson, Hartley & Arnett, P.A. · filed 2001-06-15(b)(6)

We conclude plaintiffs amended petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; thus, the district court did not err in its dismissal of the action.

Section 60-212(b) permits dismissal only when the petition’s facts and reasonable inferences fail to state a claim under any possible theory.

Knop v. Gardner Edgerton Unified School District No. 231 · filed 2009-04-10(b)

A district court may not dismiss a petition under K.S.A. 60-212(b) unless the facts and inferences fail to state a claim on any possible theory.

Under subsection (b)(6), a court assumes the alleged facts and reasonable inferences are true and asks whether they state a claim under any possible theory.

McCabe v. Hoch · filed 2009-09-25(b)(6)

When the district court has granted a motion to dismiss, this court must assume the truth of the facts alleged by the plaintiff, along with any inferences that can reasonably be drawn from those facts. This court will then decide whether those facts and inferences state a claim under any possible theory. ... The district court’s dismissal of McCabe’s negligence lawsuit based upon a failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) was not erroneous.

Section 60-212(b)(6) permits dismissal when a pleading fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Scott-Jacobs · filed 2019-12-27(b)(6)

CitiMortgage's motion to dismiss alleged that Maejean had failed to state a claim in her counterclaims and cross-claims, meaning that dismissal was proper under K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. ... Maejean failed to comply with K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-208's pleading requirements and failed to state any counter or cross-claims upon which relief may be granted. The district did not err in dismissing these claims.

Under § 60-212(c), pleadings are construed liberally in favor of the party opposing a motion to dismiss.

Lorson v. Falcon Coach, Inc. · filed 1974-05-11(c)

In considering a motion for summary judgment under K. S. A. 60-256 or a motion to dismiss under K. S. A. 1973 Supp. 60-212 (c) pleadings will be given a liberal construction in favor of the party against whom the motion is directed.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a petition to be liberally construed when deciding whether it states a claim, while § 60-212(e) permits a motion for a more definite statement when more detail is needed.

Mitchell v. Wiltfong · filed 1979-12-28(b)(6), (e)

We agree that the petition, however inartfully drawn, states such a cause of action when liberally construed — as it must be on a 60-212(b)(6) motion. ... If defendants wanted dates and details, their remedy was a motion for a more definite statement under K.S.A. 60-212(e), a provision applicable to limited actions under K.S.A. 61-1708(b).

K.S.A. 60-212 permits amendment of an undecided motion to add defenses when the request is timely and causes no prejudice, and a defendant waives service defects by relying on service to establish venue.

Bray v. Bayles · filed 1980-11-01(b), (g), and (h)

We do not quarrel with the conclusion that a district court may, in a proper case, permit the amendment of a K.S.A. 60-212( b ) motion to include additional grounds, if the original motion has not yet been determined, the request to do so is timely made, and the amendment can be made without prejudice to the opposing party. ... By taking the position he did in his motion, defendant Bayles, in our judgment, clearly waived any defects in the service of process in Wilson County and is bound thereby.

Section 60-212(g) and (h) allow a timely amendment of an initial motion to add an insufficiency-of-process or insufficiency-of-service defense.

Bray v. Bayles · filed 1980-06-26(g), (h)

Neither do we find that the trial court erred in allowing the defendant Bayles to amend his original motion to include a request for dismissal of plaintiffs’ action due to insufficiency of process or insufficiency of service of process. K.S.A. 60-212(g) and (h) seem to prohibit a second 212(b) motion, or an answer filed after a 212(h) motion has been decided, from raising insufficiency of process or insufficiency of service of process as a defense; it does not, however, preclude the amendment of the initial motion to include additional grounds if the request to do so is timely made.

When a Rule 12(b)(6) motion includes matters outside the pleadings that the court does not exclude, § 60-212(b) requires treating it as a summary-judgment motion and applying the summary-judgment procedure.

Spikes v. Bauer · filed 1981-04-17(b)

When this occurs the pertinent part of K.S.A. 60-212(b) provides: ... “If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleadings to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256 . . . .” So the motion to dismiss was properly treated in this case as one for summary judgment and rules governing disposition of cases on summary judgment were properly applied.

Section 60-212(c) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary-judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Bethany Medical Center v. Knox · filed 1985-02-14(c)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(c), when matters outside the pleadings are not excluded by the court, a motion to dismiss must be treated as one for summary judgment under K.S.A. 60-256.

Subsection (b) requires a case to be treated as a summary-judgment matter when the court considers matters outside the pleadings and does not exclude them.

Buckle v. Caylor · filed 1985-06-13(b)

When matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the trial court, the case is treated as one for summary judgment.

Subsection (b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a motion for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Zimmerman v. Board of County Commissioners · filed 2009-10-30(b)(6)

They correctly point out that because he disposed of their claim after considering matters outside of the pleadings, the disposition is characterized as a summary judgment. See K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) (if matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256).

A motion for judgment on the pleadings is unavailable until the pleadings are closed, ordinarily when an answer is filed.

Simmon v. Bond · filed 1981-10-22(c)

A motion for judgment on the pleadings will not lie until the pleadings are closed. K.S.A. 60-212(c). Pleadings are not closed until an answer is filed unless a counterclaim, cross-claim, or third party claim is filed, in which event the filing of a reply or answer to the cross-claim or third-party claim will normally mark the close of the pleadings.

Section 60-212(c) requires a court deciding a motion for judgment on the pleadings to accept the plaintiff’s factual allegations as true.

Nora H. Ringler Revocable Family Trust v. Meyer Land and Cattle Co. · filed 1998-05-22(c)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(c), the trial court was required to accept as true plaintiff’s allegation that defendants’ facility was bigger or expanded beyond what existed on July 1, 1994.

Section 60-212(c) permits judgment on the pleadings when the pleadings and admitted facts show that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief as a matter of law.

LOUISBURG BLDG. & DEV'T CO. v. Albright · filed 2011-04-08(c)

Although the district court branded its decision to terminate the Albrights’ claims a “dismissal,” its action is more appropriately characterized as a judgment on the pleadings. The district court did not find that the Albrights had failed to state a claim. It instead found that, based on the pleadings, the Albrights were not entitled ... to relief on their claims as a matter of law. See K.S.A. 60-212(c). ... Judgment on the pleadings should be granted when, based on the admitted facts, the plaintiff has no cause of action.

Section 60-212(c) requires courts deciding motions for judgment on the pleadings to view the pleaded facts and reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor and deny the motion if they could support relief; considering material beyond the pleadings may convert the motion to summary judgment under subsection (d).

Consolver v. Pistotnik · filed 2017-06-23(c), (d)

In ruling on a defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, as provided in K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(c), the district court must accept the factual representations in the pleadings in the best light for the plaintiff and then essentially ask whether those representations along with any reasonable inferences drawn from them would warrant relief for the plaintiff on some legal theory. If so, the motion should be denied. ... Procedurally, the district court properly considered the contract itself, even though it was not part of the amended petition or submitted as an exhibit with that pleading. ... In turn, a district court may consider documents attached to a petition in ruling on a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) or (c). ... Commonly, a district court ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings also may consider material documents submitted with the answer or otherwise undisputed documents central to the dispute submitted with the motion. ... At the same time, wholesale notice of an entire court file from a separate case in conjunction with a motion to dismiss likely would convert the motion to one for summary judgment. See K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(d).

Under subsection (c), a court deciding judgment on the pleadings assumes the petition's allegations are true and may resolve the case as a matter of law only when the pleadings reveal no factual issues requiring trial.

Doe v. M.J. · filed 2021-01-15(c)

When a defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings under K.S.A. 60-212(c), the court is called on to determine whether—assuming all the allegations in the petition are true—the plaintiff has stated a legally cognizable claim. Motions under K.S.A. 60-212(c) allow courts to dispose of claims as a matter of law when the pleadings frame the issues such that there are no real issues to be tried. But when the pleadings disclose factual issues that must be resolved, judgment under K.S.A. 60-212(c) is improper.

Section 60-212(c) permits a defendant to obtain judgment on the pleadings when the admitted facts show that the plaintiff has not stated a legally viable cause of action, without a trial.

Dupass v. Kansas Insurance · filed 2021-07-23(c)

"'A motion for judgment on the pleadings under 60-212(c), filed by a defendant, is based upon the premise that the moving party is entitled to judgment on the face of the pleadings themselves and the basic question to be determined is whether, upon the admitted facts, the plaintiffs have stated a cause of action. The motion serves as a means of disposing of the case without a trial where the total result of the pleadings frame the issues in such manner that the disposition of the case is a matter of law on the facts alleged or admitted, leaving no real issue to be tried. The motion operates as an admission by movant of all fact allegations in the opposing party's pleadings.' [Citations omitted.]"

Section 60-212(c) requires a court deciding judgment on the pleadings to accept the petition's allegations and reasonable inferences as true and determine from the pleadings whether they state a legally cognizable claim.

Short v. Costco Wholesale Corp. · filed 2026-03-27(c)

When a defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings under K.S.A. 60-212(c), the district court must determine from the face of the petition—assuming all the allegations and reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those allegations to be true—whether the plaintiff has stated a legally cognizable claim. On appeal, our review of the issue of whether a district court properly granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings is unlimited. ... In evaluating whether the district court appropriately granted Costco's motion for judgment on the pleadings, we must view the facts alleged in the amended petition in the light most favorable to Short. ... This is because motions under K.S.A. 60-212(c) are similar to motions under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) in that both allow district courts to dispose of claims as a matter of law only when the petition fails to state a cause of action. ... If a district court desires to consider matters outside the pleadings, it must treat the motion as one for summary judgment under K.S.A. 60-256 and follow the appropriate procedure.

Section 60-212(c) permits judgment on the pleadings when the admitted facts show that the plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action and no real issue remains for trial.

Grieb Trust v. Hosfelt · filed 2026-04-10(c)

When a district court enters a ruling pursuant to K.S.A. 60-212(c) it amounts to a finding that the moving party is entitled to judgment on the face of the pleadings themselves because, on the admitted facts, the plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action. The judgment serves as a means of disposing of the case as a matter of law because no real issue remains to be tried.

Subsection (c) permits judgment on the pleadings when the plaintiff has not stated a legally cognizable cause of action, with the plaintiff's factual allegations accepted as true.

Szerwinski v. Mainstreet Assoc., Inc. · filed 2026-04-17(c)

A motion for judgment on the pleadings under K.S.A. 60-212(c) asks the district court to find for the defendant based on the plaintiff's failure to state a cause of action. Tillman v. Goodpasture, 313 Kan. 278, 281, 485 P.3d 656 (2021). In considering the motion, the district court must accept the plaintiff's factual allegations as true, which permits the court to dispose of a matter early based on the application of the law to those admitted facts. 313 Kan. at 281. Thus, the primary consideration is whether the plaintiff has stated a legally cognizable claim. This court exercises unlimited review of a district court's decision to grant a motion for judgment on the pleadings. 313 Kan. at 281.

Section 60-212(c) permits judgment on the pleadings when no material factual issue remains and the pleadings allow disposition as a matter of law.

Clear Water Truck Co., Inc. v. M. Bruenger & Co., Inc. · filed 1974-03-02(c)

No issues of fact material to the defense of absolute privilege were left in dispute. Thus, the action was in proper posture for disposition on a motion for judgment on the pleadings under K. S. A. 1973 Supp. 60-212 (c).

A motion for judgment on the pleadings remains a pleadings motion when no matters outside the pleadings are presented, even if a response repeats facts alleged in the petition.

Scully v. Overall · filed 1992-11-13(c)

No evidence outside the pleadings was presented to the trial court in consideration of this motion. Although there were “additional undisputed facts” alleged in the Scullys’ response and objection to the joint motion for judgment on the pleadings, these are the same facts alleged in their petition to quiet title.

Section 60-212(c) allows a motion for judgment on the pleadings after the pleadings close; if the court considers matters outside the pleadings, it must treat the motion as one for summary judgment and give the parties a reasonable opportunity to present pertinent material.

Tabor v. Lederer · filed 1970-07-17(c)

K. S. A. 1969 Supp. 60-212 (c) provides that after the pleadings are closed any party may move for judgment on the pleadings; that if matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to the motion.

Section 60-212(c) permits a motion for judgment on the pleadings after the pleadings are closed.

Queen's Park Oval Asset Holding Trust v. Belveal · filed 2017-05-12(c)

Under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(c), a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be filed after the pleadings are closed.

Section 60-212(c) permits judgment on the pleadings when the admitted facts and pleadings show that the opposing party has no viable cause of action.

Doyle v. Nordstrom · filed 2021-01-08(c)

Such a motion filed under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(c) is based on the premise that the moving party is entitled to judgment based upon the admitted facts and the pleadings themselves. The motion acts as an admission by the movant of all factual allegations in the opposing party's pleadings.

On appeal from a dismissal based on the pleadings under § 60-212, the petition's allegations generally govern the outcome.

Baker v. Hayden · filed 2021-07-02

Generally, it is the allegations in Baker's petition that would dictate the outcome of this appeal from the district court order dismissing the action based on the pleadings.

When matters outside the pleadings are presented on a motion to dismiss and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment and decided under K.S.A. 60-256.

Mouber v. City of Prairie Village · filed 1981-12-03(b)

K.S.A. 60-212(b) provides that when, on a motion to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256.

Subsection (b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary-judgment motion when matters outside the pleading are presented and not excluded, with a reasonable opportunity for all parties to submit pertinent material.

Collier v. Operating Engineers Local Union No. 101 · filed 1980-06-14(b)(6)

When the status of a motion under K.S.A. 60-212(fo)(6) has been converted to that of a motion for summary judgment, reasonable opportunity to present all material pertinent to such a motion should be given.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary-judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings, while giving all parties a reasonable opportunity to present material pertinent to summary judgment.

Beck v. Kansas Adult Authority · filed 1987-03-27(b)(6)

K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) provides for the filing of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The statute also provides that: "If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by K.S.A. 60-256." ... Under the circumstances, we hold that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment, based upon the insufficiency of the facts and the "evidence before the Board," prior to the time the facts had been developed by discovery or otherwise.

A ruling on a motion under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) does not prevent later summary judgment based on material outside the complaint.

Noel v. Pizza Management, Inc. · filed 1995-07-14(b)(6)

Contrary to Noel’s suggestion, a prior ruling that dismissal of his third-party beneficiary claim under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) was improper did not preclude the district court from later entering summary judgment against that claim under K.S.A. 60-256(c).

When the court considers matters outside the pleadings on a motion challenging the legal sufficiency of a claim, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment.

Decker v. Kansas Department of Social & Rehabilitation Services · filed 1997-07-25(b)(6)

“When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim and the trial court receives and considers matters outside the pleadings, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided under K.S.A. 60-256.”

When a motion for judgment on the pleadings considers matters outside the pleadings, it is treated as a motion for summary judgment.

Johnson v. Johnson · filed 1999-07-30(c)

Although the motion, as originally filed, was for judgment on the pleadings, the trial court took into consideration matters outside the pleadings in deciding this action. Under these circumstances, a motion is to be treated as one for summary judgment. K.S.A. 60-212(c). The trial court correctly applied the legal standards in treating the matter as one for summary judgment and in ruling on it as a motion for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss that raises legal sufficiency and prompts the court to consider matters outside the pleadings to be treated as a motion for summary judgment.

Bell v. Kansas City, Kansas, Housing Authority · filed 1999-11-19(b)(6)

When a motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) raises an issue concerning the legal sufficiency of a claim and the trial court receives and considers matters outside the pleadings, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided under K.S.A. 60-256.

Section 60-212(b) requires a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim to be treated as a summary-judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Bayless v. Dieckhaus · filed 2005-02-18(b)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(b), if matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim shall be treated as one for summaiy judgment.

Section 60-212(c) does not require a motion to dismiss to be converted to summary judgment when the court decides it on the face of the pleading and disregards purported outside facts.

Little v. State · filed 2005-10-21(c)

In considering this motion, we note that Little’s attempt to “bootleg” facts into his argument did not require the district court to convert the motion to one for summary judgment under K.S.A. 60-212(c).

Section 60-212(b) requires a court to treat a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings are presented and considered.

Ronald V. Odette Family Ltd. Partnership v. AGCO Finance, LLC · filed 2005-12-02(b)

When matters outside the pleadings are presented in support of a motion to dismiss, as they were here, the district court shall treat the motion as one for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(b) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as one for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

HM of Topeka, LLC v. Indian Country Mini Mart · filed 2010-07-30(b)

Since the district court considered matters outside the pleadings, we treat the district court’s decision as one granting summary judgment rather than a motion to dismiss.

When a court considers matters outside the pleadings on a motion for judgment on the pleadings and does not exclude them, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment.

Barnes v. BD. OF COUNTY COM'RS OF COWLEY · filed 2012-04-20(c)

When, as here, matters outside the pleadings are presented to the district court with a motion for judgment on the pleadings and the district court does not exclude the outside matters, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment. See K.S.A. 60-212(c).

A motion to dismiss under § 60-212(b)(6) ordinarily must be treated as a summary-judgment motion if the court considers matters outside the pleadings, unless those matters are proper for judicial notice.

Mashaney v. Board of Indigents' Defense Services · filed 2013-11-08(b)(6)

Ordinarily, when the district court ruling on a motion to dismiss considers matters beyond the face of the pleading, the rules relating to summary judgments apply. K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6). But when matters outside die face of the pleading are proper objects for judicial notice, a motion to dismiss need not be treated as a summary judgment motion.

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is treated as a motion for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded by the court.

Rhoten v. Dickson · filed 2010-01-29(b)(6)

Under K.S.A. 60-212(b), a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is treated like a motion for a summary judgment if matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded by the court.

Section 60-212(h) treats a failure-to-state-a-claim motion as one for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleading.

Hiett v. Brier · filed 1978-11-02(h)

K.S.A. 60-212(h) provides: “If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in K.S.A. 60-256 . . . .” ... There is no genuine issue as to the material facts.

When a court considers evidence outside the pleadings on a motion to dismiss, § 60-212(c) treats the motion as one for summary judgment.

Hoffman v. Haug · filed 1988-03-25(c)

The court considered evidence outside the scope of the pleadings and therefore Haug’s motion to dismiss was treated as a motion for summary judgment. ... We will so consider it on appeal.

When the court considers matters outside the petition on a motion to dismiss, § 60-212(b) converts the motion into one for summary judgment.

Davidson v. Denning · filed 1995-06-23(b)

Here, the trial court determined that it was going to receive and consider matters outside the appellant’s amended petition. As a result and pursuant to K.S.A. 60-212(b), the appellees’ motion to dismiss became a motion for summary judgment as if filed under K.S.A. 60-256.

Section 60-212(c) converts a motion for judgment on the pleadings to one for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings; a prior decision in the same litigation and an award incorporated in the petition did not require conversion.

Missouri Bank & Trust Co. v. Gas-Mart Development Co. · filed 2006-03-10(c)

K.S.A. 60-212(c) provides that “[i]f, on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment.” ... Here, there was no indication that the district court considered any “matters outside the pleadings.” Gas-Mart argues that the motion presented two attachments, the prior memorandum decision and die award of arbitration, but we consider neither a matter “outside tire pleadings,” especially because the memorandum decision resolved issues between the same parties at a prior stage in the same litigation and the award of arbitration was referenced and incoiporated within the initial petition of Missouri Bank. ... Accordingly, the motion was treated as one for judgment on tire pleadings; the procedure for motions for summary judgment, including applicability of Rule 141 was entirely inapplicable to these proceedings.

Section 60-212(b) treats a dismissal as summary judgment when the district court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Veatch v. Beck · filed 1993-04-21(b)

Because matters outside the pleadings, including the insurance policy and the judgment in the disability action, were considered by the district court, the court’s disposition will be treated as an entry of summary judgment.

Section 60-212(c) treats a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment when affidavits are attached for the district court’s consideration.

Karhoff v. National Mills, Inc. · filed 1993-05-07(c)

Under K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 60-212(c), a motion to dismiss will be treated as a motion for summary judgment when affidavits are attached to the motion to dismiss for the district court’s consideration.

When a court considers matters outside the pleadings on a motion to dismiss, it treats the motion as one for summary judgment.

Bethany Medical Center v. Wallace, Saunders, Austin, Brown & Enochs, Chartered · filed 1994-09-16(b)

Since the trial court considered matters outside the pleadings, we treat this case as the granting of a motion for summary judgment rather than a motion to dismiss. K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 60-212(b).

Section 60-212(b) requires a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim to be treated as a summary judgment motion when matters outside the pleading are presented, provided all parties have a reasonable opportunity to present evidence.

Green v. Higgins · filed 1975-05-10(b)

K. S. A. 1973 Supp. 60-212 (b) provides that if on a motion asserting a defense of failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and shall be disposed of as provided in section 60-256, provided all parties are given a reasonable opportunity to present evidentiary material pertaining thereto.

When a court considers matters outside the pleadings, § 60-212(c) requires it to treat a motion for judgment on the pleadings as a motion for summary judgment.

Admire Bank & Trust v. City of Emporia · filed 1992-04-10(c)

As illustrated by the hearing and the memorandum decision, the trial court considered matters outside the pleadings. The trial court erred in not treating the motion as a motion for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(c) requires a motion for judgment on the pleadings to be treated as a summary judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Hollenbeck v. Household Bank · filed 1992-04-10(c)

When matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, a motion for judgment on the pleadings shall be treated as one for summary judgment. K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 60-212(c).

Section 60-212(b) requires a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim to be treated as a summary judgment motion when matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded.

Dillard Ex Rel. Jereme v. Strecker · filed 1993-10-29(b)

Consequently, it appears matters outside the pleadings were not excluded by the court. Therefore, it was proper for the court to treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) treats a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim as a summary judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Lehman v. City of Topeka · filed 2014-04-04(d)

Under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 60-212(d), a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) is treated like a motion for summary judgment if matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court.

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is treated as a motion for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

In Re the Estate of Brenner · filed 2015-11-20(d)

Under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-212(d), a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) is treated like a motion for summary judgment if matters outside the pleadings are presented to, and not excluded by, the court. In this case, the trial court considered the parties’ briefs, arguments, and documents. It is evident from the district courts memorandum decision and order dismissing the case that the court did consider matters outside of the pleadings in making its ruling, effectively converting Danny’s request for dismissal to one for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary judgment motion when the court considers matters outside the pleadings.

Sperry v. McKune · filed 2016-11-23(d)

Hence, under K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 60-212(d), the KDOC defendants' motions should have been treated as motions for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) requires a motion asserting failure to state a claim to be treated as one for summary judgment when the parties go beyond the pleadings, with a reasonable opportunity to present pertinent material.

Kearns v. New York Community Bank · filed 2017-03-24(d)

Because both parties went beyond the pleadings in addressing NYCB and Ricca's motion, which also alleged that Kearns had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 60-212(d) required the district court to treat the motion as one for summary judgment, with all parties being "given a reasonable opportunity to present all the material that is pertinent to the motion."

Section 60-212(d) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as one for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings; exhibits attached to the pleading do not trigger that conversion.

Strope v. Burris · filed 2018-04-13(d)

Generally, when matters outside the pleadings are presented to and considered by the district court, the motion to dismiss must be treated as one for summary judgment. See K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 60-212(d). However, "[a] copy of a written instrument that is an exhibit to a pleading is a part of the pleading for all purposes." K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 60-210(c). Because Strope's exhibits all related to his well-pleaded facts and the defendants did not provide any exhibits, the defendants' motions to dismiss were not effectively converted to summary judgment motions.

Section 60-212(d) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary judgment motion when the court considers materials outside the pleadings.

In re Adoption of C.D.F. · filed 2018-06-22(d)

Our review of the record in this case convinces us that the lack of a factual dispute as to the key elements and documents in this case requires that Father's motion to dismiss the amended petition should be treated as a summary judgment motion as required by K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 60-212(d).

When a court considers matters outside the pleadings on a motion to dismiss, § 60-212(d) requires treating the motion as one for summary judgment.

Jarvis v. Wood · filed 2018-11-09(d)

This appears to be the most recent statement on the subject from our Supreme Court, and it supports the conclusion that the district court in the present case erred by failing to convert the defendants' motions to dismiss into motions for summary judgment and enforcing Rule 141.

Section 60-212(d) allows a party responding to a motion to dismiss to present information outside the pleadings, but requires compliance with summary judgment procedures.

Lambert v. Peterson · filed 2019-04-19(d)

A party responding to a motion to dismiss filed under K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-212 may respond with information outside the pleadings. But the responding party must then comply with the procedural requirements relating to summary judgment motions under K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 60-256.

Section 60-212(d) requires a motion to dismiss that relies on facts outside the pleadings to be treated as a motion for summary judgment.

In re Care & Treatment of Jones · filed 2020-02-07(d)

When a motion to dismiss relies on facts not found in the pleadings, we treat it as a motion for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) requires a court that considers material outside the petition on a motion to dismiss to treat the motion as one for summary judgment.

Rindt v. Schnurr · filed 2020-06-05(d)

If the district court considers matters outside the well-pleaded allegations of the inmate's petition—such as the material attached to HCF's motion to dismiss—the district court is required to treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment.

Exhibits attached to an answer that also contains a motion to dismiss are part of the answer and do not require the motion to be treated as one for summary judgment.

Denney v. Norwood · filed 2020-06-19(d)

Because of this distinction, we hold that the documents attached by Norwood to his answer should be deemed attachments to his answer to Denney's petition and not part of his motion to dismiss under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Section 60-212(d) requires a court that considers matters outside the petition on a motion to dismiss to treat it as a motion for summary judgment and give the parties a reasonable opportunity to present pertinent material.

Jamerson v. Heimgartner · filed 2020-08-07(d)

When the district court considers matters outside the well-pleaded allegations of the inmate's petition—such as material attached to KDOC's motion to dismiss—K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-212(d) requires the district court to treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment. Under those circumstances, all parties must receive a reasonable opportunity to present all material pertinent to the motion.

When a court considers matters outside the pleadings on a motion to dismiss, subsection (d) calls for the summary judgment standard of review.

Fairfax Portfolio v. Carojoto · filed 2020-09-11(d)

When, as in this case, matters outside the pleadings were considered by the court, the appropriate standard of review is the same as that for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) treats a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment when the court considers matters outside the pleadings, but consideration of a judicially noticeable court order does not require conversion.

Rodina v. Castaneda · filed 2021-07-16(d)

If the trial court considers matters outside the pleadings, a motion to dismiss is treated as a motion for summary judgment and the parties must be given reasonable opportunity to present all pertinent material. K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(d). "But when matters outside the face of the pleadings are proper objects for judicial notice, a motion to dismiss need not be treated as a summary judgment motion." Mashaney v. Board of Indigents' Defense Services, 49 Kan. App. 2d 596, 610, 313 P.3d 64 (2013), aff'd in part and rev'd in part 302 Kan. 625, 355 P.3d 667 (2015). A trial court may take judicial notice of specific facts "capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to easily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy." K.S.A. 60-409(b). The default judgment journal entry in Rodina's first lawsuit falls within this category. The journal entry is a court order whose veracity is easy to confirm. There is no dispute the journal entry was accurate. The trial court's consideration of the default judgment journal entry was appropriate. So we conclude that the motion to dismiss remained a motion to dismiss.

Section 60-212(d) requires a court to treat a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment when it considers matters outside the pleadings.

Employers Mut. Cas. Co. v. Jayhawk Fire Sprinkler Co. · filed 2024-01-12(d)

When considering a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, K.S.A. 2022 Supp. 60-212(d) plainly provides that when "matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment under K.S.A. 60-256." The district court erred by not granting EMC's request to convert the motion to one for summary judgment.

Section 60-212(d) permits a motion to dismiss to be treated as a motion for summary judgment when the parties rely on evidence outside the pleadings.

Garrison v. Ward · filed 2022-07-29(d)

As discussed above, the district court treated the Wards' motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment under K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 60-212(d) because the parties relied upon evidence outside of the pleadings. ... Thus, we will also treat the Wards' motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment for the purposes of this appeal.

Section 60-212(b)(6) requires a motion to dismiss to be treated as a summary judgment motion when matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded.

Davidson v. Denning · filed 1996-04-19(b)(6)

However, the panel also noted K.S.A. 60-212(b)(6) provides that if matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim shall be treated as one for summary judgment. ... There was no error in the district court’s consideration of matters beyond the petition.