Murray v. State Bd. of Regents
| Decision Date | 15 May 1965 |
| Docket Number | 44018,Nos. 43836,s. 43836 |
| Citation | 194 Kan. 686,401 P.2d 898 |
| Parties | Edward F. MURRAY, Sr., and Esther M. Murray, his wife, Appellants, v. STATE BOARD OF REGENTS, or State of Kansas, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
1. Governmental agencies are creatures of the legislature, and can exercise only such powers as are expressly conferred by law and those necessary to make effective the powers expressly conferred.
2. The legislature has not granted the State Board of Regents authority to acquire land by negotiation and purchase. It may acquire land only by condemnation as provided
by G.S.1949 (now K.S.A.), 76-147 and the condemnation statutes.
3. The Kansas State University Endowment Association could not by agreement or under claim of agency extend the power of the State Board of Regents to purchase land for the use of the Kansas State University beyond the power the legislature has granted.
4. The Kansas State University Endowment Association could not by its acts or agreements estop the State Board of Regents from acquiring necessary land by condemnation as specifically authorized by the legislature.
Robert K. Weary, Junction City, argued the cause, and Ulysses S. Weary and E. S. Barnhill, Junction City, were with him on the briefs for appellants.
Charles S. Arthur, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Manhattan, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellee.
HATCHER, Commissioner:
These appeals stem from a controversy over a condemnation proceeding brought by the State Board of Regents to acquire a tract of land on behalf of the Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, for engineering research.
Because of the rather complicated manner in which the appeals reached this court a chronological presentation of both the substantive and procedural facts will be helpful.
In the early spring of 1962, the Kansas State University was preparing to make application to the federal government for grants for the purpose of conducting radiation shielding and other nuclear research programs. In order to qualify for the grants it was necessary that the university show control of a tract of land on which the nuclear research programs could be conducted.
On May 3, 1962, the Kansas State University Endowment Association entered into a lease agreement with Edward F. Murray and Esther, his wife. The lease covered one hundred severty-five acres of land adjacent to the Fort Riley Military Reservation and was for a term of five years extending to April 30, 1967. The agreement also provided for an option to purchase which covered two hundred ninety acres of land, including the land under lease, for the sum of two hundred dollars per acre. The option to purchase extended to May 1, 1964.
The lease and option agreement provided:
'The parties hereto understand and agree that the above described real estate will be occupied for the purpose of conducting a 'Summer Shielding Development Program' by the Shielding Institute which is sponsored by the Department of Nuclear Engineering at Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.'
The university subsequently received a grant from the federal government. It entered into possession of the leased land under a sub-lease from the Endowment Association and erected structures for the operation of certain phases of the radiation shielding program.
On June 5, 1963, the State Board of Regents filed a petition in the District Court of Riley County for the condemnation of the land covered by the lease. The petition stated in part:
'That the State Board of Regents is a body created and existing by virtur of the laws of the State of Kansas and said Board is vested with the management, control and government of the Kansas State University of Agriculture and Applied Science at Manhattan, Kansas.
'That the said State Board of Regents desires to acquire in the name of the State of Kansas a certain tract and parcel of land situated in Riley County, Kansas, for engineering research for the Kansas State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, Manhattan, Kansas, consisting of 175 acres more or less. That said tract and parcel of land is described and shown of record to be owned as follows:' (Description omitted.)
The petition was approved by the court and appraisers were appointed. On September 11, 1963, the landowners filed a motion to dismiss the condemnation proceedings stating:
'In support of their motion the defendant and land owners state and allege that the condemnor, Kansas State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, Manhattan, Kansas, requested the Kansas State University Endowment Association, a corporation, to obtain a lease and option agreement for the benefit of said Kansas State University whereunder the University could occupy certain land in connection with its Summer Shielding Development Program, and said land could be acquired by The Endowment Association for the benefit of the University for the purpose of making available said real estate for establishment of the proposed laboratory sponsored by the State Office of Civil Defense; that pursuant to said lease agreement, said Kansas State University entered into possession and occupied the premises and is still in possession and occupying said premises for the purpose of its Summer Shielding Development Program; that the land covered by said lease and option agreement is the same land the University is seeking to acquire hereunder; that said University has accepted all of the benefits accruing to it under and by virtue of said lease and option agreement and now seeks to avoid its obligations under said lease and option agreement by virtue of this condemnation action; that said University is not entitled to accept the benefits of said lease and option agreement and avoid the obligations thereof; that, in addition, as a result of the above facts and circumstances, the University is estopped to condemn said land; and that therefore this action should be dismissed.'
On September 18, 1963, the appraisers filed their report in which they appraised the value of the land taken, utilities and buildings, and severance damages at a total of $23,000. On September 30, 1963, the district court entered an order approving the appraisers' report and denying the landowners' motion to dismiss.
The landowners' motion for reconsideration of the motion to dismiss was also overruled on October 7, 1963, and they appealed to this court on October 11, 1963. This appeal was number 43,836.
On October 12, 1963, the landowners filed a petition for injunction seeking to have the State Board of Regents enjoined from 'entering said premises, or attemption to appropriate, condemn or acquire said land in any manner inconsistent with the provisions of said option agreement. * * *' The petition stated the same grounds for relief as were stated in its motion to dismiss, which have heretofore been presented.
The State Board of Regents filed a demurrer and a motion to dismiss. The district court, with the consent of counsel for both parties, then stayed all proceedings in both cases pending a decision of ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Wichita State University
...the Board of Regents in its control, operation and management of this state's universities and colleges. See Murray v. State Board of Regents, 194 Kan. 686, 401 P.2d 898; K.S.A.1974 Supp. 76-712. Likewise, the chief executive officer of each university or college is given broad administrati......
-
Brennan v. University of Kansas
...state and public control. This position has been recently affirmed by the Kansas Supreme Court in the case of Murray v. State Board of Regents, 194 Kan. 686, 401 P.2d 898 (1965). Thus the University of Kansas, as a state university, and the University Press of Kansas, as a state institution......
-
State ex rel. Schneider v. City of Kansas City
...v. Kittle, 203 Kan. 841, 457 P.2d 21 (1969); McCoy v. Board of Regents, 196 Kan. 506, 413 P.2d 73 (1966); Murray v. State Board of Regents, 194 Kan. 686, 401 P.2d 898 (1965); State ex rel. v. Regents of the University, 55 Kan. 389, 40 P. 656 (1895). The Board of Regents is a governmental ag......
-
In re Innes, Bankruptcy No. 95-41486-13
...451 F.2d 1287, 1290 (10th Cir.1971) (relying on Board of Regents v. Hamilton, 28 Kan. 376, 378-80 (1882) and Murray v. State Board of Regents, 194 Kan. 686, 401 P.2d 898 (1965)). Consequently, they would ordinarily share the State's immunity from suit in federal court unless they have someh......