From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Krueger v. Board of Woodson County Comm'rs

Supreme Court of Kansas
Mar 19, 2004
277 Kan. 486 (Kan. 2004)

Opinion

No. 89,592.

Opinion filed March 19, 2004.

TAXATION — Assessed Valuation for Tax Purposes.

Review of the judgment of the Court of Appeals in 31 Kan. App. 2d 698, 71 P.3d 1167 (2003). Appeal from Woodson district court; C. FRED LORENTZ, judge. Judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the district court is affirmed. Judgment of the district court is affirmed. Opinion filed March 19, 2004.

Karen J. Krueger, pro se, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellant.

Jerry B. Hathaway, county attorney, argued the cause and Leo T. Gensweider, former county attorney, was on the brief for appellee.


The opinion of the court was delivered by


Karen Krueger contested the appraisal of her house for tax years 1999, 2000, and 2001. The Board of Tax Appeals (BOTA) upheld the appraisal value, as did the district court. In a published opinion by Judge Lewis, a unanimous panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed. This court granted Krueger's petition for review.

We have carefully considered and reviewed the briefs, arguments, and the record in this case, and we conclude that the Court of Appeals was correct. We, therefore, adopt the opinion of the Court of Appeals and affirm BOTA, the district court, and the Court of Appeals.

BEIER, J., not participating.

BRAZIL, S.J., assigned.


Summaries of

Krueger v. Board of Woodson County Comm'rs

Supreme Court of Kansas
Mar 19, 2004
277 Kan. 486 (Kan. 2004)
Case details for

Krueger v. Board of Woodson County Comm'rs

Case Details

Full title:KAREN J. KRUEGER, Appellant, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF WOODSON…

Court:Supreme Court of Kansas

Date published: Mar 19, 2004

Citations

277 Kan. 486 (Kan. 2004)
85 P.3d 686

Citing Cases

Tierra Ranchos Homeowners v. Kitchukov

¶ 30 First, whether the Kitchukovs' property is sufficiently unique so as to warrant an exception from the…

In re Krueger

Krueger challenged many of the County's valuation determinations before what is now BOTA and this court. See…