Advertisement

Kansas Court of Appeals to hear case of Dr. asking for license reinstatement from KSBHA among others

Gavel
Gavel(WSAZ)
Published: Jul. 9, 2020 at 3:57 PM CDT
Email this link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) - Kansas Court of Appeals to hear a case where a doctor is asking for the reinstatement of his license from the Kansas Board of Healing Arts among others on Wednesday, July 15.

The Kansas Court of Appeals says its judges will hear appeals via videoconference Wednesday, July 15, which will be live-streamed on its YouTube channel.

The Court says the presiding judge will be Judge Henry Green Jr. joined by Judges G. Gordon Atcheson and Kathryn Gardner.

According to Administrative Order 2020-PR-076, the Kansas Supreme Court has ordered all hearings to be conducted remotely if possible.

The Court says the July 15 docket is as follows:

  • Appeal No. 121,605: In the Matter of the Marriage of Steven P. Welter and Keira J. Welter
    • The Court says in this Miami County divorce case, the Miami Co. District Court ordered Steven to pay spousal maintenance to Keira with conditions of termination, including her cohabitation with a non-family member. Steven says when he discovered Keira had been living with a boyfriend, Steven moved to terminate the maintenance. Keira says termination of spousal support would be inequitable because she cohabitated with her boyfriend only after the district court suspended her spousal maintenance and she could not live on her own or with a family member at the time. The district court said Keira had cohabitated but declined to terminate her spousal maintenance, instead reduced Steven’s payments. Steven argues, on appeal, that spousal maintenance should have automatically terminated when Keira violated the termination conditions in the divorce decree and the district court abused its discretion when it only vacated payments. Keira says the district court could not terminate maintenance because it was suspended at the time she lived with her boyfriend, the district court had the power to modify spousal maintenance and the result of the district court’s decision was fair and equitable given her circumstances.
  • Appeal No. 121,767: Daniel L. Myers, M.D. v. Kansas State Board of Healing Arts
    • The Court says in this Shawnee County case the district court affirmed the decision of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts to deny Myers’ application for reinstatement of his medical license. Myers says in his appeal, the board’s determination he was not sufficiently rehabilitated to practice medicine was not supported by substantial evidence. Myers also says the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to consider his appeal because the Shawnee Co. District Court clerk wrongly rejected his timely filed notice of appeal for lacking page numbers.
  • Appeal No. 121,649: Joseph W. Lambert and Sharon L. Lambert v. City of Leawood
    • The Court says in this Johnson County case the Lamberts purchased a residential property in 1992 in Leawood and built a two-story house. The City of Leawood says it enacted ordinances modifying the zoning restrictions applicable to single-family residential properties. The Lamberts said in 2017 a fire destroyed their home and when preparing plans to rebuild the house the plans deviated from the design of the original home. The City says it refused to issue a building permit because the plans did not comply with existing height and massing restrictions on the property. The Lambers said they filed petition in the Johnson County District Court. The district court says based on facts and cross-motions for summary judgment it ruled in favor of the city. On appeal, the Lamberts say the zoning restrictions are invalid because they retroactively interfere with their vested property right in the zoning restriction existing when they purchased the property, the ordinances were enacted without adequate notice to the Lamberts and the ordinances violated statutory uniformity requirements. The city says it contests these claims and the Lamberts’ appeal of the city’s action to the district court was untimely.
  • Appeal No. 121,014: State of Kansas v. Daniel Earl Genson III
    • The Court says in this Riley County case Genson was charged with failing to register under the Kansas Offender Registration Act. Genson said he raised an insanity defense and claimed he was involuntarily committed just days after his time to register lapsed. The Riley Co. District Court says it rejected the defense because failing to register under the Kansas Offender Registration Act is a strict liability crime and precluded evidence of Genson’s mental health at trial. The court says a jury convicted Genson as charged. On appeal, Genson says he challenges the constitutionality of the Kansas Offender Registration Act, he says the district court improperly instructed the jury and contends the court improperly precluded mental health evidence.

Copyright 2020 WIBW. All rights reserved.

Latest News

Latest News