Kansas Easements, Landlocked Property and Eminent Domain (2026)

In Kansas, a prescriptive easement generally takes 15 years of open, exclusive, continuous and adverse use. Kansas has no statute written specifically for easements: the Kansas Supreme Court sets out the elements in Pyle v. Gall (2023) and draws the 15-year period from the adverse possession statute, K.S.A. 60-503. On the eminent domain side, K.S.A. 26-501a has prohibited, since July 1, 2007, taking private property to sell, lease or transfer it to a private entity, except in the situations K.S.A. 26-501b lists, such as takings by utilities, pipelines and railroads to the extent the property is used for facilities necessary to provide their services.

This page covers both halves of Kansas law: easements between private landowners first, then the power to take private property. For other states, see our guide to easement laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-19. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Kansas law on private easements (prescriptive easements, ways of necessity, written and recorded easements, abandonment) and on condemnation of private property under the Kansas eminent domain procedure act, K.S.A. 26-501 through 26-518. It does not cover adverse possession of title (see Kansas squatters' rights and adverse possession), homeowners' association covenants, zoning or regulatory takings, condemnation by the federal government, or city and county ordinances.

How long does a prescriptive easement take in Kansas?

A prescriptive easement is a right to keep using a path, driveway or other part of someone else's land, earned by long use rather than granted in a deed. In Kansas the period is generally 15 years.

No Kansas statute sets a period for easements as such. K.S.A. 60-503, the adverse possession statute, speaks of possession of real property:

"No action shall be maintained against any person for the recovery of real property who has been in open, exclusive and continuous possession of such real property, either under a claim knowingly adverse or under a belief of ownership, for a period of fifteen (15) years."

The Kansas Supreme Court applies that period to easements. In Pyle v. Gall, 317 Kan. 499 (2023), the court noted that in State ex rel. Meek v. Hays (1990) it "considered a public prescriptive easement claim and, citing K.S.A. 60-503, explained the prescriptive period was 15 years."

The same 15-year statute governs adverse possession of ownership itself, which is a different claim with its own requirements; our page on Kansas squatters' rights and adverse possession covers that side.

The elements, in the court's words

The elements come from case law, not from a statute. The first point of the court's syllabus in Pyle v. Gall states:

"A prescriptive easement is established by the use of a private way that is (1) open; (2) exclusive, meaning unique to the prescriptor; (3) continuous; (4) for a set prescriptive period; and (5) adverse."

"Exclusive" does not mean the claimant shut everyone else out. The second syllabus point explains: "The exclusivity requirement for a prescriptive easement is met if the landowner's actions fail to substantially interrupt the prescriptor's use of the land for the prescriptor's specific purpose during the prescriptive period."

The burden is high. Citing its 1956 decision in Hale v. Ziegler, the Pyle court stated that "[t]he existence of a prescriptive easement must be shown by clear and convincing evidence."

Public land

Kansas limitation statutes do not run against public property. K.S.A. 60-509 provides: "Nothing contained in any statutes of limitations shall be applicable to any real property given, granted, sequestered or appropriated to any public use, or to any lands belonging to this state."

Stopping a prescriptive easement

K.S.A. 60-503, 60-507 and 60-509 contain no sign-posting or recorded-notice procedure of the kind some states provide for blocking prescription. In Kansas the question turns on the common-law elements: the use must be adverse, and under Pyle the exclusivity element is tested by whether the landowner's actions substantially interrupted the claimant's use during the period.

Permission matters. In Pyle, the court quoted its 1953 statement in Fiest v. Steere that use "with the consent of the owner" for the period "does not constitute adverse possession, but is simply a license so to do, out of which an estate by prescription can never arise."

Landlocked property in Kansas

Kansas has two separate routes for land with no access: a statutory petition for a public road and the common-law way of necessity.

The county road petition (K.S.A. 68-117)

Under K.S.A. 68-117, when land is "so completely surrounded by adjoining lands, the property of others or by such lands and water, as to be without access to any public highway," the owner "may petition the board of county commissioners of the county in which such premises lie for a road, and one road only, through some portion of the adjoining lands."

The statute sets terms that make this a significant step for the landlocked owner:

• Width and location: the road "shall not be less than forty (40) feet nor more than one hundred (100) feet in width and shall be laid out upon the quarter or quarter-quarter section lines when practicable."
• It becomes public: once ordered, the road is platted and recorded with the register of deeds "and shall become a public way, subject to restrictions contained in the petition."
• The benefited owner pays: the owner of the land specifically benefited "shall forthwith pay all expenses of establishing said road, including all damages, if any should be held or allowed."
• Maintenance is permanent: the benefited owner must "thereafter forever maintain and keep the same in repair and without any expense or liability to the township or other municipality."

The common-law way of necessity

Kansas courts also recognize an easement implied by necessity. In Horner v. Heersche, 202 Kan. 250 (1968), the Kansas Supreme Court said: "Kansas has long given recognition to the common-law rule, generally followed by the courts of this country, which implies a way of necessity where a grantor either conveys or retains a portion of his lands which otherwise would be inaccessible."

The court added a timing limit: the way of necessity "does not arise, in any event, nor is it to be implied, until lands owned by a common grantor are separated." On the relationship to the road statute, the court concluded: "Under the conditions obtaining in this case we incline to the view that K. S. A. 68-117 does not preclude plaintiffs from asserting their right to a way of necessity over the defendants' land."

An implied easement can also benefit land the seller keeps. In Van Sandt v. Royster, 148 Kan. 495 (1938), the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed an implied easement for a private sewer line that crossed a lot sold by warranty deed to serve the house on land the original owner kept. The court said that whether the claimant is the grantor or the grantee "is but one of many factors to be considered in determining whether an easement will arise by implication," and that "[t]he easement may arise in favor of the conveyor or the conveyee." It added: "If land may be used without an easement, but cannot be used without disproportionate effort and expense, an easement may still be implied in favor of either the grantor or grantee on the basis of necessity alone."

The size of an easement by necessity is set by what the parties had in mind when it arose. The Kansas Court of Appeals stated in McCoy v. Barr, 47 Kan. App. 2d 285 (2012): "The scope of an implied easement by necessity is determined by the intent that may be inferred from the actual use of the dominant tenement at the time of the creation of the easement as well as any uses that the facts and circumstances show were in reasonable contemplation of the parties at that time."

Written and recorded easements

Kansas's statute of frauds bars an action on "any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them" unless the agreement is in writing and signed by the party to be charged (K.S.A. 33-106).

Recording gives notice to later buyers. Under K.S.A. 58-2222, a recorded instrument, from the time it is filed with the register of deeds, "shall ... impart notice to all persons of the contents thereof; and all subsequent purchasers and mortgagees shall be deemed to purchase with notice." Recorded easements are found through the county register of deeds; our guide to Kansas property records explains how to search them.

Two kinds of easement have their own statutes:

• Solar easements: "Any easement obtained for the purpose of exposure of a solar energy device shall be created in writing," and the instrument must be recorded with the register of deeds of the county where the affected property lies (K.S.A. 58-3801).
• Conservation easements: "Except as provided in subsection (b) of K.S.A. 58-3812 and unless the instrument creating it otherwise provides, a conservation easement shall be limited in duration to the lifetime of the grantor and may be revoked at grantor's request" (K.S.A. 58-3811(d)).

How an easement ends in Kansas

Nonuse alone does not end an easement. The Kansas Court of Appeals stated in McCoy v. Barr (2012): "In Kansas, it is well settled that an easement may not be abandoned by mere nonuse; rather, actual relinquishment accompanied by intention to abandon must be shown."

A conservation easement created without a longer term in its instrument is limited to the grantor's lifetime and may be revoked at the grantor's request, subject to the exception in K.S.A. 58-3812(b) (K.S.A. 58-3811(d)).

Eminent Domain in Kansas

Eminent domain is the power to take private property for public use with compensation. Kansas runs every condemnation through one procedure, and since 2007 it has limited takings that end with the property in private hands. For a comparison with other states and the federal rules, see our guide to eminent domain laws by state.

The compensation rules in the constitution and the statute

The Kansas Constitution speaks directly to corporations. Article 12, section 4 provides: "No right of way shall be appropriated to the use of any corporation, until full compensation therefor be first made in money, or secured by a deposit of money, to the owner, irrespective of any benefit from any improvement proposed by such corporation" (Kan. Const. art. 12, § 4).

The eminent domain procedure act adds a general rule covering damage as well as takings: "Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation" (K.S.A. 26-513(a)).

Limits on takings for private parties after Kelo

In 2006 the legislature enacted K.S.A. 26-501a, which reads:

"On and after July 1, 2007: (a) Private property shall not be taken by eminent domain except for public use and private property shall not be taken without just compensation. (b) The taking of private property by eminent domain for the purpose of selling, leasing or otherwise transferring such property to any private entity is prohibited except as provided in K.S.A. 26-501b, and amendments thereto."

K.S.A. 26-501b lists six exceptions, takings:

• by the Kansas department of transportation or a municipality where "the property is deemed excess real property that was taken lawfully and incidental to the acquisition of right-of-way for a public road, bridge or public improvement project" (subsection (a));
• by any public utility, gas gathering service, pipe-line company or railroad, and "all persons and associations of persons, whether incorporated or not, operating such agencies for public use in the conveyance of persons or property within this state, but only to the extent such property is used for the operation of facilities necessary for the provision of services" (subsection (b));
• "by any municipality when the private property owner has acquiesced in writing to the taking" (subsection (c));
• "by any municipality for the purpose of acquiring property which has defective or unusual conditions of title including, but not limited to, clouded or defective title or unknown ownership interests in the property" (subsection (d));
• "by any municipality for the purpose of acquiring property which is unsafe for occupation by humans under the building codes of the jurisdiction where the structure is situated" (subsection (e)); and
• "expressly authorized by the legislature on or after July 1, 2007, by enactment of law that identifies the specific tract or tracts to be taken" (subsection (f)).

Subsection (f) also says that if the legislature authorizes eminent domain for private economic development, it "shall consider requiring compensation of at least 200% of fair market value." That is a direction to the legislature to consider a figure, not a rule that sets one.

At the federal level, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), that the takings challenged there, made under a city plan the Court said "unquestionably serves a public purpose," satisfied the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment, and it emphasized that "nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power." When land is acquired in a program that receives federal financial assistance, the acquiring agency must give assurances that it will be guided, "to the greatest extent practicable under State law," by the federal land acquisition policies in 42 U.S.C. § 4651 (42 U.S.C. § 4655(a)). The national guide covers the federal rules in depth.

Who may condemn

K.S.A. 26-501 requires the procedure in K.S.A. 26-501 through 26-518, plus 26-501a and 26-501b, to "be followed in all eminent domain proceedings," and defines a "taking" as "the use by any authorized entity of the power of eminent domain to acquire any interest in private real property." Private companies that hold the power use the same procedure: "Any corporation having the right of eminent domain and any partnership holding a certificate of convenience issued by the state corporation commission and having the right of eminent domain, shall exercise such right in the manner set forth in K.S.A. 26-501 to 26-516, inclusive" (K.S.A. 26-101).

Before filing, a prospective condemner "may enter upon the land and make examinations, surveys and maps thereof," and that entry gives the owner no cause of action "except for actual damages thereto" (K.S.A. 26-512).

How a Kansas condemnation case works

The proceeding begins with a verified petition in the district court of the county where the land lies (K.S.A. 26-501(b)). Sections 26-501 through 26-513 of the act contain no requirement that the condemner appraise the property or make a written offer before filing. The steps after filing are:

1. Notice. The condemner publishes notice once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least 14 days before the date set for considering the petition and appointing appraisers, and mails each interested party a copy of the notice and the petition, as it relates to that party's interest, at least 14 days before that date (K.S.A. 26-503).
2. The court's findings and the appraisers. If the judge finds from the petition that the plaintiff has the power of eminent domain and that the taking is necessary to its lawful corporate purposes, the judge appoints three disinterested residents of the county, at least two with experience in valuing real estate, and sets their report deadline no later than 45 days after the order, except for good cause (K.S.A. 26-504). An order granting the petition "shall not be considered a final order for the purpose of appeal to the supreme court, but an order denying the petition shall be considered such a final order."
3. The appraisers' hearing. Notice of the appraisers' hearing must be mailed at least 14 days in advance to the plaintiff and each party named in the petition, with one newspaper publication (K.S.A. 26-506).
4. The report. The appraisers file their report with the clerk of the district court. Within seven days after receiving notice of the filing, the condemner must mail written notice of it to every person who owns an interest in the property taken, if that person's address is known. The appraisers' fees and expenses are assessed against the plaintiff (K.S.A. 26-505).
5. Payment and possession. If the plaintiff wants to go ahead, it must pay the appraisers' award to the clerk within 30 days after the report is filed. On payment, "the title, easement or interest appropriated in the land condemned shall thereupon immediately vest in the plaintiff, and it shall be entitled to the immediate possession of the land to the extent necessary for the purpose for which taken and consistent with the title, easement or interest condemned." The owner then has 14 days from the payment to remove personal property (K.S.A. 26-507(a)).
6. Non-payment. If the plaintiff does not pay within those 30 days, "the condemnation is abandoned as to those tracts," and judgment is entered against the plaintiff for costs, including the appraisers' fees, and for the owner's "reasonable expenses incurred in defense of the action" (K.S.A. 26-507(b)).

Deadlines owners should know

Watch out: The 30-day appeal period runs from the day the appraisers' report is filed with the clerk, not from the day an owner receives the mailed notice of the filing (K.S.A. 26-505, 26-508(a)).

Under K.S.A. 26-508(a), a plaintiff or defendant dissatisfied with the award "within 30 days after the filing of the appraisers' report, may appeal from the award by filing a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the district court." An appeal by either side "shall bring the issue of damages to all interests in the tract before the court for trial de novo." It is docketed as a new civil action, and "[t]he only issue to be determined therein shall be the compensation required by K.S.A. 26-513."

Taking the money does not give up the appeal. Under K.S.A. 26-510(b), the defendants "may by order of the judge and without prejudice to the defendants' right of appeal withdraw the amount paid to the clerk of the court as the defendants' interests are determined by the appraisers' report."

Three more rules in the act matter to an owner once the award is filed:

• Mailing the notice of appeal: the appeal is perfected when the notice is filed, and copies "shall be mailed to all parties affected by such appeal, within seven days after the date of the perfection thereof" (K.S.A. 26-508(a)).
• Repayment if the final award is lower: "If the compensation finally awarded on appeal is less than the amount paid to the clerk of the court pursuant to K.S.A. 26-507, the judge shall enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the return of the difference, with interest" (K.S.A. 26-511(a)). An owner who withdrew the deposit carries that risk, and an appeal by either side retries damages to all interests in the tract (K.S.A. 26-508(a)).
• No one-sided abandonment after payment: once the award is paid to the clerk, the proceedings as to those tracts "can only be abandoned by the mutual consent of the plaintiff and the parties interested in the award" (K.S.A. 26-507(b)).

How just compensation is measured

K.S.A. 26-513 sets two measures:

• Whole taking: "the fair market value of the property or interest at the time of the taking" (subsection (b)).
• Partial taking: "the difference between the fair market value of the entire property or interest immediately before the taking, and the value of that portion of the tract or interest remaining immediately after the taking" (subsection (c)).

The statute defines fair market value as "the amount in terms of money that a well informed buyer is justified in paying and a well informed seller is justified in accepting for property in an open and competitive market, assuming that the parties are acting without undue compulsion," determined by the comparable sales, cost or income capitalization appraisal methods or a combination of them (K.S.A. 26-513(e)).

Subsection (d) lists 15 factors that "shall be considered if such factors are shown to exist," among them the most advantageous use to which the property is reasonably adaptable, access to the remaining property, severance of a tract, loss of trees and shrubbery, fences, drains or private roads, destruction of a legal nonconforming use, and loss of or damage to growing crops. They "are not to be considered as separate items of damages," only as they affect the total compensation.

The compensation provisions of the procedure act (K.S.A. 26-507 through 26-513) contain no percentage bonus above fair market value for homes or family property. The only percentage in the post-Kelo statutes is the 200% figure in K.S.A. 26-501b(f), which the legislature is told to consider for takings it specially authorizes for private economic development.

If a larger amount is awarded after the deposit, interest runs on the judgment. When the money was paid to the clerk on or after July 1, 1982, "the judgment shall bear interest, on and after the date of the payment to the clerk and until the date the judgment is paid, at the rate provided by K.S.A. 16-204" (K.S.A. 26-511(c)).

Attorney fees and relocation

Two provisions of the procedure act address an owner's legal costs:

• Condemner's appeal: "Whenever the plaintiff condemner shall appeal the award of court appointed appraisers, and the jury renders a verdict for the landowners in an amount greater than said appraisers' award, the court may allow as court costs an amount to be paid to the landowner's attorney as attorney fees" (K.S.A. 26-509). By its terms the section applies when the condemner appeals, and the award is discretionary.
• Abandonment for non-payment: if the condemner fails to pay the award within 30 days, the owner receives judgment for "the reasonable expenses incurred in defense of the action" (K.S.A. 26-507(b)).

For relocation, K.S.A. 26-518 applies "[w]henever federal funding is not involved" and the acquisition, by negotiation in advance of condemnation or by condemnation, will displace a person. The condemning authority must then "[p]rovide the displaced person, as defined in the federal uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition policies act of 1970, fair and reasonable relocation payments and assistance to or for displaced persons."

Inverse condemnation

When an owner claims the government took or damaged property without bringing a condemnation case, the claim is called inverse condemnation. In Hiji v. City of Garnett, 248 Kan. 1 (1991), answering certified questions from a federal court, the Kansas Supreme Court held that the three-year implied-contract period of K.S.A. 60-512 does not apply and that "K.S.A. 60-507 is the controlling statute." K.S.A. 60-507 provides that no action "for the recovery of real property or for the determination of any adverse claim or interest therein, not provided for in this article," may be maintained "after fifteen (15) years from the time the cause of action accrued." Our page on the Kansas statute of limitations covers other filing deadlines.

Kansas easement and eminent domain rules at a glance

Related Kansas property guides

• Easement laws by state
• Eminent domain laws by state
• Kansas squatters' rights and adverse possession
• Kansas property records: how to find out who owns a property
• Kansas statute of limitations

This article provides general legal information about Kansas easement and eminent domain law. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific property or condemnation, contact a lawyer licensed in Kansas.

Last updated: 2026-10-19.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long does it take to get a prescriptive easement in Kansas?

Generally 15 years. Kansas has no statute written specifically for easements; the Kansas Supreme Court lists a set prescriptive period as an element and, in Pyle v. Gall (2023), pointed to its earlier explanation, citing the 15-year adverse possession statute K.S.A. 60-503, that the period is 15 years.

What are the requirements for a prescriptive easement in Kansas?

Under Pyle v. Gall (Kan. 2023), the use of the private way must be open, exclusive (meaning unique to the claimant), continuous, adverse and for the set prescriptive period, and it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence.

Does exclusive use mean the owner can never use the land?

No. The Kansas Supreme Court held in Pyle v. Gall (2023) that exclusivity is met if the landowner's actions fail to substantially interrupt the claimant's use of the land for the claimant's specific purpose during the prescriptive period.

What can I do if my land is landlocked in Kansas?

K.S.A. 68-117 lets an owner whose land has no access to any public highway petition the board of county commissioners for one road, 40 to 100 feet wide, that becomes a public way subject to restrictions in the petition, with the benefited owner paying all expenses and maintaining it. Kansas courts also recognize a common-law way of necessity, which arises only after land owned by a common grantor is divided (Horner v. Heersche, 1968).

Can an easement be lost by not using it in Kansas?

Not by nonuse alone. The Kansas Court of Appeals stated in McCoy v. Barr (2012) that actual relinquishment accompanied by an intention to abandon must be shown.

Can Kansas take my property for a private developer?

K.S.A. 26-501a prohibits taking private property by eminent domain to sell, lease or otherwise transfer it to a private entity, except as K.S.A. 26-501b provides. The six exceptions cover excess property taken lawfully and incidental to right-of-way for a public road, bridge or public improvement project (KDOT or a municipality); public utilities, pipelines and railroads (only to the extent the property is used for facilities necessary for service); a municipal taking the owner has agreed to in writing; a municipal taking of property with defective or unusual title; a municipal taking of property unsafe for human occupation under the building codes; and tracts the legislature identifies by law.

Can a pipeline company use eminent domain in Kansas?

K.S.A. 26-501b(b) allows pipe-line companies, public utilities, gas gathering services and railroads to take property that will be transferred to a private entity, but only to the extent the property is used for the operation of facilities necessary for the provision of services. Corporations with the right of eminent domain must follow the K.S.A. 26-501 procedure (K.S.A. 26-101).

How is just compensation calculated in Kansas?

For a whole taking, compensation is the fair market value of the property or interest at the time of the taking; for a partial taking, it is the difference between the value of the entire property immediately before the taking and the value of the remainder immediately after (K.S.A. 26-513(b), (c)). Fair market value is defined in K.S.A. 26-513(e), and a statutory list of factors such as access, severance and loss of crops is weighed only as it affects the total compensation (K.S.A. 26-513(d)).

How long do I have to appeal an eminent domain award in Kansas?

A party dissatisfied with the appraisers' award must file a written notice of appeal with the clerk of the district court within 30 days after the appraisers' report is filed, and copies of the notice must be mailed to all parties affected within seven days after it is filed (K.S.A. 26-508(a)). The appeal is a new civil action tried de novo, and the only issue is compensation.

How long do I have to file an inverse condemnation claim in Kansas?

The Kansas Supreme Court held in Hiji v. City of Garnett (1991) that the three-year implied-contract period does not apply and that K.S.A. 60-507, a 15-year period running from when the cause of action accrued, controls.