{"meta":{"key":"s_ks--pass-17","task":"S_KS","title":"Kansas ordinary consumer-debt and debt-relief-agreement arbitration gateway","parent_title":"Kansas debt and debt relief law","edition":"pass-17","path":"/research/s_ks--pass-17/","kind":"split_pass","category":"state","role":"state","area_numbers":[66],"groups":["collections"],"date":"2026-10-26","tables":11,"claims":64,"sources":34,"review_status":"revise","review_complete":true,"sha256":"d95b528da5600a3ba8e8f5d2129ee073f470510ac34dd18ef93d5fb36b0af8d7","headings":["Kansas ordinary consumer-debt and debt-relief-agreement arbitration gateway","A1. State-versus-federal threshold matrix","A2. 2018 enactment and current-status check","A3. FAA scope and preemption","B1. Gateway allocation matrix","C1. Formation burden","C2. Electronic formation","C3. Amendment and change in terms","C4. Competing agreements","D1. Clear-and-unmistakable requirement","D2. Challenge targeting","D3. Scope and statutory claims","D4. Class and collective procedure","E1. Enforcement theories","E2. Actor matrix","E3. Assignment of debt versus arbitration rights","E4. Negotiable instruments","F1. Saving-clause defense matrix","F2. Kansas unconscionability","F3. Costs and effective vindication","F4. Consumer statutes","G1. Federal standard after Morgan","G2. Kansas law and decisionmaker uncertainty","G3. Current Tenth Circuit guidance","G4. Court deadlines and stay","H1. Kansas state-court procedure","If no civil action is pending","If a civil action is pending","Evidence and hearing","No universal response period","H2. Kansas stay structure","H3. Chapter 61 and small claims","H4. Federal motion and hearing","H5. Federal jurisdiction","H6. Federal stay versus dismissal","H7. Immediate appeal matrix","I1. Official-resource inventory","J1. Assent disputed","J2. Valid arbitration clause; whole debt-relief contract allegedly illegal","J3. Clause-specific unconscionability","J4. Delegation-specific challenge","J5. Assignee lacks complete contract and transfer proof","J6. Litigation-conduct waiver after Morgan","J7. Arbitration demand filed; no court motion or stay order","J8. Motion to compel pending","J9. Compulsion granted: stay versus dismissal","J10. Denial and immediate appeal","J11. Administrator-rules incorporation","Actually read or inspected in PASS-17","Material currentness findings","Access and research limitations","Not read or obtained","Method limits","PASS-17 conclusion"],"generation_provenance":{"actual_route":"regular_chat_adaptive_models","actual_model":"GPT-5.6 Sol","actual_mode":"Pro","provenance_limit":"Actual documented capture labels only; missing labels remain unknown. No preferred setting is inferred as actual execution."},"public_id":"S_KS/pass-17","facets":{"geography":["us","us-ks"],"debt_type":[],"stage":[],"subject":["agreements-disclosures","arbitration-adr"]},"scope":"Kansas arbitration agreement/formation/delegation/nonsignatory/scope/waiver/compel/stay gateway","pending_corrections":4},"markdown":"# SettleADebt.com — S_KS, PASS-17\n\n## Kansas ordinary consumer-debt and debt-relief-agreement arbitration gateway\n\n**Fresh research date:** October 26, 2026, Pacific (America/Los_Angeles) / October 26, 2026, UTC\n**Actual model:** GPT-5.6 Sol Pro\n**Review character:** Same-project continuation in this original authorized Chat; **not an independent review**\n**Component boundary:** Arbitration agreement formation, delegation, scope, nonsignatory and assignee enforcement, generally applicable defenses, waiver or default, motions to compel, stays, and the immediate-appeal gateway for ordinary unsecured consumer-debt and consumer debt-relief agreements.\n\nPASS-16 is complete and saved but unreviewed and is not adopted as a premise. Broader findings from PASS-07, PASS-09, PASS-11, PASS-12, PASS-13, PASS-15, and PASS-16 likewise remain unreviewed and are not silently incorporated here. The necessary arbitration statutes, contract-formation provisions, and cases were read for this focused pass.\n\nThis pass does **not** decide any actual contract, consumer assent, assignment, debt, provider status, legal claim, arbitration administrator, fee, award, or litigation outcome. Confirmation and vacatur of awards, postaward judgment enforcement, bankruptcy, secured debt, medical debt, government debt, local and tribal law, and a complete arbitration-remedies dossier remain outside this component.\n\n# Executive determination\n\nKansas’s current Revised Uniform Arbitration Act governs agreements made on or after **July 1, 2018**. An earlier agreement remains governed by the repealed Kansas arbitration act unless all parties agree in a record to use the current act. The current act broadly validates arbitration agreements and, unlike the old law, does not contain the old prospective-arbitration exclusions for insurance, employment, and tort claims. A 2026 bill that would have added an insurance-contract exception to current K.S.A. 5-428 **died** and is not current law. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThe Federal Arbitration Act applies only when the asserted arbitration provision is written and is in a maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving interstate or foreign commerce, subject to the transportation-worker employment exclusion and the separate 2022 sexual-assault and sexual-harassment exception. An ordinary multistate credit, collection, or debt-relief transaction may involve commerce, but the contract, parties, communications, payments, and business operations still must establish the actual nexus. A clause’s statement that the FAA governs is relevant but does not manufacture federal commerce, federal subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, or venue. ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThe Kansas default allocation is unusually explicit:\n\n- The **court** decides whether an arbitration agreement exists and whether the controversy is subject to it.\n- The **arbitrator** decides whether a condition precedent to arbitrability has been fulfilled and whether the contract containing a valid arbitration agreement is enforceable.\n- A valid contractual delegation can alter some gateway allocation, because those subsections are not listed among the act’s categorically nonwaivable provisions, but the delegation itself must have been formed and must clearly cover the contested issue. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nFormation remains judicial even when the paper or electronic terms purport to delegate every issue to an arbitrator. A business record showing that a consumer clicked a button can authenticate a click event without proving that the consumer was shown the exact arbitration provision, assented to that version, received incorporated rules, accepted a later amendment, or agreed to delegate formation. Kansas UETA recognizes electronic records and signatures but does not eliminate ordinary offer, acceptance, mutual-assent, attribution, and version-control questions. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-2066/19-2066-2020-09-16.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nOnce a valid arbitration clause exists, a challenge that the **entire contract** is illegal or void generally goes to the arbitrator under the FAA’s separability rule. *Packard v. Credit Solutions of America* applied that rule to a Kansas debt-relief contract challenged under the Kansas Credit Services Organization Act and KCPA. It did not decide that the provider was licensed, that the fees were lawful, or that the consumer’s substantive claims failed. A challenge to arbitration-clause formation, a challenge directed specifically to the arbitration clause, or a challenge directed specifically to a delegation clause follows a different gateway. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nAn assignee, debt buyer, servicer, affiliate, agent, attorney, or arbitration administrator does not acquire arbitration rights merely from its label. The party seeking arbitration must establish the actual clause and a Kansas-law or other controlling contract theory allowing that actor to enforce it—such as an express assignment, assumption, agency, third-party-beneficiary status, or fact-supported equitable estoppel. Assignment of the debt is relevant but does not automatically prove transfer of every contractual dispute-resolution right, and Article 3 authority to enforce a negotiable instrument is not automatically equivalent to authority to enforce a separate arbitration agreement. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nKansas’s current act requires a state court to stay the implicated judicial proceeding while a motion to compel is being decided and, if arbitration is ordered, to stay the arbitrable claim while arbitration proceeds. The Kansas statute does not authorize dismissal in place of that post-compulsion stay. In federal court, 9 U.S.C. §3 likewise requires a stay when a party requests one and is not in default in proceeding with arbitration; the Supreme Court confirmed in *Smith v. Spizzirri* that dismissal cannot replace the statutorily requested federal stay. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nKansas permits an immediate appeal from an order **denying** a motion to compel, but not from an ordinary interlocutory order granting arbitration and staying litigation. Federal 9 U.S.C. §16 follows a similar one-way structure. A nonfrivolous federal appeal from denial of arbitration automatically stays district-court merits proceedings under *Coinbase v. Bielski*; no matching automatic Kansas state-court appellate stay was located. Kansas stay relief instead depends on the applicable stay, bond, injunction, or appellate-order provisions. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# A. Governing state and federal frameworks\n\n## A1. State-versus-federal threshold matrix\n\n| Question | Kansas current act | Federal Arbitration Act | Practical result |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| **Agreement date** | Current K.S.A. 5-423–5-453 governs agreements made on or after July 1, 2018 | FAA depends on commerce, not Kansas agreement date | Determine agreement/version date first |\n| **Pre-July 1, 2018 agreement** | Repealed act governs unless all parties agree in a record to current act | FAA can still preempt conflicting old Kansas exclusions where commerce is involved | Both transition and FAA scope must be analyzed |\n| **Writing or record** | Agreement must be contained in a “record” | Arbitration provision must be written | Electronic record may qualify, but formation remains separate |\n| **Commerce nexus** | Not an express prerequisite to Kansas act | Maritime or interstate/foreign commerce required | FAA is not established by contractual label alone |\n| **Transportation-worker exclusion** | No matching ordinary consumer-debt exclusion | FAA §1 excludes specified employment contracts of transportation workers | Ordinarily irrelevant to consumer debt unless unusual employment facts exist |\n| **Sexual-assault/harassment exception** | No parallel debt-specific rule | FAA chapter 4 can permit claimant election for covered disputes accruing after March 3, 2022 | Ordinarily outside this debt component |\n| **General validity** | Valid except generally applicable contract-revocation grounds | Same equal-footing saving clause | Fraud, duress, unconscionability, and lack of assent remain possible |\n| **State hostile rule** | Current Kansas act favors enforcement | FAA preempts rules that disfavor arbitration because it is arbitration | Neutral Kansas contract law remains available |\n| **Court jurisdiction** | Kansas court must already have jurisdiction over controversy and parties | FAA creates no independent federal subject-matter jurisdiction | State or federal jurisdiction must exist independently |\n| **Motion format** | Judicial relief by motion; initial motion served like summons if no action pending | FAA application heard as motion; §4 supplies specific notice and hearing requirements | Filing route depends on forum and existing action |\n| **Stay while motion pending** | Mandatory on just terms after motion to compel | No identical §4 text, though district court can manage case; §3 governs referable issues after satisfaction | Kansas gives an express pending-motion stay |\n| **Stay after arbitration ordered** | Mandatory on just terms | Mandatory on application if §3 predicates met | Dismissal cannot replace a requested federal stay |\n| **Immediate appeal from denial** | Yes | Yes | Separate state and federal appeal rules apply |\n| **Immediate appeal from grant** | Not listed except an order staying arbitration itself | Generally prohibited under §16(b) | Review ordinarily waits for later final judgment or authorized route |\n\nThe current Kansas transition rule appears in K.S.A. 5-425 and the savings clause in K.S.A. 5-453. The old act’s prospective-arbitration exclusions are preserved only for agreements governed by that old act, subject to federal preemption and specialized law such as McCarran-Ferguson in an insurance setting. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0053_section/005_004_0053_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## A2. 2018 enactment and current-status check\n\nThe 2018 enrolled act created the current K.S.A. 5-423–5-453 framework, repealed the predecessor provisions, and established the July 1, 2018 transition. Selected enrolled pages were visually inspected: PDF index 0/printed page 1, index 1/printed page 2, index 7/printed page 8, and index 9/printed page 10. This was not a whole legislative-history audit. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThe current K.S.A. 5-428 page lists HB 2351 as a measure affecting the section, but the official bill page marks HB 2351 **died**. Its proposed insurance-contract exception is not operative law. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## A3. FAA scope and preemption\n\nThe FAA reaches a written arbitration provision in a transaction involving commerce. Kansas decisions recognize that the FAA creates substantive federal arbitration law applicable in state as well as federal court. Under *Skewes*, the FAA preempted the old Kansas prohibition against prospective arbitration of tort claims in an interstate transaction. The same result does not automatically govern specialized insurance disputes subject to McCarran-Ferguson reverse preemption. ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThe FAA’s saving clause preserves generally applicable defenses but preempts a doctrine that derives its meaning from the fact that an agreement requires arbitration or interferes with arbitration’s fundamental attributes. *Concepcion* therefore invalidates arbitration-specific hostility, while ordinary formation, fraud, duress, and unconscionability principles remain available on equal terms. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# B. Court-versus-arbitrator allocation\n\n## B1. Gateway allocation matrix\n\n| Contested issue | Default decisionmaker | Possible contractual variation | Controlling qualification |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| **Was any contract formed?** | Court | No delegation can precede formation of the agreement containing it | *Fedor*; K.S.A. 5-428(b) |\n| **Was an arbitration agreement formed?** | Court | Same | Electronic signature/authentication does not itself prove assent |\n| **Which version of the terms governed?** | Court | Delegation cannot decide which contract formed the delegation | *Coinbase v. Suski* |\n| **Did consumer receive/incorporate the clause?** | Court | Same formation boundary | Actual delivery, notice, and assent evidence |\n| **Does the controversy fall within the clause?** | Court under Kansas statutory default | Can be delegated clearly and unmistakably | K.S.A. 5-428(b); *Belnap*; *Henry Schein* |\n| **Condition precedent to arbitrability** | Arbitrator under Kansas default | Parties can define the condition and process | K.S.A. 5-428(c) |\n| **Is the contract containing a valid clause enforceable?** | Arbitrator under Kansas default | Subject to formation and valid delegation | K.S.A. 5-428(c) |\n| **Whole-contract illegality or voidness** | Arbitrator when FAA separability applies | Clause-specific challenge remains judicial unless delegated | *Buckeye*; *Packard* |\n| **Arbitration-clause-specific unconscionability** | Court absent valid delegation | Arbitrator if valid delegation covers enforceability and delegation itself is not specifically challenged | *Rent-A-Center* |\n| **Delegation-clause formation** | Court | Cannot be delegated before formation | *Fedor* |\n| **Delegation-specific unconscionability** | Court | Court decides the specific challenge | *Rent-A-Center* |\n| **“Wholly groundless” scope argument** | Arbitrator after valid delegation | No judicial merits exception | *Henry Schein* |\n| **Competing contracts, one with arbitration and one selecting courts** | Court | Delegation in one document does not answer which contract controls | *Coinbase v. Suski* |\n| **Can a nonsignatory invoke the agreement?** | Ordinarily court | Actual delegation can matter only after court establishes an enforceable basis connecting actor to agreement | *Arthur Andersen* |\n| **Litigation-conduct waiver** | Federal court ordinarily applies ordinary waiver after *Morgan* | Kansas allocation remains less settled because of older *Dixon* | Actual forum and contractual delegation matter |\n| **Procedural waiver inside arbitration** | Arbitrator ordinarily | Defined by clause/rules | Distinguish from waiver through court litigation conduct |\n| **FAA §3 “default in proceeding with arbitration”** | Federal court deciding stay | Contract and administrator facts matter | Nonpayment or refusal to proceed can be relevant |\n\nKansas’s statutory default appears in K.S.A. 5-428. Parties can vary many act provisions to the extent allowed by law, but K.S.A. 5-426 makes specified provisions nonwaivable and prevents unreasonable pre-dispute restrictions on initiation notice, disclosures, and counsel rights. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# C. Formation, assent, version, and evidentiary hearing\n\n## C1. Formation burden\n\nThe party seeking arbitration bears the initial burden to establish an agreement. The evidence ordinarily must identify:\n\n- The proposed terms.\n- How and when they were presented.\n- The person or entity making the offer.\n- The consumer’s acceptance.\n- Consideration or the underlying exchange.\n- The exact arbitration-clause version.\n- Any incorporated document or administrator rules.\n- Any opt-out route and whether it was exercised.\n- Any later amendment and contractual authority for it.\n- The connection between the consumer and the account.\n- Authentication and attribution of electronic records.\n\nIf the opponent produces a genuine factual dispute over formation, the court cannot simply resolve credibility against that opponent on a paper record. Under the FAA, §4 requires a summary trial of the formation issue; *Howard v. Ferrellgas* describes an initial summary-judgment-like evaluation followed by a trial where a genuine factual issue remains. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nKansas K.S.A. 5-429 similarly instructs the court to “proceed summarily” where the motion is opposed and to compel only if an enforceable arbitration agreement exists. The Kansas statute does not prescribe a universal jury right or exact discovery period for that summary process. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## C2. Electronic formation\n\nKansas UETA provides:\n\n- A party cannot be forced to use electronic records merely because the statute recognizes them.\n- UETA applies only when both parties agreed to conduct the transaction electronically.\n- Agreement can be inferred from context and conduct.\n- An electronic record can satisfy a writing requirement.\n- An electronic signature can satisfy a signature requirement.\n- Attribution depends on proof that the electronic act was the purported person’s act, considering the agreement, security procedures, and surrounding circumstances. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0009_section/016_016_0009_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThose rules mean:\n\nPlain text\n```\nAuthenticated click event\n≠ automatically mutual assent to every linked term\n\nElectronic signature\n≠ automatically proof of the exact arbitration version\n\nBusiness record\n≠ automatically proof that the clause was displayed\n\nContinued account use\n≠ automatically assent unless the contract and notice make that consequence sufficiently clear\n```\n\nIn *Duling v. Mid American Credit Union* and unpublished *Knisley v. Equity Bank*, Kansas appellate panels scrutinized whether a change-in-terms notice and opt-out structure actually communicated that continued use would constitute acceptance. The cases support fact-specific Kansas contract analysis rather than a universal continued-use rule. *Knisley* is unpublished; *Duling* was issued as a memorandum opinion and should not be treated as an across-the-board safe harbor or prohibition. ([caselaw.findlaw.com](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## C3. Amendment and change in terms\n\nA later arbitration term requires evidence of:\n\n1. Contractual power to amend.\n2. Compliance with notice requirements.\n3. Delivery or availability of the exact new term.\n4. Any opt-out rights.\n5. Conduct that the agreement validly defines as assent.\n6. Effective date.\n7. Whether the dispute accrued before or after the change.\n8. Whether the amendment can bind an assignee, affiliate, or related account.\n\nA website posting alone is not universal proof of delivery or assent. An internal record stating “terms changed” does not prove the consumer received the incorporated text.\n\n## C4. Competing agreements\n\nWhere the same parties have:\n\n- An earlier account agreement containing arbitration; and\n- A later promotion, sweepstakes, settlement, debt-relief agreement, or other contract selecting court,\n\nthe court decides which agreement governs the dispute. *Coinbase v. Suski* rejects the proposition that a delegation clause in one asserted contract can itself decide whether that contract or a competing court-selection agreement controls. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# D. Delegation and scope\n\n## D1. Clear-and-unmistakable requirement\n\nA delegation clause is an agreement to arbitrate gateway questions such as scope or enforceability. Under federal law, courts enforce it where the parties clearly and unmistakably delegated those questions.\n\nDirect language can say, for example, that the arbitrator has exclusive authority to decide:\n\n- Interpretation.\n- Applicability.\n- Enforceability.\n- Formation of the arbitration provision—although formation of the larger agreement still cannot be delegated before a contract exists.\n- Scope.\n- Waiver or conditions precedent.\n\nIncorporation of administrator rules can also demonstrate delegation. In published *Belnap v. Iasis Healthcare*, the Tenth Circuit held that incorporation of JAMS rules empowering the arbitrator to determine jurisdiction supplied clear and unmistakable delegation on the agreement before it. That does not establish that any reference to “AAA,” “JAMS,” or “industry rules” is sufficient. The contract must adequately incorporate identifiable rules, and formation, competing-contract, nonsignatory, and version questions remain distinct. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## D2. Challenge targeting\n\n| Challenge actually made | Court’s first task |\n| --- | --- |\n| “I never agreed to any contract” | Decide formation |\n| “I agreed to the account but never received or accepted arbitration terms” | Decide arbitration-clause formation |\n| “The delegation paragraph was hidden, one-sided, or never accepted” | Decide delegation-specific challenge |\n| “The whole arbitration clause is unconscionable,” with valid delegation not specifically attacked | Arbitrator may decide under *Rent-A-Center* |\n| “The entire contract is illegal under KCSOA” | Arbitrator under separability if valid clause and FAA apply |\n| “This dispute falls outside the arbitration clause” | Court under Kansas default, unless valid delegation covers scope |\n| “The requested arbitration theory is absurd” | Arbitrator after valid delegation; no wholly-groundless exception |\n| “A later court-selection agreement superseded the arbitration agreement” | Court decides which contract controls |\n| “The debt buyer is not a party and has no right to invoke the clause” | Court determines enforceability by or against that actor |\n\n*Rent-A-Center* treats the delegation clause as severable. A party must specifically challenge that delegation provision to obtain judicial review of the delegated issue. *Henry Schein* eliminates a judicial “wholly groundless” exception once delegation has been established. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## D3. Scope and statutory claims\n\nScope turns on the actual language:\n\n- “Arising under this agreement” can be narrower.\n- “Arising out of or relating to this agreement, account, services, communications, or relationship” can be broader.\n- Express exclusions for small claims, injunctions, collection actions, intellectual property, or particular remedies must be read.\n- A one-sided clause can reserve creditor court remedies while sending consumer claims to arbitration; that structure can raise ordinary contract-defense issues but is not automatically invalid.\n\nBroad language can encompass statutory KCSOA, KCPA, CROA, or other claims where they relate to the contractual relationship. It does not establish that the claimant actually has a private cause of action or that every statutory remedy can be waived.\n\n## D4. Class and collective procedure\n\nAn arbitrator cannot impose class arbitration based only on contractual silence or ambiguity. There must be an affirmative contractual basis for concluding that the parties agreed to class arbitration. *Lamps Plus* applies that federal consent principle. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nA contractual class-action waiver in individual arbitration is not invalid merely because state law considers such waivers unconscionable in certain consumer contracts; *Concepcion* preempts state rules that condition arbitration enforcement on the availability of class procedures. Separate formation, fraud, costs, and remedy-waiver challenges remain possible. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# E. Assignees, debt buyers, servicers, affiliates, and other nonsignatories\n\n## E1. Enforcement theories\n\nA nonsignatory can enforce an arbitration agreement only if an ordinary state-law contract theory makes the agreement enforceable by that actor. Recognized theories can include:\n\n- Assignment.\n- Assumption.\n- Agency.\n- Third-party-beneficiary status.\n- Equitable estoppel.\n- Alter ego or veil-piercing in an appropriate case.\n- Incorporation by reference.\n- Successor status.\n\nThe FAA does not create a free-standing federal nonsignatory right. *Arthur Andersen v. Carlisle* directs courts back to applicable state contract law. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## E2. Actor matrix\n\n| Actor seeking arbitration | Necessary gateway proof | What is insufficient by itself |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| **Original creditor** | Consumer agreement, formation, clause, scope | Account statements alone |\n| **Debt buyer** | Transfer of the relevant contract or arbitration right; account inclusion; clause scope | “We bought the debt” label or generic bill of sale |\n| **Assignee** | Assignment language and chain showing dispute-resolution rights passed | Assignment of payment right without contract terms |\n| **Servicer** | Agency or contractual authority, clause covering agents/servicers, owner’s status | Possession of payment records |\n| **Collection agency** | Express clause coverage, agency, beneficiary, or estoppel theory | Collection placement alone |\n| **Affiliate** | Express affiliate language or another recognized theory | Common branding or ownership |\n| **Attorney or law firm** | Clause coverage of counsel/agents or derivative enforcement theory | Attorney relationship alone |\n| **Debt-relief provider affiliate** | Actual agreement and relationship; clause coverage | Shared officers or marketing |\n| **Trustee** | Trust transfer plus trustee authority and clause rights | Trust name alone |\n| **Arbitration administrator** | Normally administers rather than litigates merits; contractual immunity or role depends on rules | Being named in the clause does not make administrator creditor or party |\n| **Consumer against nonsignatory company** | Same state-law theories; estoppel and beneficiary principles can work in either direction | Allegation of corporate relationship alone |\n\nIn *Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co.*, Kansas applied assignee language and equitable estoppel in a vehicle dispute, but its result depended on the actual contract and intertwined claims. It is not a universal creditor-affiliate rule. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nIn *Portfolio Recovery Associates v. Dixon*, the Kansas Court of Appeals remanded for determination of whether a binding arbitration agreement existed and whether the debt buyer could enforce it. The decision does not establish that every portfolio purchaser automatically inherits arbitration rights. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## E3. Assignment of debt versus arbitration rights\n\nThe relevant documents can include:\n\n- Original consumer agreement.\n- Change-in-terms provisions.\n- Bill of sale.\n- Purchase agreement.\n- Definitions of “account,” “contract,” and “rights.”\n- Account schedule.\n- Intermediate transfers.\n- Servicing agreement.\n- Any exclusion of dispute-resolution rights.\n- Any anti-assignment provision.\n- Any clause extending rights to successors, assigns, agents, or affiliates.\n\nA transfer of “receivables” can differ from a transfer of the complete contract. A transfer of the complete account can differ from a bare collection placement. The court must determine what was actually transferred.\n\n## E4. Negotiable instruments\n\nArticle 3 authority to enforce a negotiable instrument can exist independently of ownership. But the arbitration clause may be in:\n\n- The note itself.\n- A separate loan agreement.\n- An account agreement.\n- A disclosure packet.\n- A later modification.\n\nA person entitled to enforce the note does not automatically become entitled to enforce a separate arbitration agreement without a transfer, assumption, agency, or other connecting theory.\n\n# F. Validity defenses and statutory-right boundaries\n\n## F1. Saving-clause defense matrix\n\n| Defense | Court/arbitrator gateway | Required focus |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| **No assent** | Court | Formation, delivery, exact version |\n| **Fraud in execution** | Court where it challenges agreement formation | Nature of document and opportunity to know terms |\n| **Fraud in inducement of whole contract** | Arbitrator after valid clause under separability | Whole-contract merits |\n| **Fraud aimed specifically at arbitration clause** | Court absent valid delegation; delegation analysis if present | Clause-specific conduct |\n| **Duress** | Depends on whether it attacks formation, clause, delegation, or whole contract | Actual threat, causation, alternatives |\n| **Procedural unconscionability** | Court absent valid delegation | Surprise, visibility, bargaining conduct, delivery |\n| **Substantive unconscionability** | Court absent valid delegation | One-sided remedies, costs, forum, fee shifting, limitations |\n| **Illegality of whole debt-relief contract** | Arbitrator under *Packard/Buckeye* if valid clause and FAA apply | Underlying statutory merits |\n| **Prospective waiver of statutory rights** | Court absent valid delegation; remedy-specific analysis | Whether clause eliminates substantive right rather than changes forum |\n| **Prohibitive arbitration cost** | Challenger bears evidentiary burden | Actual fees, ability, contract allocation, administrator rules |\n| **Class waiver** | FAA ordinarily enforces individual arbitration | Formation and other neutral defenses remain |\n| **Unavailable administrator** | Clause construction, substitution statute, integral-forum question | Actual administrator status and clause wording |\n\n## F2. Kansas unconscionability\n\nKansas uses ordinary contract unconscionability. *Wille v. Southwestern Bell* identifies factors such as:\n\n- Inequality of bargaining power.\n- Deceptive bargaining conduct.\n- Hidden or incomprehensible terms.\n- Denial of basic rights or remedies.\n- Grossly one-sided terms.\n- Unfair surprise.\n- Overall commercial setting and alternatives.\n\nMere unequal bargaining power or a take-it-or-leave-it presentation is not necessarily enough. The party attacking the clause bears the burden. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nFor arbitration, relevant evidence can include:\n\n- Font, location, headings, and disclosure.\n- Whether the consumer received the rules.\n- Opt-out terms.\n- Cost allocation.\n- Travel forum.\n- One-sided court carveouts.\n- Confidentiality.\n- Limitation of remedies.\n- Fee shifting.\n- Shortened limitations.\n- Unilateral amendment.\n- Ability to obtain statutory attorney fees.\n- Severability.\n\nNo single factor decides every case.\n\n## F3. Costs and effective vindication\n\nA claimant asserting that arbitration costs prevent effective access bears the burden to show likely, non-speculative prohibitive costs. *Green Tree* rejected a challenge based only on uncertain possible expenses. Actual administrator rules, filing fees, consumer caps, company payment obligations, indigency procedures, and the value of the claim matter. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nThe effective-vindication doctrine does not invalidate a clause merely because individual arbitration is economically unattractive. *American Express v. Italian Colors* distinguishes high litigation expense from a provision that prospectively waives the substantive federal right itself. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nBecause no actual clause or administrator version is supplied, PASS-17 does not calculate AAA or JAMS filing fees, arbitrator compensation, company-paid amounts, or hardship relief.\n\n## F4. Consumer statutes\n\nNo universal federal consumer statute bars arbitration. In *CompuCredit v. Greenwood*, the Supreme Court held that CROA’s disclosure of a “right to sue” did not displace the FAA because Congress had not made CROA claims nonarbitrable. That does not establish CROA coverage, merits, or a private claim in an actual Kansas debt-relief transaction. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nKansas K.S.A. 50-1121(u) bars a licensed CSO from attempting to make a consumer waive rights or benefits under the KCSOA. An arbitration clause that preserves substantive remedies is not necessarily a waiver merely because it changes forum. A clause that prospectively eliminates statutory damages, attorney fees, rescission, agency complaints, or other nonwaivable rights presents a different issue. Kansas’s arbitration act also authorizes an arbitrator to award punitive damages, attorney fees, and other remedies where law or the agreement permits them. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# G. Waiver, litigation conduct, and default in arbitration\n\n## G1. Federal standard after *Morgan*\n\n*Morgan v. Sundance* rejected an arbitration-specific requirement that the opposing party prove prejudice before litigation conduct can waive arbitration. Courts must apply ordinary waiver principles rather than make arbitration contracts harder to waive than other contracts. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nRelevant conduct can include:\n\n- Knowledge of the arbitration right.\n- Filing suit on arbitrable claims.\n- Answering without preserving arbitration.\n- Extensive merits discovery.\n- Filing dispositive merits motions.\n- Seeking a court merits ruling before invoking arbitration.\n- Long unexplained delay.\n- Conduct inconsistent with an intent to arbitrate.\n\nNo one act is universally dispositive. Prejudice is no longer a federal prerequisite, but delay and procedural advantage can remain evidence of intentional relinquishment.\n\n## G2. Kansas law and decisionmaker uncertainty\n\n*Jackson Trak Group v. Mid States Port Authority* describes waiver as intentional relinquishment of a known right and identifies inconsistent action, denial of arbitrability, failure to follow required preliminary steps, and unjustified delay as possible waiver conduct. It found no waiver on its facts. The case predates the 2018 Kansas act and *Morgan*. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n*Portfolio Recovery v. Dixon* stated that the arbitrator should decide the creditor’s alleged waiver through litigation conduct, assuming an enforceable arbitration agreement. That allocation predates both the current Kansas act and *Morgan*. No later controlling published Kansas appellate decision located in this pass squarely reconciles:\n\n- K.S.A. 5-428’s allocation;\n- *Dixon*;\n- ordinary waiver after *Morgan*; and\n- a valid delegation clause.\n\nAccordingly, the current Kansas state-court decisionmaker for litigation-conduct waiver remains **partially unresolved**. Contractual procedural waiver occurring inside arbitration remains more naturally arbitral.\n\n## G3. Current Tenth Circuit guidance\n\nAn unpublished February 12, 2026 Tenth Circuit decision, *Myers v. Papa Texas*, treats *Morgan* as eliminating prejudice from the circuit’s earlier litigation-conduct factors while retaining the other inconsistent-conduct considerations. It also distinguishes waiver from FAA §3 “default in proceeding with arbitration”; failure to pay required arbitration costs resulting in administrator termination can support statutory default. The decision is current persuasive authority but nonprecedential. ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## G4. Court deadlines and stay\n\nAn arbitration demand sent to AAA, JAMS, or the opponent does **not** itself:\n\n- Answer a Kansas complaint.\n- Extend a Kansas answer deadline.\n- Stay discovery.\n- Stay a pending motion.\n- Stay default proceedings.\n- Divest the court of jurisdiction.\n\nUnder Kansas law, the statutory pending-motion stay is triggered when a party **makes a motion to the court** to order arbitration. The court must then stay the implicated judicial proceeding on just terms until it finally decides the motion. If arbitration is ordered, a further mandatory stay follows. Practically, the party should not assume that deadlines have disappeared before the court recognizes and implements the statutory stay, particularly where scope or affected claims are disputed. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# H. Motion to compel, hearing, stay, and appeal\n\n## H1. Kansas state-court procedure\n\n### If no civil action is pending\n\n- Relief is sought by motion.\n- The initial motion must be served like a civil summons.\n- The court must have jurisdiction over the controversy and parties.\n- Venue follows K.S.A. 5-449.\n- The motion should identify the agreement, refusal, requested order, and supporting evidence. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n### If a civil action is pending\n\n- The motion must be filed in that court if it involves the pending claim.\n- Service follows the rules for motions in a pending case.\n- The opposing party can contest formation, enforceability, actor status, scope, waiver, or another gateway.\n- The court proceeds summarily.\n- The court cannot deny arbitration merely because it believes the underlying claim lacks merit. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n### Evidence and hearing\n\nThe Kansas act does not prescribe one required affidavit form. The motion record can include:\n\n- Agreement and amendments.\n- Electronic audit evidence.\n- Business-record declaration.\n- Account identifiers.\n- Assignment documents.\n- Administrator rules.\n- Opt-out records.\n- Correspondence refusing arbitration.\n- Evidence of litigation conduct.\n\nWhere material formation facts conflict, a live evidentiary hearing or other summary factfinding can be required. The exact hearing procedure follows applicable court rules and orders.\n\n### No universal response period\n\nK.S.A. 5-427 says motions are heard under the ordinary motion rules. The arbitration act itself states no single statewide number of days for opposing every motion to compel. Applicable Kansas civil rules, Chapter 61 procedure, local rules, scheduling orders, and service method must be checked. No concrete deadline is calculated without an actual filed motion and court.\n\n## H2. Kansas stay structure\n\n| Stage | Kansas rule |\n| --- | --- |\n| Motion to compel filed | Court shall stay the judicial proceeding involving the allegedly arbitrable claim until final decision on motion |\n| Motion granted | Court shall stay judicial proceeding involving arbitrable claim |\n| Mixed claims | Stay may be limited to severable arbitrable claim |\n| Motion denied | Litigation can proceed, subject to appeal and any separate stay order |\n| Provisional relief before arbitrator appointed | Court can grant for good cause where necessary to protect arbitration effectiveness |\n| Provisional relief after arbitrator appointed | Court relief generally requires urgency and inability of arbitrator to act adequately |\n\nThe stay provisions are mandatory and listed among the act’s nonwaivable requirements. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## H3. Chapter 61 and small claims\n\nThe Kansas arbitration act defines “court” as a court of competent jurisdiction. If the alleged arbitration agreement is already at issue in a pending Chapter 61 or otherwise eligible small-claims case, K.S.A. 5-429(e) directs the motion to the court where the proceeding is pending.\n\nNo arbitration-specific Kansas Judicial Council form or published controlling Kansas case was located in this pass that establishes:\n\n- Automatic conversion of every small-claims case to Chapter 60.\n- A unique small-claims arbitration-opposition form.\n- A different Chapter 61 evidentiary burden.\n- A special small-claims immediate-appeal clock.\n\nThe district court’s actual assignment, route, local rules, and any conversion order remain necessary. Small claims’ restrictions on pleadings and attorney appearances do not erase the arbitration act, but the practical handling of a complex gateway dispute remains held.\n\n## H4. Federal motion and hearing\n\nUnder 9 U.S.C. §4:\n\n- A party aggrieved by another’s refusal may petition a U.S. district court that would have jurisdiction absent the arbitration agreement.\n- Written notice must be served at least five days before the hearing.\n- Service follows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.\n- If agreement formation or refusal is not in issue, the court orders arbitration according to the agreement.\n- If formation or failure is genuinely in issue, the court summarily tries that issue.\n- A jury trial is available on a timely statutory demand for the formation or failure issue. ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nFAA applications are made and heard as motions unless the FAA expressly provides otherwise. ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s6/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## H5. Federal jurisdiction\n\nThe FAA does not independently confer federal subject-matter jurisdiction.\n\nFor a §4 petition, *Vaden*’s look-through approach permits the court to examine the underlying controversy because §4 asks whether the court would have jurisdiction “save for” the arbitration agreement. *Badgerow v. Walters* holds that this look-through method does not extend to FAA §§9 and 10, whose text lacks that language. An independent federal question or diversity basis is then required. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nFederal personal jurisdiction, venue, service, and amount-in-controversy requirements remain separate.\n\n## H6. Federal stay versus dismissal\n\nFAA §3 says the federal court shall stay a referable suit on a party’s application if the applicant is not in default in proceeding with arbitration. In *Smith v. Spizzirri*, the Supreme Court held that where a party requests the stay, the district court cannot dismiss the action instead. ([U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## H7. Immediate appeal matrix\n\n| Order | Kansas state appeal | Federal FAA appeal |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| **Denial of motion to compel** | Immediate appeal under K.S.A. 5-450(a)(1) | Immediate appeal under 9 U.S.C. §16(a) |\n| **Order granting stay of arbitration** | Immediate appeal | Immediate appeal under §16(a) where injunction/stay fits |\n| **Order compelling arbitration and staying litigation** | Not listed as immediate Kansas appeal | Generally not immediately appealable under §16(b) |\n| **Dismissal entering final judgment after compelling** | Kansas final-judgment route may apply, but current Kansas act requires stay | Federal final decision can be appealable, but *Smith* prohibits dismissal where stay requested |\n| **Confirmation/vacatur orders** | Separate K.S.A. 5-450 routes | Separate §16 routes |\n| **Appeal effect on trial court** | No automatic arbitration-specific stay located | Nonfrivolous §16(a) appeal from denial automatically stays district-court merits proceedings under *Coinbase v. Bielski* |\n\nA Kansas arbitration appeal is taken like a civil appeal. K.S.A. 60-2103 ordinarily gives 30 days from entry of the appealable order, subject to its tolling and extension rules. Filing an appeal does not itself establish a stay; Kansas stay relief can depend on K.S.A. 60-262, supersedeas, injunction, or appellate order. ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([kslegislature.gov](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_002_0000_article/060_002_0062_section/060_002_0062_k/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\nA federal civil notice of appeal ordinarily is due 30 days after entry, or 60 days where the United States or specified federal party is involved, subject to FRAP 4’s tolling, extension, and entry rules. No actual appellate date is calculated here. ([uscourts.gov](https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n# I. Administrator rules and public forms\n\n## I1. Official-resource inventory\n\n| Resource | Current public status | Use | Limit |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| **Kansas Court Forms index** | Current public index located | General motion, service, and civil forms | No arbitration-specific motion form located in bounded search |\n| **Kansas Judicial Council Chapter 60 forms** | Public index located | General civil filing and motion presentation | Direct pages intermittently returned 403 |\n| **Kansas Judicial Council Chapter 61 pleadings** | Public index located | Limited-action pleadings | No dedicated arbitration opposition form located |\n| **AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules** | AAA public page states updated rules effective May 1, 2025 | Administration only if actual agreement selects or properly incorporates AAA and applicable version | Rules are not Kansas statutes; actual contract/version unknown |\n| **JAMS Consumer Minimum Standards** | Public page states effective May 1, 2024 | JAMS policy for qualifying consumer arbitrations | Standards apply only through actual JAMS administration and contract context |\n| **JAMS Comprehensive Rules** | Public rules available | Contractual procedure if incorporated | Actual version and incorporation unknown |\n\nOfficial resources:\n\n- https://self-help.kscourts.gov/FindCourtForms\n- https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-60-civil-actions\n- https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-61-civil-actions/pleadings\n- https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/\n- https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards\n\nThe AAA and JAMS materials do not prove:\n\n- That the consumer accepted them.\n- Which version governs.\n- That their delegation provision was incorporated.\n- The actual fee allocation.\n- Administrator willingness to accept the matter.\n- Eligibility for consumer protections.\n- Compliance with a prefiling registration requirement.\n\nNo fee arithmetic is provided because no actual clause, administrator, filing date, claim value, rule version, or company-registration status is supplied.\n\n# J. Bounded hypothetical workflows\n\n## J1. Assent disputed\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Creditor produces an electronic audit record showing a click.\n- Consumer admits opening an online account but denies seeing arbitration terms.\n- Audit record does not identify the displayed version.\n- Linked document metadata shows multiple versions.\n- No delegation is considered until formation is resolved.\n\n**Workflow**\n\nPlain text\n```\n1. Mover must establish the exact offered arbitration record.\n2. Court determines whether the clause was presented and accepted.\n3. UETA can establish an electronic record/signature but not mutual assent by itself.\n4. If evidence creates no genuine factual dispute, court decides on record.\n5. If a genuine formation dispute remains:\n   Kansas court proceeds summarily;\n   federal court conducts the §4 trial process.\n```\n\n**Held evidence**\n\n- Page flow.\n- Clickwrap or browsewrap design.\n- Timestamp.\n- IP/device data.\n- Version hash.\n- Linked text.\n- Opt-out records.\n- Consumer testimony.\n- Business-record foundation.\n\nNo arbitration is compelled merely from the phrase “electronic acceptance.”\n\n## J2. Valid arbitration clause; whole debt-relief contract allegedly illegal\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Court finds a valid arbitration clause.\n- FAA commerce nexus is established.\n- Consumer argues the entire debt-relief agreement is void under KCSOA because the provider’s model or fees were unlawful.\n- Consumer does not assert a separate formation or clause-specific defect.\n\n**Result**\n\nUnder *Buckeye* and *Packard*, the whole-contract illegality issue goes to the arbitrator first. The court does **not** decide that the provider complied with KCSOA; it decides only the arbitration gateway. The arbitrator can later decide the alleged illegality and remedies within the lawful scope of arbitral authority. ([supreme.justia.com](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ([law.justia.com](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n**Alternative**\n\nIf the claimed statutory defect prevented any contract from forming at all, or was directed specifically to formation of the arbitration provision, the court must resolve that gateway.\n\n## J3. Clause-specific unconscionability\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Formation is established.\n- No delegation clause exists.\n- Consumer challenges only the arbitration clause because it requires an inaccessible out-of-state forum, shifts all fees to the consumer, eliminates statutory attorney fees, and reserves all court remedies to the company.\n- Actual fees and consumer finances are supplied.\n\n**Workflow**\n\nPlain text\n```\nCourt applies generally applicable Kansas contract law.\nConsumer bears burden of unconscionability.\nCourt examines procedural and substantive evidence.\nFAA preempts arbitration-specific hostility,\nbut not neutral unconscionability.\n```\n\n**Possible branches**\n\n- Clause enforceable as written.\n- Offending term severed if contract and law permit.\n- Clause unenforceable.\n- Costs challenge fails because evidence is speculative.\n\nNo result can be predicted without the actual clause and fee evidence.\n\n## J4. Delegation-specific challenge\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Clause states arbitrator has exclusive power to decide scope and enforceability.\n- Consumer specifically argues the delegation sentence was hidden and imposes unilateral gateway fees.\n- Consumer also attacks the broader arbitration clause.\n\n**Result**\n\nPlain text\n```\nCourt first decides:\n- whether delegation was formed;\n- whether the delegation itself is unconscionable.\n\nIf delegation survives:\n- arbitrator decides the broader arbitration-clause challenge.\n\nIf delegation fails:\n- court decides the arbitration-clause challenge.\n```\n\nIf the dispute concerns a competing later contract selecting court, the court first determines which contract governs under *Coinbase v. Suski*. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n## J5. Assignee lacks complete contract and transfer proof\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Debt buyer produces monthly statements.\n- It produces a generic bill of sale but no underlying account agreement.\n- Bill of sale references an electronic schedule not produced.\n- Buyer invokes an arbitration clause from a generic form used by the original creditor in a different year.\n- Consumer disputes account inclusion and term version.\n\n**Result**\n\nPlain text\n```\nCourt must determine:\n1. Which agreement governed the account?\n2. Did that agreement contain arbitration?\n3. Did the consumer assent?\n4. Was the arbitration right transferred?\n5. Is this account included in the transfer?\n```\n\nDebt ownership allegations and statements alone do not compel arbitration. The court does not send these threshold connection questions to an arbitrator merely because the generic form contains a delegation provision.\n\n## J6. Litigation-conduct waiver after *Morgan*\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Defendant knew of arbitration.\n- Defendant litigated for one year.\n- It sought merits discovery and filed a dispositive merits motion.\n- It invoked arbitration only after losing that motion.\n- FAA applies.\n- No contractual delegation of litigation-conduct waiver is established.\n\n**Federal branch**\n\nThe federal court applies ordinary waiver without requiring prejudice. Knowledge, delay, merits litigation, and inconsistent conduct are relevant.\n\n**Kansas branch**\n\nKansas’s older *Jackson Trak* factors remain relevant, but *Dixon*’s arbitrator-allocation statement predates the current act and *Morgan*. The current Kansas decisionmaker remains held pending actual clause and later controlling authority.\n\nNo waiver exists merely because a party filed an answer or participated briefly.\n\n## J7. Arbitration demand filed; no court motion or stay order\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Defendant receives a Kansas civil complaint.\n- Defendant files an AAA demand.\n- Defendant sends plaintiff a copy.\n- Defendant files no motion to compel and no answer.\n- Court has entered no stay.\n\n**Result**\n\nPlain text\n```\nPrivate arbitration demand:\ndoes not answer the complaint\ndoes not invoke K.S.A. 5-429(f)\ndoes not extend court deadlines\ndoes not prevent default\n```\n\nThe statutory pending-motion stay requires a motion **to the court**. The actual answer or motion deadline remains governed by the case route and court orders.\n\n## J8. Motion to compel pending\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Defendant timely files a Kansas motion to compel in the pending debt case.\n- Motion identifies the agreement and requests the statutory stay.\n- Plaintiff opposes formation.\n- Court has not yet decided formation.\n\n**Kansas consequence**\n\nK.S.A. 5-429(f) requires the court, on just terms, to stay the proceeding involving the allegedly arbitrable claim until the final motion decision.\n\n**Evidence phase**\n\n- Court may allow targeted formation evidence.\n- Arbitration itself may continue unless court orders otherwise under K.S.A. 5-428(d), though practical facts may warrant an order pausing it.\n- Merits weakness is not a reason to deny the compel motion.\n\n## J9. Compulsion granted: stay versus dismissal\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Kansas court finds an enforceable clause covering all claims.\n- No nonarbitrable claim remains.\n\n**Kansas result**\n\nCourt orders arbitration and stays the judicial action. K.S.A. 5-429(g) does not authorize dismissal as a substitute.\n\n**Federal result**\n\nIf a party requested a stay, FAA §3 and *Smith v. Spizzirri* require a stay rather than dismissal.\n\n**Mixed claim branch**\n\nThe court can stay only the severable arbitrable claim if a nonarbitrable claim can proceed independently; practical case-management considerations can support a broader discretionary stay, but that requires an actual order and record.\n\n## J10. Denial and immediate appeal\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Kansas court denies a motion to compel.\n- Order is entered on date D0.\n- No tolling motion or extension facts are supplied.\n\n**Kansas**\n\n- K.S.A. 5-450 permits immediate appeal.\n- K.S.A. 60-2103 ordinarily supplies a 30-day notice-of-appeal period.\n- No exact date is calculated because entry, service, postorder motions, and holiday facts are not provided.\n- The appeal does not itself establish an automatic Kansas stay; a stay order or applicable security may be needed.\n\n**Federal**\n\n- 9 U.S.C. §16 permits immediate appeal from denial.\n- FRAP 4 ordinarily supplies 30 days, or 60 days where a specified federal party is involved.\n- A nonfrivolous federal §16 appeal automatically stays district-court proceedings under *Coinbase v. Bielski*. ([supremecourt.gov](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com))\n\n**Grant branch**\n\nAn ordinary order compelling arbitration and staying litigation is not immediately appealable under the listed Kansas or federal routes.\n\n## J11. Administrator-rules incorporation\n\n**Assumptions**\n\n- Clause says disputes use “the arbitration rules of AAA.”\n- It does not identify Consumer, Commercial, or another ruleset.\n- Contract predates the current AAA rules.\n- No copy was delivered.\n- Mover argues incorporation delegated every gateway.\n\n**Result**\n\nThe court must determine:\n\n- Whether the reference adequately incorporated identifiable rules.\n- Which version applies.\n- Whether those rules assign the specific gateway issue.\n- Whether the consumer assented to incorporation.\n- Whether the administrator accepts the dispute.\n- Whether formation or a competing contract still requires judicial decision.\n\n*Belnap* supports delegation through clear incorporation of JAMS rules on its facts; it does not make any ambiguous administrator reference universally dispositive.\n\n# K. Source register\n\n| Source ID | Title, issuer, and full literal URL | Exact read scope | Status, access, and limits |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| **S_KS-P17-S001** | Kansas Revised Uniform Arbitration Act — Kansas Revisor: https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0023_section/005_004_0023_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0024_section/005_004_0024_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0031_section/005_004_0031_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0052_section/005_004_0052_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0053_section/005_004_0053_k/ | Definitions; notice; transition; nonwaivable terms; judicial motion; validity and allocation; motion to compel; stays; provisional relief; initiation; remedies; jurisdiction; venue; appeal; E-SIGN relation; savings | **Fresh Oct. 26, 2026 Pacific/UTC.** Current 2026 official HTML; no printed pages or PDF indices. No complete act-history or comments audit. [Kansas Legislature+9](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S002** | 2018 HB 2571 enrolled act: https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf | Selected visual inspection: PDF index 0/printed 1; index 1/printed 2; index 7/printed 8; index 9/printed 10 | **Fresh selected PDF read; not whole legislative history.** Current statute controls. [Kansas Legislature+3](https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S003** | Repealed Kansas act, former K.S.A. 5-401: https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/ | Complete former validity and exclusions text | **Historical, not current except through transition/savings.** [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S004** | HB 2351 official status: https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/ | Bill status and version | **Proposed and died; not operative.** [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S005** | Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§1–4, 6, 16 — OLRC: https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/ https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/ https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/ https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/ https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s6/ https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/ | Commerce/exclusion; validity; stay; compel petition and trial; motion procedure; appeals | **Fresh.** OLRC states law through Public Law 119-120, Oct. 7, 2026. Chapter 4 reviewed only at boundary. [U.S. Code+5](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S006** | Kansas UETA: https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0007_section/016_016_0007_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0009_section/016_016_0009_k/ | Electronic agreement, recognition, and attribution | **Fresh.** No actual platform/audit evidence. [Kansas Legislature+2](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S007** | KCSOA anti-waiver and Kansas arbitral remedies: https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/ | K.S.A. 50-1121(u); K.S.A. 5-443 | **Fresh targeted read.** No broader provider-remedies acceptance. [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S008** | Kansas appeal and stay statutes: https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/ https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_002_0000_article/060_002_0062_section/060_002_0062_k/ | 30-day civil appeal; supersedeas and stay provisions | **Fresh.** No actual appeal/order. [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S009** | *Packard v. Credit Solutions of America*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html | Whole-contract KCSOA/KCPA illegality and FAA separability | **Fresh selected reread for PASS-17.** Published Kansas Court of Appeals; registration-era facts; no merits decision. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S010** | *Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna*: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/ | Whole-contract illegality/separability | **Fresh selected read.** U.S. Supreme Court; applies in state and federal court. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S011** | *Howard v. Ferrellgas Partners*: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html | Formation burden and FAA §4 trial | **Fresh selected read.** Published Tenth Circuit. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S012** | *Fedor v. UnitedHealthcare*: https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066 https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-2066/19-2066-2020-09-16.html | Formation must precede delegation | **Fresh selected read.** Published Tenth Circuit. [Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals+1](https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S013** | *Duling v. Mid American Credit Union*: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html | Change-in-terms assent and opt-out | **Fresh selected read.** Kansas memorandum opinion; not universal authority. [FindLaw+1](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S014** | *Knisley v. Equity Bank*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html | Silence/continued use and FAA-preemption limits | **Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential.** [Justia Law+3](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S015** | *Belnap v. Iasis Healthcare*: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html | JAMS-rule incorporation and delegation | **Fresh selected read.** Published Tenth Circuit; nonconsumer healthcare contract. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S016** | *Coinbase v. Suski* official PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf | Competing agreements; court decides controlling contract | **Fresh PDF read.** PDF index 5/opinion 4 and index 7/opinion 6 visually inspected. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S017** | *Rent-A-Center v. Jackson*: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/ | Delegation severability and specific challenge | **Fresh selected read.** U.S. Supreme Court. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S018** | *Henry Schein v. Archer & White*: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/ | No wholly-groundless exception | **Fresh selected read.** U.S. Supreme Court. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S019** | *Arthur Andersen v. Carlisle*: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/ | State-law nonsignatory theories | **Fresh selected read.** U.S. Supreme Court. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S020** | *Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co.*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html | Assignee language and equitable estoppel | **Fresh selected read.** Published Kansas Court of Appeals; vehicle facts. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S021** | *Portfolio Recovery Associates v. Dixon*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html | Debt-buyer enforcement and waiver allocation | **Fresh selected read.** Published; predates 2018 act and *Morgan*. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S022** | *Jackson Trak Group v. Mid States Port Authority*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html | Kansas waiver factors | **Fresh selected read.** Published; predecessor act. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S023** | *Morgan v. Sundance* official PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf | No arbitration-specific prejudice requirement | **Fresh PDF read.** PDF index 4/opinion 3 and index 6/opinion 5 visually inspected. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S024** | *Myers v. Papa Texas*: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html | Current Tenth Circuit waiver/default discussion | **Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential.** [Justia Law+4](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S025** | *Wille v. Southwestern Bell*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html | Kansas unconscionability factors | **Fresh selected read.** Published Kansas Supreme Court. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S026** | FAA saving-clause and remedy cases: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/ | *Concepcion*, *Italian Colors*, *Green Tree*, *CompuCredit*, *Lamps Plus* | **Fresh selected reads.** No broader federal-consumer-remedy audit. [Justia Law+4](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S027** | *Skewes v. Shearson Lehman*: https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html | FAA preemption of old Kansas tort exclusion | **Fresh selected read.** Published Kansas Supreme Court. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S028** | *Badgerow v. Walters* official PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf | FAA no independent jurisdiction; look-through text | **Fresh PDF read.** PDF index 6/opinion 4 and index 10/opinion 8 visually inspected. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S029** | *Smith v. Spizzirri* official PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf | Federal stay rather than dismissal | **Fresh PDF read.** PDF index 4/opinion 3 visually inspected. [Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S030** | *Coinbase v. Bielski* official PDF: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf | Automatic federal stay during nonfrivolous §16 appeal | **Fresh PDF read.** PDF index 6/opinion 4 visually inspected. [Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S031** | Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 4: https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf | Rule 4(a), PDF pages 17–20; 30/60-day branches and tolling | **Fresh parsed read.** Screenshots initially captured historical-note pages; operative text verified through parsed official PDF lines. [United States Courts+1](https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S032** | Kansas forms: https://self-help.kscourts.gov/FindCourtForms https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-60-civil-actions https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-61-civil-actions/pleadings | Bounded search for arbitration-specific motion forms | **Fresh bounded search; direct pages intermittently inaccessible.** No specific form located; not proof none exists. |\n| **S_KS-P17-S033** | AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules: https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/ | Public consumer rules/status page | **Fresh.** Rules updated effective May 1, 2025; actual contract/version unknown. [American Arbitration Association+1](https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/) |\n| **S_KS-P17-S034** | JAMS Consumer Minimum Standards: https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards | Public consumer standards | **Fresh.** Effective May 1, 2024; private administrator policy, not Kansas law. [JAMS](https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards) |\n\n# L. Claim register\n\n| Claim ID | Precise assertion | Source and pinpoint | Predicates, consequence, and confidence |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| **S_KS-P17-C001** | Current Kansas arbitration act governs agreements made on or after July 1, 2018. | S001, K.S.A. 5-425(a). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C002** | Pre-July 1, 2018 agreement uses current act only if all parties agree in a record; otherwise predecessor act governs subject to savings. | S001 §§5-425(b), 5-453; S003. [Kansas Legislature+2](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C003** | HB 2351’s proposed insurance exception died and is not current law. | S004. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/) | **High current-status fact.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C004** | FAA requires a written clause in a maritime or commerce transaction. | S005, 9 U.S.C. §§1–2. [U.S. Code+1](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/) | **High.** Actual commerce facts required. |\n| **S_KS-P17-C005** | Contractual statement that FAA governs does not create federal subject-matter jurisdiction. | S028; S005. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C006** | Current Kansas act validates arbitration agreements subject to generally applicable contract defenses. | S001, §5-428(a). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C007** | Kansas statutory default assigns existence and scope to court. | S001, §5-428(b). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/) | **High.** Valid delegation can vary scope allocation. |\n| **S_KS-P17-C008** | Kansas statutory default assigns conditions precedent and contract enforceability to arbitrator once a valid clause exists. | S001, §5-428(c). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/) | **High.** Formation remains judicial. |\n| **S_KS-P17-C009** | Formation must be judicially established before delegation is enforced. | S012. [Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals+1](https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066) | **High published Tenth Circuit rule.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C010** | Mover bears initial burden to establish an arbitration agreement. | S011; S013–S014. [Justia Law+2](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C011** | Genuine FAA formation dispute requires summary trial rather than credibility resolution against opponent on papers. | S005 §4; S011. [U.S. Code+1](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C012** | Kansas court proceeds summarily on an opposed compel motion. | S001, §5-429(a)–(c). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C013** | Electronic record/signature can satisfy writing/signature but does not independently prove mutual assent or exact clause version. | S006. [Kansas Legislature+2](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C014** | Continued use after change-in-terms is not universally assent; contract and notice must clearly establish that consequence. | S013–S014. [FindLaw+2](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html) | **Medium-high; case-status limits preserved.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C015** | Whole-contract illegality ordinarily goes to arbitrator after valid FAA clause. | S009–S010. [Justia Law+1](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html) | **High.** Formation/clause-specific challenges differ. |\n| **S_KS-P17-C016** | *Packard* did not decide KCSOA merits, licensing, fee legality, or liability. | S009. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html) | **High source limit.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C017** | Delegation-specific challenge is for court; broad arbitration-clause challenge goes to arbitrator after valid delegation. | S017. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C018** | No wholly-groundless exception exists after valid delegation. | S018. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C019** | Competing-contract question remains for court notwithstanding delegation in one asserted agreement. | S016. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C020** | Incorporation of JAMS rules can clearly delegate arbitrability on appropriate facts. | S015. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html) | **High Tenth Circuit holding; no universal incorporation rule.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C021** | Ambiguous administrator reference or unidentified rule version does not automatically establish delegation. | S015–S016. | **High bounded synthesis.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C022** | Class arbitration requires affirmative contractual basis and cannot rest on silence or ambiguity. | S026, *Lamps Plus*. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C023** | FAA preempts state rules conditioning arbitration on class procedures. | S026, *Concepcion*. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C024** | Nonsignatory FAA enforcement depends on applicable state contract law. | S019. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C025** | Debt buyer does not automatically acquire arbitration rights merely by purchasing debt. | S021. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C026** | Kansas equitable-estoppel or assignee enforcement is fact-specific. | S020. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html) | **High with vehicle-case limits.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C027** | Transfer of payment rights and transfer of complete contract/arbitration rights can differ. | S019–S021. | **High contract-law distinction.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C028** | Article 3 instrument-enforcement right does not automatically establish right to enforce separate arbitration agreement. | S019 and ordinary contract principles. | **High bounded conclusion.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C029** | Kansas generally applicable unconscionability remains available. | S025; S001 §5-428(a). [Justia Law+1](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C030** | Inequality of bargaining power alone does not establish Kansas unconscionability. | S025. [Justia Law](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C031** | Party asserting prohibitive arbitration costs bears evidentiary burden; speculation is insufficient. | S026, *Green Tree*. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C032** | Economic infeasibility alone does not establish effective-vindication invalidity. | S026, *Italian Colors*. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C033** | CROA contains no categorical anti-arbitration command recognized in *CompuCredit*. | S026. [Justia Law](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/) | **High holding; actual CROA coverage held.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C034** | KCSOA anti-waiver can affect a clause eliminating substantive rights but does not automatically prohibit arbitration as forum. | S007. [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/) | **High bounded distinction.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C035** | Kansas arbitrator can award statutory fees, punitive damages, and other remedies where law/agreement authorizes. | S007, K.S.A. 5-443. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C036** | Federal litigation-conduct waiver does not require prejudice after *Morgan*. | S023. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C037** | Knowledge, delay, merits litigation, and inconsistent conduct remain relevant to waiver. | S022–S024. [Justia Law+1](https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html) | **High generally; fact-specific.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C038** | Current Kansas state decisionmaker for litigation-conduct waiver remains partially unresolved after *Morgan*. | S021–S024. | **Medium-high hold.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C039** | FAA §3 default in proceeding with arbitration is distinct from litigation-conduct waiver. | S005 §3; S024. [U.S. Code+1](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/) | **High distinction.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C040** | Arbitration demand alone does not stay a Kansas lawsuit or extend court response deadline. | S001 §§5-427, 5-429. [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C041** | Kansas court must stay implicated judicial claim while compel motion is pending. | S001, §5-429(f). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/) | **High, nonwaivable.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C042** | Kansas court must stay arbitrable claim after ordering arbitration. | S001, §5-429(g). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C043** | Kansas act does not authorize dismissal in lieu of post-compulsion stay. | S001, §5-429(g). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/) | **High textual conclusion.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C044** | Federal court must stay rather than dismiss when party requests FAA §3 stay. | S005 §3; S029. [U.S. Code+1](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C045** | Initial Kansas arbitration motion without pending action is served like summons. | S001, §5-427(b). [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C046** | Pending Kansas action requires motion in that court. | S001, §§5-427, 5-429(e). [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C047** | Kansas court must independently have jurisdiction over controversy and parties. | S001, §5-448. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C048** | Kansas arbitration venue follows specified-hearing county or adverse-party residence/business branches. | S001, §5-449. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C049** | FAA §4 supplies five-day federal hearing notice and formation-trial process. | S005, §4. [U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C050** | FAA supplies no independent federal subject-matter jurisdiction. | S028. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C051** | Look-through jurisdiction applies to FAA §4 but not automatically §§9–10. | S028. [Supreme Court+1](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C052** | Kansas immediate appeal lies from denial of motion to compel. | S001, §5-450. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C053** | Kansas act does not list an ordinary order granting compulsion/staying litigation as immediately appealable. | S001, §5-450. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C054** | Kansas arbitration appeal ordinarily uses 30-day civil appeal period. | S008, §60-2103. [Kansas Legislature](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/) | **High, subject to actual order/tolling.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C055** | No automatic Kansas arbitration-appeal stay was located; separate stay authority is needed. | S008. [Kansas Legislature+1](https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/) | **Bounded negative finding.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C056** | FAA §16 permits immediate appeal from denial and generally bars interlocutory appeal from grant. | S005, §16. [U.S. Code](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C057** | Nonfrivolous federal appeal from arbitration denial automatically stays district merits proceedings. | S030. [Supreme Court](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf) | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C058** | Federal civil appeal ordinarily is 30 days, or 60 days for specified federal-party cases. | S031, FRAP 4(a). [United States Courts+1](https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf) | **High, subject to tolling and entry rules.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C059** | No arbitration-specific Kansas Judicial Council form was located in bounded search. | S032. | **Bounded search result, not universal absence.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C060** | AAA/JAMS rules apply only if actual contract and applicable version incorporate them and administrator accepts the case. | S033–S034. [American Arbitration Association+1](https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/) | **High practical/legal distinction.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C061** | No administrator fee or eligibility amount can be determined without actual clause, version, claim, and status. | S033–S034. | **High hold.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C062** | Small-claims and Chapter 61 cases remain subject to arbitration gateways, but no special published Kansas handling rule was located. | S001, §5-429(e); S032. | **Partial/unresolved.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C063** | Actual contract, assent, delegation, transfer, waiver, and administrator facts control every case-specific result. | Entire component. | **High.** |\n| **S_KS-P17-C064** | PASS-17 establishes no provider, creditor, debt, clause, or arbitration approval. | Scope. | **High project-status statement.** |\n\n# M. Granular coverage and remaining gaps\n\n| Assigned issue | Status | Claims | Exact missing evidence or next action |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Current Kansas arbitration statute | **Answered** | C001–C003, C006–C008 | Actual agreement date |\n| 2018 transition | **Answered** | C001–C002 | Pre-2018 opt-in record |\n| Old insurance/employment/tort exclusions | **Answered historically** | C002 | Specialized old-act/FAA facts |\n| 2026 proposed insurance amendment | **Answered as dead proposal** | C003 | No further action unless reintroduced |\n| FAA commerce scope | **Answered generally** | C004 | Actual transaction nexus |\n| FAA transportation-worker exclusion | **Answered at boundary** | C004 | Ordinarily irrelevant consumer facts |\n| EFAA chapter 4 exception | **Answered at boundary** | C004 | Specialized claim excluded |\n| FAA preemption | **Answered generally** | C006, C023 | Claim-specific state rule |\n| Federal subject-matter jurisdiction | **Answered** | C005, C050–C051 | Federal question/diversity facts |\n| Kansas jurisdiction and venue | **Answered** | C047–C048 | Actual parties/hearing place |\n| Formation | **Answered doctrinally** | C009–C014 | Actual offer, acceptance, version |\n| Formation burden | **Answered** | C010–C012 | Actual evidentiary record |\n| Formation trial | **Answered federally; Kansas summary process** | C011–C012 | Court procedure/order |\n| Electronic assent | **Answered generally** | C013–C014 | Platform logs and display |\n| Wet-ink requirement | **No universal requirement** | C013 | Authentication/assent facts |\n| Web-posted terms | **No automatic assent** | C013–C014 | Notice and acceptance |\n| Change-in-terms | **Partial/fact-specific** | C014 | Amendment clause and delivery |\n| Exact version | **Unresolved without records** | C013–C014 | Version hash/text |\n| Whole-contract illegality | **Answered gateway only** | C015–C016 | Substantive merits later |\n| KCSOA voidness/arbitration relationship | **Answered only through separability boundary** | C015–C016, C034 | Actual defect/formation theory |\n| Court-versus-arbitrator default | **Answered** | C007–C009 | Actual delegation |\n| Delegation formation | **Answered** | C009, C017 | Actual clause and assent |\n| Delegation-specific defense | **Answered** | C017 | Actual challenge |\n| Wholly-groundless exception | **Rejected** | C018 | Valid delegation first required |\n| Competing agreements | **Answered** | C019 | Actual agreements |\n| Incorporation of administrator rules | **Answered conditionally** | C020–C021 | Exact named rules/version |\n| Scope | **Answered doctrinally** | C007–C008, C018–C021 | Clause language and claim |\n| Class arbitration | **Answered** | C022 | Affirmative contractual basis |\n| Class waiver | **Answered under FAA boundary** | C023 | Formation/other neutral defense |\n| Assignee enforcement | **Answered as conditional** | C024–C027 | Assignment terms and chain |\n| Debt-buyer enforcement | **Answered as nonautomatic** | C025 | Contract/account link |\n| Servicer/agent enforcement | **Partial** | C024–C027 | Agency agreement and scope |\n| Affiliate enforcement | **Partial** | C024–C027 | Express clause or theory |\n| Equitable estoppel | **Answered fact-specifically** | C026 | Intertwined claims and conduct |\n| Negotiable instrument crossover | **Answered as distinct** | C028 | Actual note/arbitration document |\n| Unconscionability | **Answered generally** | C029–C030 | Clause, setting, costs |\n| Costs | **Answered at burden level** | C031 | Actual administrator fees/ability |\n| Effective vindication | **Answered narrowly** | C032 | Actual prospective remedy waiver |\n| CROA arbitration | **Answered only as arbitrability boundary** | C033 | Coverage and merits remain open |\n| KCSOA anti-waiver | **Answered conditionally** | C034–C035 | Actual remedy restrictions |\n| Statutory remedies in arbitration | **Answered generally** | C035 | Governing law and clause |\n| Litigation-conduct waiver | **Answered federally** | C036–C037 | Actual litigation conduct |\n| Kansas waiver decisionmaker | **Unresolved after current developments** | C038 | Later controlling Kansas authority |\n| FAA §3 default | **Answered as distinct** | C039 | Actual administrator termination/nonpayment |\n| Arbitration demand effect | **Answered—no court stay by itself** | C040 | Court motion/order |\n| Kansas pending-motion stay | **Answered** | C041 | Actual motion |\n| Kansas post-compulsion stay | **Answered** | C042–C043 | Scope/severability |\n| Federal stay | **Answered** | C044 | Application and no statutory default |\n| Initial Kansas motion service | **Answered** | C045 | Actual summons service |\n| Pending-case motion | **Answered** | C046 | Actual court and service |\n| Kansas response deadline to motion | **Unresolved generally** | — | Route, local rule, order |\n| Kansas evidentiary hearing | **Answered generally** | C012 | Actual factual dispute |\n| Federal §4 hearing/trial | **Answered** | C049 | Actual demand/jury request |\n| Provisional remedies | **Answered at statute level** | S001 | Urgency and arbitrator capacity |\n| Chapter 61 arbitration handling | **Partial** | C062 | Published case/local procedure |\n| Small-claims arbitration handling | **Partial** | C062 | Route/conversion/order |\n| Kansas denial appeal | **Answered** | C052–C055 | Entry/tolling/stay facts |\n| Kansas grant appeal | **Answered—no ordinary immediate route listed** | C053 | Extraordinary appellate route not analyzed |\n| Federal denial appeal | **Answered** | C056–C058 | Notice date/frivolousness |\n| Federal grant appeal | **Answered generally** | C056 | Finality/other statutory route |\n| Federal automatic appellate stay | **Answered** | C057 | Nonfrivolous denial appeal |\n| Kansas automatic appellate stay | **Not located** | C055 | Stay motion/order |\n| Official Kansas arbitration form | **Not located in bounded search** | C059 | Local forms/orders |\n| AAA current rules | **Status answered** | C060–C061 | Actual incorporation and case registration |\n| JAMS current standards | **Status answered** | C060–C061 | Actual incorporation and eligibility |\n| Administrator fee arithmetic | **Held** | C061 | Actual rule/claim/company |\n| Award confirmation/vacatur | **Excluded** | — | Separate later pass |\n| Postaward judgment enforcement | **Excluded** | — | Separate later pass |\n| Bankruptcy | **Excluded** | — | Separate procedure |\n| Mortgage/security interests | **Excluded** | — | Sector pass |\n| Medical/government/support/tax | **Excluded** | — | Sector passes |\n| Local/tribal/country law | **Excluded** | — | Separate jurisdictional research |\n| Actual provider/creditor/account | **Not reviewed** | C063–C064 | Actual public/authorized records |\n| Component/state/parent/A066 acceptance | **Not evaluated** | C064 | No acceptance follows |\n\n# N. Researcher self-check\n\n## Actually read or inspected in PASS-17\n\n- Current K.S.A. 5-423 through 5-453 provisions necessary for:Application and transition.Nonwaivable requirements.Judicial motions.Validity, existence, scope, and arbitrator allocation.Motions to compel.Pending and post-compulsion stays.Provisional remedies.Arbitration initiation.Remedies.Jurisdiction.Venue.Immediate appeals.E-SIGN relationship.Savings.\n- Selected pages of the 2018 enrolled arbitration act, visually inspected.\n- The complete former K.S.A. 5-401 exclusion text.\n- Current status of HB 2351.\n- Current FAA §§1–4, 6, and 16.\n- Kansas UETA formation, recognition, and attribution provisions.\n- KCSOA anti-waiver and Kansas arbitral-remedy provisions.\n- Kansas civil appeal and stay statutes.\n- Material formation, delegation, nonsignatory, waiver, defense, jurisdiction, stay, and appeal decisions identified above.\n- Current AAA consumer-rules and JAMS consumer-standards public pages.\n\n## Material currentness findings\n\n- HB 2351 died; its proposed insurance exception is not operative.\n- AAA’s public consumer-rules page identifies rules effective May 1, 2025.\n- JAMS’s public Consumer Minimum Standards identify a May 1, 2024 effective date.\n- *Myers v. Papa Texas* is a February 12, 2026 unpublished Tenth Circuit decision; it is persuasive, not binding.\n- *Coinbase v. Suski*, *Smith v. Spizzirri*, and *Coinbase v. Bielski* remain material current Supreme Court authorities.\n- No future-effective Kansas arbitration amendment relevant to ordinary debt was located.\n\n## Access and research limitations\n\n- Several Kansas Judicial Council form pages intermittently returned HTTP 403.\n- No dedicated Kansas arbitration motion form was located in the bounded official search; that is not proof no local form exists.\n- The official Kansas PDF for *Suchan* was inaccessible. The case was not used to supply a material holding.\n- Some cases were read through public court-opinion reproductions rather than official PDFs.\n- No subscription citator, private administrator database, private docket, contract repository, or provider lookup was used.\n- No complete Kansas local-rule survey or full legislative-history audit was performed.\n- No full current citator was performed for every older case.\n\n## Not read or obtained\n\n- Any actual arbitration clause, consumer agreement, debt-relief agreement, card agreement, account agreement, note, assignment, bill of sale, servicing contract, administrator registration, arbitration demand, invoice, fee schedule, court motion, hearing transcript, or order.\n- Any actual clickstream, audit log, source code, version archive, IP data, opt-out record, or consumer communication.\n- Any private AAA or JAMS case record.\n- Complete confirmation, vacatur, modification, or award-enforcement law.\n- Complete arbitration discovery, arbitrator selection, award, fee, or remedies procedure.\n- Full constitutional review of a punitive or statutory award.\n- Specialized mortgage, vehicle, medical, support, government, tax, bankruptcy, local, tribal, or foreign arbitration law.\n\n## Method limits\n\n- An FAA clause was not treated as federal jurisdiction.\n- Electronic authentication was not treated as assent.\n- A delegation clause was not permitted to decide whether it was ever formed.\n- Administrator-rule incorporation was not treated as universal delegation.\n- Whole-contract illegality was not confused with formation or a clause-specific challenge.\n- A debt sale was not treated as automatic transfer of arbitration rights.\n- Article 3 note enforcement was not treated as automatic arbitration authority.\n- Attorney, affiliate, servicer, or collector status was not treated as automatic nonsignatory enforcement.\n- Unequal bargaining power was not treated as automatic unconscionability.\n- Potential high costs were not treated as proven prohibitive costs.\n- A class waiver was not treated as consent to class arbitration.\n- Participation in litigation was not treated as automatic waiver.\n- Lack of prejudice was not treated as automatic preservation after *Morgan*.\n- An arbitration demand was not treated as a court response or stay.\n- A motion to compel was not treated as an automatic extension of every deadline without applying the statutory stay and an actual court record.\n- A grant of arbitration was not treated as immediately appealable merely because a denial is.\n- No actual arbitration right, waiver, stay, appeal, provider approval, debt validity, operational clearance, component acceptance, Kansas acceptance, parent-dossier acceptance, A066 acceptance, or publication readiness is supplied.\n\n## PASS-17 conclusion\n\nKansas now has a modern arbitration act that places the decisive gateways in a structured order. The court first determines whether an arbitration agreement exists, whether the particular controversy falls within it, and whether the person seeking enforcement has a contractual right to do so. Formation and exact-version evidence therefore come before delegation, scope, or merits.\n\nOnce a valid clause and any valid delegation are established, whole-contract illegality, contract enforceability, conditions precedent, and delegated scope issues can move to the arbitrator. Neutral Kansas defenses remain available, but the FAA preempts rules that disfavor arbitration as arbitration. Assignees and nonsignatories must prove a genuine contractual bridge; debt ownership, servicing, corporate affiliation, or administrator labels are not enough.\n\nProcedurally, Kansas is especially clear: filing the motion produces a mandatory stay of the implicated court claim while the motion is decided, and an order compelling arbitration produces a further stay rather than dismissal. A denial is immediately appealable; an ordinary grant is not. The corresponding federal routes are similar but require independent federal jurisdiction and apply their own notice, trial, stay, and appeal rules.\n\n**END S_KS PASS-17.**\n\n","tables":[{"headers":["Question","Kansas current act","Federal Arbitration Act","Practical result"],"index":0,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Question","Kansas current act","Federal Arbitration Act","Practical result"],["Agreement date","Current K.S.A. 5-423–5-453 governs agreements made on or after July 1, 2018","FAA depends on commerce, not Kansas agreement date","Determine agreement/version date first"],["Pre-July 1, 2018 agreement","Repealed act governs unless all parties agree in a record to current act","FAA can still preempt conflicting old Kansas exclusions where commerce is involved","Both transition and FAA scope must be analyzed"],["Writing or record","Agreement must be contained in a “record”","Arbitration provision must be written","Electronic record may qualify, but formation remains separate"],["Commerce nexus","Not an express prerequisite to Kansas act","Maritime or interstate/foreign commerce required","FAA is not established by contractual label alone"],["Transportation-worker exclusion","No matching ordinary consumer-debt exclusion","FAA §1 excludes specified employment contracts of transportation workers","Ordinarily irrelevant to consumer debt unless unusual employment facts exist"],["Sexual-assault/harassment exception","No parallel debt-specific rule","FAA chapter 4 can permit claimant election for covered disputes accruing after March 3, 2022","Ordinarily outside this debt component"],["General validity","Valid except generally applicable contract-revocation grounds","Same equal-footing saving clause","Fraud, duress, unconscionability, and lack of assent remain possible"],["State hostile rule","Current Kansas act favors enforcement","FAA preempts rules that disfavor arbitration because it is arbitration","Neutral Kansas contract law remains available"],["Court jurisdiction","Kansas court must already have jurisdiction over controversy and parties","FAA creates no independent federal subject-matter jurisdiction","State or federal jurisdiction must exist independently"],["Motion format","Judicial relief by motion; initial motion served like summons if no action pending","FAA application heard as motion; §4 supplies specific notice and hearing requirements","Filing route depends on forum and existing action"],["Stay while motion pending","Mandatory on just terms after motion to compel","No identical §4 text, though district court can manage case; §3 governs referable issues after satisfaction","Kansas gives an express pending-motion stay"],["Stay after arbitration ordered","Mandatory on just terms","Mandatory on application if §3 predicates met","Dismissal cannot replace a requested federal stay"],["Immediate appeal from denial","Yes","Yes","Separate state and federal appeal rules apply"],["Immediate appeal from grant","Not listed except an order staying arbitration itself","Generally prohibited under §16(b)","Review ordinarily waits for later final judgment or authorized route"]]},{"headers":["Contested issue","Default decisionmaker","Possible contractual variation","Controlling qualification"],"index":1,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Contested issue","Default decisionmaker","Possible contractual variation","Controlling qualification"],["Was any contract formed?","Court","No delegation can precede formation of the agreement containing it","Fedor; K.S.A. 5-428(b)"],["Was an arbitration agreement formed?","Court","Same","Electronic signature/authentication does not itself prove assent"],["Which version of the terms governed?","Court","Delegation cannot decide which contract formed the delegation","Coinbase v. Suski"],["Did consumer receive/incorporate the clause?","Court","Same formation boundary","Actual delivery, notice, and assent evidence"],["Does the controversy fall within the clause?","Court under Kansas statutory default","Can be delegated clearly and unmistakably","K.S.A. 5-428(b); Belnap; Henry Schein"],["Condition precedent to arbitrability","Arbitrator under Kansas default","Parties can define the condition and process","K.S.A. 5-428(c)"],["Is the contract containing a valid clause enforceable?","Arbitrator under Kansas default","Subject to formation and valid delegation","K.S.A. 5-428(c)"],["Whole-contract illegality or voidness","Arbitrator when FAA separability applies","Clause-specific challenge remains judicial unless delegated","Buckeye; Packard"],["Arbitration-clause-specific unconscionability","Court absent valid delegation","Arbitrator if valid delegation covers enforceability and delegation itself is not specifically challenged","Rent-A-Center"],["Delegation-clause formation","Court","Cannot be delegated before formation","Fedor"],["Delegation-specific unconscionability","Court","Court decides the specific challenge","Rent-A-Center"],["“Wholly groundless” scope argument","Arbitrator after valid delegation","No judicial merits exception","Henry Schein"],["Competing contracts, one with arbitration and one selecting courts","Court","Delegation in one document does not answer which contract controls","Coinbase v. Suski"],["Can a nonsignatory invoke the agreement?","Ordinarily court","Actual delegation can matter only after court establishes an enforceable basis connecting actor to agreement","Arthur Andersen"],["Litigation-conduct waiver","Federal court ordinarily applies ordinary waiver after Morgan","Kansas allocation remains less settled because of older Dixon","Actual forum and contractual delegation matter"],["Procedural waiver inside arbitration","Arbitrator ordinarily","Defined by clause/rules","Distinguish from waiver through court litigation conduct"],["FAA §3 “default in proceeding with arbitration”","Federal court deciding stay","Contract and administrator facts matter","Nonpayment or refusal to proceed can be relevant"]]},{"headers":["Challenge actually made","Court’s first task"],"index":2,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Challenge actually made","Court’s first task"],["“I never agreed to any contract”","Decide formation"],["“I agreed to the account but never received or accepted arbitration terms”","Decide arbitration-clause formation"],["“The delegation paragraph was hidden, one-sided, or never accepted”","Decide delegation-specific challenge"],["“The whole arbitration clause is unconscionable,” with valid delegation not specifically attacked","Arbitrator may decide under Rent-A-Center"],["“The entire contract is illegal under KCSOA”","Arbitrator under separability if valid clause and FAA apply"],["“This dispute falls outside the arbitration clause”","Court under Kansas default, unless valid delegation covers scope"],["“The requested arbitration theory is absurd”","Arbitrator after valid delegation; no wholly-groundless exception"],["“A later court-selection agreement superseded the arbitration agreement”","Court decides which contract controls"],["“The debt buyer is not a party and has no right to invoke the clause”","Court determines enforceability by or against that actor"]]},{"headers":["Actor seeking arbitration","Necessary gateway proof","What is insufficient by itself"],"index":3,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Actor seeking arbitration","Necessary gateway proof","What is insufficient by itself"],["Original creditor","Consumer agreement, formation, clause, scope","Account statements alone"],["Debt buyer","Transfer of the relevant contract or arbitration right; account inclusion; clause scope","“We bought the debt” label or generic bill of sale"],["Assignee","Assignment language and chain showing dispute-resolution rights passed","Assignment of payment right without contract terms"],["Servicer","Agency or contractual authority, clause covering agents/servicers, owner’s status","Possession of payment records"],["Collection agency","Express clause coverage, agency, beneficiary, or estoppel theory","Collection placement alone"],["Affiliate","Express affiliate language or another recognized theory","Common branding or ownership"],["Attorney or law firm","Clause coverage of counsel/agents or derivative enforcement theory","Attorney relationship alone"],["Debt-relief provider affiliate","Actual agreement and relationship; clause coverage","Shared officers or marketing"],["Trustee","Trust transfer plus trustee authority and clause rights","Trust name alone"],["Arbitration administrator","Normally administers rather than litigates merits; contractual immunity or role depends on rules","Being named in the clause does not make administrator creditor or party"],["Consumer against nonsignatory company","Same state-law theories; estoppel and beneficiary principles can work in either direction","Allegation of corporate relationship alone"]]},{"headers":["Defense","Court/arbitrator gateway","Required focus"],"index":4,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Defense","Court/arbitrator gateway","Required focus"],["No assent","Court","Formation, delivery, exact version"],["Fraud in execution","Court where it challenges agreement formation","Nature of document and opportunity to know terms"],["Fraud in inducement of whole contract","Arbitrator after valid clause under separability","Whole-contract merits"],["Fraud aimed specifically at arbitration clause","Court absent valid delegation; delegation analysis if present","Clause-specific conduct"],["Duress","Depends on whether it attacks formation, clause, delegation, or whole contract","Actual threat, causation, alternatives"],["Procedural unconscionability","Court absent valid delegation","Surprise, visibility, bargaining conduct, delivery"],["Substantive unconscionability","Court absent valid delegation","One-sided remedies, costs, forum, fee shifting, limitations"],["Illegality of whole debt-relief contract","Arbitrator under Packard/Buckeye if valid clause and FAA apply","Underlying statutory merits"],["Prospective waiver of statutory rights","Court absent valid delegation; remedy-specific analysis","Whether clause eliminates substantive right rather than changes forum"],["Prohibitive arbitration cost","Challenger bears evidentiary burden","Actual fees, ability, contract allocation, administrator rules"],["Class waiver","FAA ordinarily enforces individual arbitration","Formation and other neutral defenses remain"],["Unavailable administrator","Clause construction, substitution statute, integral-forum question","Actual administrator status and clause wording"]]},{"headers":["Stage","Kansas rule"],"index":5,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Stage","Kansas rule"],["Motion to compel filed","Court shall stay the judicial proceeding involving the allegedly arbitrable claim until final decision on motion"],["Motion granted","Court shall stay judicial proceeding involving arbitrable claim"],["Mixed claims","Stay may be limited to severable arbitrable claim"],["Motion denied","Litigation can proceed, subject to appeal and any separate stay order"],["Provisional relief before arbitrator appointed","Court can grant for good cause where necessary to protect arbitration effectiveness"],["Provisional relief after arbitrator appointed","Court relief generally requires urgency and inability of arbitrator to act adequately"]]},{"headers":["Order","Kansas state appeal","Federal FAA appeal"],"index":6,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Order","Kansas state appeal","Federal FAA appeal"],["Denial of motion to compel","Immediate appeal under K.S.A. 5-450(a)(1)","Immediate appeal under 9 U.S.C. §16(a)"],["Order granting stay of arbitration","Immediate appeal","Immediate appeal under §16(a) where injunction/stay fits"],["Order compelling arbitration and staying litigation","Not listed as immediate Kansas appeal","Generally not immediately appealable under §16(b)"],["Dismissal entering final judgment after compelling","Kansas final-judgment route may apply, but current Kansas act requires stay","Federal final decision can be appealable, but Smith prohibits dismissal where stay requested"],["Confirmation/vacatur orders","Separate K.S.A. 5-450 routes","Separate §16 routes"],["Appeal effect on trial court","No automatic arbitration-specific stay located","Nonfrivolous §16(a) appeal from denial automatically stays district-court merits proceedings under Coinbase v. Bielski"]]},{"headers":["Resource","Current public status","Use","Limit"],"index":7,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Resource","Current public status","Use","Limit"],["Kansas Court Forms index","Current public index located","General motion, service, and civil forms","No arbitration-specific motion form located in bounded search"],["Kansas Judicial Council Chapter 60 forms","Public index located","General civil filing and motion presentation","Direct pages intermittently returned 403"],["Kansas Judicial Council Chapter 61 pleadings","Public index located","Limited-action pleadings","No dedicated arbitration opposition form located"],["AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules","AAA public page states updated rules effective May 1, 2025","Administration only if actual agreement selects or properly incorporates AAA and applicable version","Rules are not Kansas statutes; actual contract/version unknown"],["JAMS Consumer Minimum Standards","Public page states effective May 1, 2024","JAMS policy for qualifying consumer arbitrations","Standards apply only through actual JAMS administration and contract context"],["JAMS Comprehensive Rules","Public rules available","Contractual procedure if incorporated","Actual version and incorporation unknown"]]},{"headers":["Source ID","Title, issuer, and full literal URL","Exact read scope","Status, access, and limits"],"index":8,"links":[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+9"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+3"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/","text":"U.S. Code\n+5"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066","text":"Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"},{"href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","text":"FindLaw\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html","text":"Justia Law\n+3"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html","text":"Justia Law\n+4"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/","text":"Justia Law\n+4"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"},{"href":"https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","text":"United States Courts\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","text":"American Arbitration Association\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards","text":"JAMS"}],"row_links":[[],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+9"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+3"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/","text":"U.S. Code\n+5"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066","text":"Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","text":"FindLaw\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html","text":"Justia Law\n+3"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html","text":"Justia Law\n+4"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/","text":"Justia Law\n+4"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"}],[{"href":"https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","text":"United States Courts\n+1"}],[],[{"href":"https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","text":"American Arbitration Association\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards","text":"JAMS"}]],"rows":[["Source ID","Title, issuer, and full literal URL","Exact read scope","Status, access, and limits"],["S_KS-P17-S001","Kansas Revised Uniform Arbitration Act — Kansas Revisor:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0023_section/005_004_0023_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0024_section/005_004_0024_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0031_section/005_004_0031_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0052_section/005_004_0052_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0053_section/005_004_0053_k/","Definitions; notice; transition; nonwaivable terms; judicial motion; validity and allocation; motion to compel; stays; provisional relief; initiation; remedies; jurisdiction; venue; appeal; E-SIGN relation; savings","Fresh Oct. 26, 2026 Pacific/UTC. Current 2026 official HTML; no printed pages or PDF indices. No complete act-history or comments audit. \nKansas Legislature\n+9"],["S_KS-P17-S002","2018 HB 2571 enrolled act:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf","Selected visual inspection: PDF index 0/printed 1; index 1/printed 2; index 7/printed 8; index 9/printed 10","Fresh selected PDF read; not whole legislative history. Current statute controls. \nKansas Legislature\n+3"],["S_KS-P17-S003","Repealed Kansas act, former K.S.A. 5-401:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/","Complete former validity and exclusions text","Historical, not current except through transition/savings. \nKansas Legislature"],["S_KS-P17-S004","HB 2351 official status:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","Bill status and version","Proposed and died; not operative. \nKansas Legislature"],["S_KS-P17-S005","Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§1–4, 6, 16 — OLRC:\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s6/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/","Commerce/exclusion; validity; stay; compel petition and trial; motion procedure; appeals","Fresh. OLRC states law through Public Law 119-120, Oct. 7, 2026. Chapter 4 reviewed only at boundary. \nU.S. Code\n+5"],["S_KS-P17-S006","Kansas UETA:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0007_section/016_016_0007_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0009_section/016_016_0009_k/","Electronic agreement, recognition, and attribution","Fresh. No actual platform/audit evidence. \nKansas Legislature\n+2"],["S_KS-P17-S007","KCSOA anti-waiver and Kansas arbitral remedies:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","K.S.A. 50-1121(u); K.S.A. 5-443","Fresh targeted read. No broader provider-remedies acceptance. \nKansas Legislature\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S008","Kansas appeal and stay statutes:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_002_0000_article/060_002_0062_section/060_002_0062_k/","30-day civil appeal; supersedeas and stay provisions","Fresh. No actual appeal/order. \nKansas Legislature\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S009","Packard v. Credit Solutions of America:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","Whole-contract KCSOA/KCPA illegality and FAA separability","Fresh selected reread for PASS-17. Published Kansas Court of Appeals; registration-era facts; no merits decision. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S010","Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/","Whole-contract illegality/separability","Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court; applies in state and federal court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S011","Howard v. Ferrellgas Partners:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","Formation burden and FAA §4 trial","Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S012","Fedor v. UnitedHealthcare:\nhttps://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-2066/19-2066-2020-09-16.html","Formation must precede delegation","Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit. \nTenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S013","Duling v. Mid American Credit Union:\nhttps://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","Change-in-terms assent and opt-out","Fresh selected read. Kansas memorandum opinion; not universal authority. \nFindLaw\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S014","Knisley v. Equity Bank:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html","Silence/continued use and FAA-preemption limits","Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential. \nJustia Law\n+3"],["S_KS-P17-S015","Belnap v. Iasis Healthcare:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","JAMS-rule incorporation and delegation","Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit; nonconsumer healthcare contract. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S016","Coinbase v. Suski official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","Competing agreements; court decides controlling contract","Fresh PDF read. PDF index 5/opinion 4 and index 7/opinion 6 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S017","Rent-A-Center v. Jackson:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","Delegation severability and specific challenge","Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S018","Henry Schein v. Archer & White:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","No wholly-groundless exception","Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S019","Arthur Andersen v. Carlisle:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","State-law nonsignatory theories","Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S020","Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co.:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","Assignee language and equitable estoppel","Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Court of Appeals; vehicle facts. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S021","Portfolio Recovery Associates v. Dixon:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","Debt-buyer enforcement and waiver allocation","Fresh selected read. Published; predates 2018 act and Morgan. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S022","Jackson Trak Group v. Mid States Port Authority:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","Kansas waiver factors","Fresh selected read. Published; predecessor act. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S023","Morgan v. Sundance official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","No arbitration-specific prejudice requirement","Fresh PDF read. PDF index 4/opinion 3 and index 6/opinion 5 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S024","Myers v. Papa Texas:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html","Current Tenth Circuit waiver/default discussion","Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential. \nJustia Law\n+4"],["S_KS-P17-S025","Wille v. Southwestern Bell:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","Kansas unconscionability factors","Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S026","FAA saving-clause and remedy cases:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/","Concepcion, Italian Colors, Green Tree, CompuCredit, Lamps Plus","Fresh selected reads. No broader federal-consumer-remedy audit. \nJustia Law\n+4"],["S_KS-P17-S027","Skewes v. Shearson Lehman:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html","FAA preemption of old Kansas tort exclusion","Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"],["S_KS-P17-S028","Badgerow v. Walters official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","FAA no independent jurisdiction; look-through text","Fresh PDF read. PDF index 6/opinion 4 and index 10/opinion 8 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S029","Smith v. Spizzirri official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf","Federal stay rather than dismissal","Fresh PDF read. PDF index 4/opinion 3 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court"],["S_KS-P17-S030","Coinbase v. Bielski official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","Automatic federal stay during nonfrivolous §16 appeal","Fresh PDF read. PDF index 6/opinion 4 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court"],["S_KS-P17-S031","Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 4:\nhttps://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","Rule 4(a), PDF pages 17–20; 30/60-day branches and tolling","Fresh parsed read. Screenshots initially captured historical-note pages; operative text verified through parsed official PDF lines. \nUnited States Courts\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S032","Kansas forms:\nhttps://self-help.kscourts.gov/FindCourtForms\nhttps://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-60-civil-actions\nhttps://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-61-civil-actions/pleadings","Bounded search for arbitration-specific motion forms","Fresh bounded search; direct pages intermittently inaccessible. No specific form located; not proof none exists."],["S_KS-P17-S033","AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules:\nhttps://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","Public consumer rules/status page","Fresh. Rules updated effective May 1, 2025; actual contract/version unknown. \nAmerican Arbitration Association\n+1"],["S_KS-P17-S034","JAMS Consumer Minimum Standards:\nhttps://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards","Public consumer standards","Fresh. Effective May 1, 2024; private administrator policy, not Kansas law. \nJAMS"]]},{"headers":["Claim ID","Precise assertion","Source and pinpoint","Predicates, consequence, and confidence"],"index":9,"links":[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066","text":"Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","text":"Justia Law\n+2"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"},{"href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","text":"FindLaw\n+2"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/","text":"Justia Law"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/","text":"U.S. Code"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"},{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"},{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/","text":"U.S. Code"},{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"},{"href":"https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","text":"United States Courts\n+1"},{"href":"https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","text":"American Arbitration Association\n+1"}],"row_links":[[],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066","text":"Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","text":"Justia Law\n+2"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+2"}],[{"href":"https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","text":"FindLaw\n+2"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[],[],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/","text":"Justia Law"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","text":"Justia Law\n+1"}],[],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/","text":"U.S. Code\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/","text":"U.S. Code"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","text":"Supreme Court\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature"}],[{"href":"https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","text":"Kansas Legislature\n+1"}],[{"href":"https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/","text":"U.S. Code"}],[{"href":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","text":"Supreme Court"}],[{"href":"https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","text":"United States Courts\n+1"}],[],[{"href":"https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","text":"American Arbitration Association\n+1"}],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Claim ID","Precise assertion","Source and pinpoint","Predicates, consequence, and confidence"],["S_KS-P17-C001","Current Kansas arbitration act governs agreements made on or after July 1, 2018.","S001, K.S.A. 5-425(a). \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C002","Pre-July 1, 2018 agreement uses current act only if all parties agree in a record; otherwise predecessor act governs subject to savings.","S001 §§5-425(b), 5-453; S003. \nKansas Legislature\n+2","High."],["S_KS-P17-C003","HB 2351’s proposed insurance exception died and is not current law.","S004. \nKansas Legislature","High current-status fact."],["S_KS-P17-C004","FAA requires a written clause in a maritime or commerce transaction.","S005, 9 U.S.C. §§1–2. \nU.S. Code\n+1","High. Actual commerce facts required."],["S_KS-P17-C005","Contractual statement that FAA governs does not create federal subject-matter jurisdiction.","S028; S005. \nSupreme Court\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C006","Current Kansas act validates arbitration agreements subject to generally applicable contract defenses.","S001, §5-428(a). \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C007","Kansas statutory default assigns existence and scope to court.","S001, §5-428(b). \nKansas Legislature","High. Valid delegation can vary scope allocation."],["S_KS-P17-C008","Kansas statutory default assigns conditions precedent and contract enforceability to arbitrator once a valid clause exists.","S001, §5-428(c). \nKansas Legislature","High. Formation remains judicial."],["S_KS-P17-C009","Formation must be judicially established before delegation is enforced.","S012. \nTenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1","High published Tenth Circuit rule."],["S_KS-P17-C010","Mover bears initial burden to establish an arbitration agreement.","S011; S013–S014. \nJustia Law\n+2","High."],["S_KS-P17-C011","Genuine FAA formation dispute requires summary trial rather than credibility resolution against opponent on papers.","S005 §4; S011. \nU.S. Code\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C012","Kansas court proceeds summarily on an opposed compel motion.","S001, §5-429(a)–(c). \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C013","Electronic record/signature can satisfy writing/signature but does not independently prove mutual assent or exact clause version.","S006. \nKansas Legislature\n+2","High."],["S_KS-P17-C014","Continued use after change-in-terms is not universally assent; contract and notice must clearly establish that consequence.","S013–S014. \nFindLaw\n+2","Medium-high; case-status limits preserved."],["S_KS-P17-C015","Whole-contract illegality ordinarily goes to arbitrator after valid FAA clause.","S009–S010. \nJustia Law\n+1","High. Formation/clause-specific challenges differ."],["S_KS-P17-C016","Packard did not decide KCSOA merits, licensing, fee legality, or liability.","S009. \nJustia Law","High source limit."],["S_KS-P17-C017","Delegation-specific challenge is for court; broad arbitration-clause challenge goes to arbitrator after valid delegation.","S017. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C018","No wholly-groundless exception exists after valid delegation.","S018. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C019","Competing-contract question remains for court notwithstanding delegation in one asserted agreement.","S016. \nSupreme Court\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C020","Incorporation of JAMS rules can clearly delegate arbitrability on appropriate facts.","S015. \nJustia Law","High Tenth Circuit holding; no universal incorporation rule."],["S_KS-P17-C021","Ambiguous administrator reference or unidentified rule version does not automatically establish delegation.","S015–S016.","High bounded synthesis."],["S_KS-P17-C022","Class arbitration requires affirmative contractual basis and cannot rest on silence or ambiguity.","S026, Lamps Plus. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C023","FAA preempts state rules conditioning arbitration on class procedures.","S026, Concepcion. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C024","Nonsignatory FAA enforcement depends on applicable state contract law.","S019. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C025","Debt buyer does not automatically acquire arbitration rights merely by purchasing debt.","S021. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C026","Kansas equitable-estoppel or assignee enforcement is fact-specific.","S020. \nJustia Law","High with vehicle-case limits."],["S_KS-P17-C027","Transfer of payment rights and transfer of complete contract/arbitration rights can differ.","S019–S021.","High contract-law distinction."],["S_KS-P17-C028","Article 3 instrument-enforcement right does not automatically establish right to enforce separate arbitration agreement.","S019 and ordinary contract principles.","High bounded conclusion."],["S_KS-P17-C029","Kansas generally applicable unconscionability remains available.","S025; S001 §5-428(a). \nJustia Law\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C030","Inequality of bargaining power alone does not establish Kansas unconscionability.","S025. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C031","Party asserting prohibitive arbitration costs bears evidentiary burden; speculation is insufficient.","S026, Green Tree. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C032","Economic infeasibility alone does not establish effective-vindication invalidity.","S026, Italian Colors. \nJustia Law","High."],["S_KS-P17-C033","CROA contains no categorical anti-arbitration command recognized in CompuCredit.","S026. \nJustia Law","High holding; actual CROA coverage held."],["S_KS-P17-C034","KCSOA anti-waiver can affect a clause eliminating substantive rights but does not automatically prohibit arbitration as forum.","S007. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","High bounded distinction."],["S_KS-P17-C035","Kansas arbitrator can award statutory fees, punitive damages, and other remedies where law/agreement authorizes.","S007, K.S.A. 5-443. \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C036","Federal litigation-conduct waiver does not require prejudice after Morgan.","S023. \nSupreme Court\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C037","Knowledge, delay, merits litigation, and inconsistent conduct remain relevant to waiver.","S022–S024. \nJustia Law\n+1","High generally; fact-specific."],["S_KS-P17-C038","Current Kansas state decisionmaker for litigation-conduct waiver remains partially unresolved after Morgan.","S021–S024.","Medium-high hold."],["S_KS-P17-C039","FAA §3 default in proceeding with arbitration is distinct from litigation-conduct waiver.","S005 §3; S024. \nU.S. Code\n+1","High distinction."],["S_KS-P17-C040","Arbitration demand alone does not stay a Kansas lawsuit or extend court response deadline.","S001 §§5-427, 5-429. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C041","Kansas court must stay implicated judicial claim while compel motion is pending.","S001, §5-429(f). \nKansas Legislature","High, nonwaivable."],["S_KS-P17-C042","Kansas court must stay arbitrable claim after ordering arbitration.","S001, §5-429(g). \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C043","Kansas act does not authorize dismissal in lieu of post-compulsion stay.","S001, §5-429(g). \nKansas Legislature","High textual conclusion."],["S_KS-P17-C044","Federal court must stay rather than dismiss when party requests FAA §3 stay.","S005 §3; S029. \nU.S. Code\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C045","Initial Kansas arbitration motion without pending action is served like summons.","S001, §5-427(b). \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C046","Pending Kansas action requires motion in that court.","S001, §§5-427, 5-429(e). \nKansas Legislature\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C047","Kansas court must independently have jurisdiction over controversy and parties.","S001, §5-448. \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C048","Kansas arbitration venue follows specified-hearing county or adverse-party residence/business branches.","S001, §5-449. \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C049","FAA §4 supplies five-day federal hearing notice and formation-trial process.","S005, §4. \nU.S. Code","High."],["S_KS-P17-C050","FAA supplies no independent federal subject-matter jurisdiction.","S028. \nSupreme Court\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C051","Look-through jurisdiction applies to FAA §4 but not automatically §§9–10.","S028. \nSupreme Court\n+1","High."],["S_KS-P17-C052","Kansas immediate appeal lies from denial of motion to compel.","S001, §5-450. \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C053","Kansas act does not list an ordinary order granting compulsion/staying litigation as immediately appealable.","S001, §5-450. \nKansas Legislature","High."],["S_KS-P17-C054","Kansas arbitration appeal ordinarily uses 30-day civil appeal period.","S008, §60-2103. \nKansas Legislature","High, subject to actual order/tolling."],["S_KS-P17-C055","No automatic Kansas arbitration-appeal stay was located; separate stay authority is needed.","S008. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","Bounded negative finding."],["S_KS-P17-C056","FAA §16 permits immediate appeal from denial and generally bars interlocutory appeal from grant.","S005, §16. \nU.S. Code","High."],["S_KS-P17-C057","Nonfrivolous federal appeal from arbitration denial automatically stays district merits proceedings.","S030. \nSupreme Court","High."],["S_KS-P17-C058","Federal civil appeal ordinarily is 30 days, or 60 days for specified federal-party cases.","S031, FRAP 4(a). \nUnited States Courts\n+1","High, subject to tolling and entry rules."],["S_KS-P17-C059","No arbitration-specific Kansas Judicial Council form was located in bounded search.","S032.","Bounded search result, not universal absence."],["S_KS-P17-C060","AAA/JAMS rules apply only if actual contract and applicable version incorporate them and administrator accepts the case.","S033–S034. \nAmerican Arbitration Association\n+1","High practical/legal distinction."],["S_KS-P17-C061","No administrator fee or eligibility amount can be determined without actual clause, version, claim, and status.","S033–S034.","High hold."],["S_KS-P17-C062","Small-claims and Chapter 61 cases remain subject to arbitration gateways, but no special published Kansas handling rule was located.","S001, §5-429(e); S032.","Partial/unresolved."],["S_KS-P17-C063","Actual contract, assent, delegation, transfer, waiver, and administrator facts control every case-specific result.","Entire component.","High."],["S_KS-P17-C064","PASS-17 establishes no provider, creditor, debt, clause, or arbitration approval.","Scope.","High project-status statement."]]},{"headers":["Assigned issue","Status","Claims","Exact missing evidence or next action"],"index":10,"links":[],"row_links":[[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]],"rows":[["Assigned issue","Status","Claims","Exact missing evidence or next action"],["Current Kansas arbitration statute","Answered","C001–C003, C006–C008","Actual agreement date"],["2018 transition","Answered","C001–C002","Pre-2018 opt-in record"],["Old insurance/employment/tort exclusions","Answered historically","C002","Specialized old-act/FAA facts"],["2026 proposed insurance amendment","Answered as dead proposal","C003","No further action unless reintroduced"],["FAA commerce scope","Answered generally","C004","Actual transaction nexus"],["FAA transportation-worker exclusion","Answered at boundary","C004","Ordinarily irrelevant consumer facts"],["EFAA chapter 4 exception","Answered at boundary","C004","Specialized claim excluded"],["FAA preemption","Answered generally","C006, C023","Claim-specific state rule"],["Federal subject-matter jurisdiction","Answered","C005, C050–C051","Federal question/diversity facts"],["Kansas jurisdiction and venue","Answered","C047–C048","Actual parties/hearing place"],["Formation","Answered doctrinally","C009–C014","Actual offer, acceptance, version"],["Formation burden","Answered","C010–C012","Actual evidentiary record"],["Formation trial","Answered federally; Kansas summary process","C011–C012","Court procedure/order"],["Electronic assent","Answered generally","C013–C014","Platform logs and display"],["Wet-ink requirement","No universal requirement","C013","Authentication/assent facts"],["Web-posted terms","No automatic assent","C013–C014","Notice and acceptance"],["Change-in-terms","Partial/fact-specific","C014","Amendment clause and delivery"],["Exact version","Unresolved without records","C013–C014","Version hash/text"],["Whole-contract illegality","Answered gateway only","C015–C016","Substantive merits later"],["KCSOA voidness/arbitration relationship","Answered only through separability boundary","C015–C016, C034","Actual defect/formation theory"],["Court-versus-arbitrator default","Answered","C007–C009","Actual delegation"],["Delegation formation","Answered","C009, C017","Actual clause and assent"],["Delegation-specific defense","Answered","C017","Actual challenge"],["Wholly-groundless exception","Rejected","C018","Valid delegation first required"],["Competing agreements","Answered","C019","Actual agreements"],["Incorporation of administrator rules","Answered conditionally","C020–C021","Exact named rules/version"],["Scope","Answered doctrinally","C007–C008, C018–C021","Clause language and claim"],["Class arbitration","Answered","C022","Affirmative contractual basis"],["Class waiver","Answered under FAA boundary","C023","Formation/other neutral defense"],["Assignee enforcement","Answered as conditional","C024–C027","Assignment terms and chain"],["Debt-buyer enforcement","Answered as nonautomatic","C025","Contract/account link"],["Servicer/agent enforcement","Partial","C024–C027","Agency agreement and scope"],["Affiliate enforcement","Partial","C024–C027","Express clause or theory"],["Equitable estoppel","Answered fact-specifically","C026","Intertwined claims and conduct"],["Negotiable instrument crossover","Answered as distinct","C028","Actual note/arbitration document"],["Unconscionability","Answered generally","C029–C030","Clause, setting, costs"],["Costs","Answered at burden level","C031","Actual administrator fees/ability"],["Effective vindication","Answered narrowly","C032","Actual prospective remedy waiver"],["CROA arbitration","Answered only as arbitrability boundary","C033","Coverage and merits remain open"],["KCSOA anti-waiver","Answered conditionally","C034–C035","Actual remedy restrictions"],["Statutory remedies in arbitration","Answered generally","C035","Governing law and clause"],["Litigation-conduct waiver","Answered federally","C036–C037","Actual litigation conduct"],["Kansas waiver decisionmaker","Unresolved after current developments","C038","Later controlling Kansas authority"],["FAA §3 default","Answered as distinct","C039","Actual administrator termination/nonpayment"],["Arbitration demand effect","Answered—no court stay by itself","C040","Court motion/order"],["Kansas pending-motion stay","Answered","C041","Actual motion"],["Kansas post-compulsion stay","Answered","C042–C043","Scope/severability"],["Federal stay","Answered","C044","Application and no statutory default"],["Initial Kansas motion service","Answered","C045","Actual summons service"],["Pending-case motion","Answered","C046","Actual court and service"],["Kansas response deadline to motion","Unresolved generally","—","Route, local rule, order"],["Kansas evidentiary hearing","Answered generally","C012","Actual factual dispute"],["Federal §4 hearing/trial","Answered","C049","Actual demand/jury request"],["Provisional remedies","Answered at statute level","S001","Urgency and arbitrator capacity"],["Chapter 61 arbitration handling","Partial","C062","Published case/local procedure"],["Small-claims arbitration handling","Partial","C062","Route/conversion/order"],["Kansas denial appeal","Answered","C052–C055","Entry/tolling/stay facts"],["Kansas grant appeal","Answered—no ordinary immediate route listed","C053","Extraordinary appellate route not analyzed"],["Federal denial appeal","Answered","C056–C058","Notice date/frivolousness"],["Federal grant appeal","Answered generally","C056","Finality/other statutory route"],["Federal automatic appellate stay","Answered","C057","Nonfrivolous denial appeal"],["Kansas automatic appellate stay","Not located","C055","Stay motion/order"],["Official Kansas arbitration form","Not located in bounded search","C059","Local forms/orders"],["AAA current rules","Status answered","C060–C061","Actual incorporation and case registration"],["JAMS current standards","Status answered","C060–C061","Actual incorporation and eligibility"],["Administrator fee arithmetic","Held","C061","Actual rule/claim/company"],["Award confirmation/vacatur","Excluded","—","Separate later pass"],["Postaward judgment enforcement","Excluded","—","Separate later pass"],["Bankruptcy","Excluded","—","Separate procedure"],["Mortgage/security interests","Excluded","—","Sector pass"],["Medical/government/support/tax","Excluded","—","Sector passes"],["Local/tribal/country law","Excluded","—","Separate jurisdictional research"],["Actual provider/creditor/account","Not reviewed","C063–C064","Actual public/authorized records"],["Component/state/parent/A066 acceptance","Not evaluated","C064","No acceptance follows"]]}],"claims":[{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C001","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C001","Precise assertion":"Current Kansas arbitration act governs agreements made on or after July 1, 2018.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, K.S.A. 5-425(a). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C002","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C002","Precise assertion":"Pre-July 1, 2018 agreement uses current act only if all parties agree in a record; otherwise predecessor act governs subject to savings.","Source and pinpoint":"S001 §§5-425(b), 5-453; S003. \nKansas Legislature\n+2","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C003","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C003","Precise assertion":"HB 2351’s proposed insurance exception died and is not current law.","Source and pinpoint":"S004. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High current-status fact."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C004","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C004","Precise assertion":"FAA requires a written clause in a maritime or commerce transaction.","Source and pinpoint":"S005, 9 U.S.C. §§1–2. \nU.S. Code\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High. Actual commerce facts required."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":["S_KS-P17-Q001"],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C005","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C005","Precise assertion":"Contractual statement that FAA governs does not create federal subject-matter jurisdiction.","Source and pinpoint":"S028; S005. \nSupreme Court\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C006","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C006","Precise assertion":"Current Kansas act validates arbitration agreements subject to generally applicable contract defenses.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-428(a). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C007","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C007","Precise assertion":"Kansas statutory default assigns existence and scope to court.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-428(b). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High. Valid delegation can vary scope allocation."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C008","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C008","Precise assertion":"Kansas statutory default assigns conditions precedent and contract enforceability to arbitrator once a valid clause exists.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-428(c). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High. Formation remains judicial."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C009","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C009","Precise assertion":"Formation must be judicially established before delegation is enforced.","Source and pinpoint":"S012. \nTenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High published Tenth Circuit rule."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C010","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C010","Precise assertion":"Mover bears initial burden to establish an arbitration agreement.","Source and pinpoint":"S011; S013–S014. \nJustia Law\n+2","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C011","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C011","Precise assertion":"Genuine FAA formation dispute requires summary trial rather than credibility resolution against opponent on papers.","Source and pinpoint":"S005 §4; S011. \nU.S. Code\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C012","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C012","Precise assertion":"Kansas court proceeds summarily on an opposed compel motion.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-429(a)–(c). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C013","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C013","Precise assertion":"Electronic record/signature can satisfy writing/signature but does not independently prove mutual assent or exact clause version.","Source and pinpoint":"S006. \nKansas Legislature\n+2","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C014","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C014","Precise assertion":"Continued use after change-in-terms is not universally assent; contract and notice must clearly establish that consequence.","Source and pinpoint":"S013–S014. \nFindLaw\n+2","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"Medium-high; case-status limits preserved."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C015","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C015","Precise assertion":"Whole-contract illegality ordinarily goes to arbitrator after valid FAA clause.","Source and pinpoint":"S009–S010. \nJustia Law\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High. Formation/clause-specific challenges differ."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C016","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C016","Precise assertion":"Packard did not decide KCSOA merits, licensing, fee legality, or liability.","Source and pinpoint":"S009. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High source limit."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C017","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C017","Precise assertion":"Delegation-specific challenge is for court; broad arbitration-clause challenge goes to arbitrator after valid delegation.","Source and pinpoint":"S017. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C018","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C018","Precise assertion":"No wholly-groundless exception exists after valid delegation.","Source and pinpoint":"S018. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C019","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C019","Precise assertion":"Competing-contract question remains for court notwithstanding delegation in one asserted agreement.","Source and pinpoint":"S016. \nSupreme Court\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C020","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C020","Precise assertion":"Incorporation of JAMS rules can clearly delegate arbitrability on appropriate facts.","Source and pinpoint":"S015. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High Tenth Circuit holding; no universal incorporation rule."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C021","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C021","Precise assertion":"Ambiguous administrator reference or unidentified rule version does not automatically establish delegation.","Source and pinpoint":"S015–S016.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High bounded synthesis."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C022","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C022","Precise assertion":"Class arbitration requires affirmative contractual basis and cannot rest on silence or ambiguity.","Source and pinpoint":"S026, Lamps Plus. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C023","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C023","Precise assertion":"FAA preempts state rules conditioning arbitration on class procedures.","Source and pinpoint":"S026, Concepcion. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C024","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C024","Precise assertion":"Nonsignatory FAA enforcement depends on applicable state contract law.","Source and pinpoint":"S019. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C025","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C025","Precise assertion":"Debt buyer does not automatically acquire arbitration rights merely by purchasing debt.","Source and pinpoint":"S021. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C026","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C026","Precise assertion":"Kansas equitable-estoppel or assignee enforcement is fact-specific.","Source and pinpoint":"S020. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High with vehicle-case limits."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C027","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C027","Precise assertion":"Transfer of payment rights and transfer of complete contract/arbitration rights can differ.","Source and pinpoint":"S019–S021.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High contract-law distinction."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C028","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C028","Precise assertion":"Article 3 instrument-enforcement right does not automatically establish right to enforce separate arbitration agreement.","Source and pinpoint":"S019 and ordinary contract principles.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High bounded conclusion."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C029","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C029","Precise assertion":"Kansas generally applicable unconscionability remains available.","Source and pinpoint":"S025; S001 §5-428(a). \nJustia Law\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C030","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C030","Precise assertion":"Inequality of bargaining power alone does not establish Kansas unconscionability.","Source and pinpoint":"S025. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C031","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C031","Precise assertion":"Party asserting prohibitive arbitration costs bears evidentiary burden; speculation is insufficient.","Source and pinpoint":"S026, Green Tree. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C032","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C032","Precise assertion":"Economic infeasibility alone does not establish effective-vindication invalidity.","Source and pinpoint":"S026, Italian Colors. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C033","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C033","Precise assertion":"CROA contains no categorical anti-arbitration command recognized in CompuCredit.","Source and pinpoint":"S026. \nJustia Law","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High holding; actual CROA coverage held."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C034","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C034","Precise assertion":"KCSOA anti-waiver can affect a clause eliminating substantive rights but does not automatically prohibit arbitration as forum.","Source and pinpoint":"S007. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High bounded distinction."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C035","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C035","Precise assertion":"Kansas arbitrator can award statutory fees, punitive damages, and other remedies where law/agreement authorizes.","Source and pinpoint":"S007, K.S.A. 5-443. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"bounded_clarity_qualification_UNSENT_default_bases_vs_permitted_variation","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":["S_KS-P17-Q003"],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C036","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C036","Precise assertion":"Federal litigation-conduct waiver does not require prejudice after Morgan.","Source and pinpoint":"S023. \nSupreme Court\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C037","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C037","Precise assertion":"Knowledge, delay, merits litigation, and inconsistent conduct remain relevant to waiver.","Source and pinpoint":"S022–S024. \nJustia Law\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High generally; fact-specific."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C038","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C038","Precise assertion":"Current Kansas state decisionmaker for litigation-conduct waiver remains partially unresolved after Morgan.","Source and pinpoint":"S021–S024.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"Medium-high hold."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C039","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C039","Precise assertion":"FAA §3 default in proceeding with arbitration is distinct from litigation-conduct waiver.","Source and pinpoint":"S005 §3; S024. \nU.S. Code\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High distinction."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C040","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C040","Precise assertion":"Arbitration demand alone does not stay a Kansas lawsuit or extend court response deadline.","Source and pinpoint":"S001 §§5-427, 5-429. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C041","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C041","Precise assertion":"Kansas court must stay implicated judicial claim while compel motion is pending.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-429(f). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High, nonwaivable."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C042","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C042","Precise assertion":"Kansas court must stay arbitrable claim after ordering arbitration.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-429(g). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C043","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C043","Precise assertion":"Kansas act does not authorize dismissal in lieu of post-compulsion stay.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-429(g). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High textual conclusion."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C044","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C044","Precise assertion":"Federal court must stay rather than dismiss when party requests FAA §3 stay.","Source and pinpoint":"S005 §3; S029. \nU.S. Code\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C045","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C045","Precise assertion":"Initial Kansas arbitration motion without pending action is served like summons.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-427(b). \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C046","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C046","Precise assertion":"Pending Kansas action requires motion in that court.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §§5-427, 5-429(e). \nKansas Legislature\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C047","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C047","Precise assertion":"Kansas court must independently have jurisdiction over controversy and parties.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-448. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C048","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C048","Precise assertion":"Kansas arbitration venue follows specified-hearing county or adverse-party residence/business branches.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-449. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C049","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C049","Precise assertion":"FAA §4 supplies five-day federal hearing notice and formation-trial process.","Source and pinpoint":"S005, §4. \nU.S. Code","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C050","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C050","Precise assertion":"FAA supplies no independent federal subject-matter jurisdiction.","Source and pinpoint":"S028. \nSupreme Court\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C051","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C051","Precise assertion":"Look-through jurisdiction applies to FAA §4 but not automatically §§9–10.","Source and pinpoint":"S028. \nSupreme Court\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C052","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C052","Precise assertion":"Kansas immediate appeal lies from denial of motion to compel.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-450. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C053","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C053","Precise assertion":"Kansas act does not list an ordinary order granting compulsion/staying litigation as immediately appealable.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-450. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C054","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C054","Precise assertion":"Kansas arbitration appeal ordinarily uses 30-day civil appeal period.","Source and pinpoint":"S008, §60-2103. \nKansas Legislature","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High, subject to actual order/tolling."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C055","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C055","Precise assertion":"No automatic Kansas arbitration-appeal stay was located; separate stay authority is needed.","Source and pinpoint":"S008. \nKansas Legislature\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"Bounded negative finding."},"coordinator_verification_status":"original_bounded_search_or_absence_hold_not_rerun","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C056","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C056","Precise assertion":"FAA §16 permits immediate appeal from denial and generally bars interlocutory appeal from grant.","Source and pinpoint":"S005, §16. \nU.S. Code","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C057","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C057","Precise assertion":"Nonfrivolous federal appeal from arbitration denial automatically stays district merits proceedings.","Source and pinpoint":"S030. \nSupreme Court","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_judicial_or_application_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C058","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C058","Precise assertion":"Federal civil appeal ordinarily is 30 days, or 60 days for specified federal-party cases.","Source and pinpoint":"S031, FRAP 4(a). \nUnited States Courts\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High, subject to tolling and entry rules."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C059","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C059","Precise assertion":"No arbitration-specific Kansas Judicial Council form was located in bounded search.","Source and pinpoint":"S032.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"Bounded search result, not universal absence."},"coordinator_verification_status":"original_bounded_search_or_absence_hold_not_rerun","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C060","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C060","Precise assertion":"AAA/JAMS rules apply only if actual contract and applicable version incorporate them and administrator accepts the case.","Source and pinpoint":"S033–S034. \nAmerican Arbitration Association\n+1","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High practical/legal distinction."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C061","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C061","Precise assertion":"No administrator fee or eligibility amount can be determined without actual clause, version, claim, and status.","Source and pinpoint":"S033–S034.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High hold."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C062","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C062","Precise assertion":"Small-claims and Chapter 61 cases remain subject to arbitration gateways, but no special published Kansas handling rule was located.","Source and pinpoint":"S001, §5-429(e); S032.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"Partial/unresolved."},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_statutory_or_administrator_text_checked_not_whole_claim_acceptance","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C063","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C063","Precise assertion":"Actual contract, assent, delegation, transfer, waiver, and administrator facts control every case-specific result.","Source and pinpoint":"Entire component.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High."},"coordinator_verification_status":"scope_boundary_observed_actual_private_facts_not_reviewed","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}},{"claim_id":"S_KS-P17-C064","area_numbers":[66],"area_assignment_method":"task_scope_fallback","researcher_record":{"Claim ID":"S_KS-P17-C064","Precise assertion":"PASS-17 establishes no provider, creditor, debt, clause, or arbitration approval.","Source and pinpoint":"Scope.","Predicates, consequence, and confidence":"High project-status statement."},"coordinator_verification_status":"scope_boundary_observed_actual_private_facts_not_reviewed","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","related_findings":[],"all_underlying_primary_accepted":false,"actual_application_accepted":false}}],"sources":[{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S001","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0023_section/005_004_0023_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0024_section/005_004_0024_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0031_section/005_004_0031_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0052_section/005_004_0052_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0053_section/005_004_0053_k/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S001","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Kansas Revised Uniform Arbitration Act — Kansas Revisor:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0023_section/005_004_0023_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0024_section/005_004_0024_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0025_section/005_004_0025_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0027_section/005_004_0027_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0028_section/005_004_0028_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0029_section/005_004_0029_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0031_section/005_004_0031_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0048_section/005_004_0048_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0049_section/005_004_0049_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0050_section/005_004_0050_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0052_section/005_004_0052_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0053_section/005_004_0053_k/","Exact read scope":"Definitions; notice; transition; nonwaivable terms; judicial motion; validity and allocation; motion to compel; stays; provisional relief; initiation; remedies; jurisdiction; venue; appeal; E-SIGN relation; savings","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh Oct. 26, 2026 Pacific/UTC. Current 2026 official HTML; no printed pages or PDF indices. No complete act-history or comments audit. \nKansas Legislature\n+9"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh complete selected15 current Kansas arbitration sections; definitions/notice, transition, variation, judicial relief/allocation, compel/stays, provisional initiation/remedy/jurisdiction/venue/appeal/E-SIGN/savings compared. Q002/Q003/Q004 qualifications pending.","limits":"Not all31 operative sections/current history/comments; actual agreement, permitted variation, waiver/application and private facts held.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S002","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S002","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"2018 HB 2571 enrolled act:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/measures/documents/hb2571_enrolled.pdf","Exact read scope":"Selected visual inspection: PDF index 0/printed 1; index 1/printed 2; index 7/printed 8; index 9/printed 10","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected PDF read; not whole legislative history. Current statute controls. \nKansas Legislature\n+3"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh selected enrolled parsed sections1–8,26–31, repeal/effectiveness context; no pixels.","limits":"No entire10-page PDF/history/approval-chain acceptance; unrelated trust/lemon/high-voltage provisions are incidental, not newly researched sectors.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S003","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S003","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Repealed Kansas act, former K.S.A. 5-401:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2018/b2017_18/statute/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0001_section/005_004_0001_k/","Exact read scope":"Complete former validity and exclusions text","Status, access, and limits":"Historical, not current except through transition/savings. \nKansas Legislature"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh complete historical2017 former401 validity/exclusion body/history read after ordinary later-line open.","limits":"Old insurance/employment/tort exclusion only through actual425/453/FAA/special-law predicates; not current general exclusions.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S004","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S004","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"HB 2351 official status:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/bills/hb2351/","Exact read scope":"Bill status and version","Status, access, and limits":"Proposed and died; not operative. \nKansas Legislature"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh officialHB2351 summary/status shows Died.","limits":"Not enacted law; no full bill/version/history/future proposal audit.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S005","urls":["https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/","https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/","https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/","https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/","https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s6/","https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S005","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§1–4, 6, 16 — OLRC:\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s1/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s2/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s3/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s4/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s6/\nhttps://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-120/t9/s16/","Exact read scope":"Commerce/exclusion; validity; stay; compel petition and trial; motion procedure; appeals","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh. OLRC states law through Public Law 119-120, Oct. 7, 2026. Chapter 4 reviewed only at boundary. \nU.S. Code\n+5"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Explicit dated MT16 completeFAA1/2/3/4/6/16 bodies plus fresh402/effective boundary. Q001 inclusive date/judicial exception.","limits":"Original119-120 provenance retained; coordinator119-124 dated reuse not fresh. No wholeChapter4/federal jurisdiction/case-law/application acceptance.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S006","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0007_section/016_016_0007_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0009_section/016_016_0009_k/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S006","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Kansas UETA:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0005_section/016_016_0005_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0007_section/016_016_0007_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/016_000_0000_chapter/016_016_0000_article/016_016_0009_section/016_016_0009_k/","Exact read scope":"Electronic agreement, recognition, and attribution","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh. No actual platform/audit evidence. \nKansas Legislature\n+2"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh complete1605/1607/1609 operative bodies. Mutual electronic agreement, recognition, attribution and context/other-law boundaries compared.","limits":"No actual displayed clause/version/security/process/consumer assent or complete UETA/federal writing/consumer notice analysis.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S007","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S007","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"KCSOA anti-waiver and Kansas arbitral remedies:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/050_000_0000_chapter/050_011_0000_article/050_011_0021_section/050_011_0021_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","Exact read scope":"K.S.A. 50-1121(u); K.S.A. 5-443","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh targeted read. No broader provider-remedies acceptance. \nKansas Legislature\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh50-1121 body including(u) and443 complete operative body, with426 variation caveat. Q003 default remedy branches need clarity.","limits":"No private cause, actual CSO/license/remedy/fee, broader permitted variation or punitive/cap procedure acceptance.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S008","urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_002_0000_article/060_002_0062_section/060_002_0062_k/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S008","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Kansas appeal and stay statutes:\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_021_0000_article/060_021_0003_section/060_021_0003_k/\nhttps://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/060_000_0000_chapter/060_002_0000_article/060_002_0062_section/060_002_0062_k/","Exact read scope":"30-day civil appeal; supersedeas and stay provisions","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh. No actual appeal/order. \nKansas Legislature\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh complete60-2103/262 operative texts.30-day ordinary appeal, listed reset/extension, stay/security and appellate powers compared.","limits":"No actual order/bond/clock, complete appellate/local rule/history or categorical absence of automatic state stay established.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S009","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S009","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Packard v. Credit Solutions of America:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/100231.html","Exact read scope":"Whole-contract KCSOA/KCPA illegality and FAA separability","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected reread for PASS-17. Published Kansas Court of Appeals; registration-era facts; no merits decision. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S010","urls":["https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S010","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/546/440/","Exact read scope":"Whole-contract illegality/separability","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court; applies in state and federal court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S011","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S011","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Howard v. Ferrellgas Partners:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/13-3061/13-3061-2014-04-08.html","Exact read scope":"Formation burden and FAA §4 trial","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S012","urls":["https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066","https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-2066/19-2066-2020-09-16.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S012","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Fedor v. UnitedHealthcare:\nhttps://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinion/19-2066\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-2066/19-2066-2020-09-16.html","Exact read scope":"Formation must precede delegation","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit. \nTenth Circuit Court of Appeals\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S013","urls":["https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S013","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Duling v. Mid American Credit Union:\nhttps://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ks-court-of-appeals/2099019.html","Exact read scope":"Change-in-terms assent and opt-out","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Kansas memorandum opinion; not universal authority. \nFindLaw\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S014","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S014","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Knisley v. Equity Bank:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2024/126277.html","Exact read scope":"Silence/continued use and FAA-preemption limits","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential. \nJustia Law\n+3"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S015","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S015","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Belnap v. Iasis Healthcare:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/15-4010/15-4010-2017-01-05.html","Exact read scope":"JAMS-rule incorporation and delegation","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Tenth Circuit; nonconsumer healthcare contract. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S016","urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S016","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Coinbase v. Suski official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-3_879d.pdf","Exact read scope":"Competing agreements; court decides controlling contract","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh PDF read. PDF index 5/opinion 4 and index 7/opinion 6 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S017","urls":["https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S017","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Rent-A-Center v. Jackson:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/63/","Exact read scope":"Delegation severability and specific challenge","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S018","urls":["https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S018","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Henry Schein v. Archer & White:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-1272/","Exact read scope":"No wholly-groundless exception","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S019","urls":["https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S019","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Arthur Andersen v. Carlisle:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/624/","Exact read scope":"State-law nonsignatory theories","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. U.S. Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S020","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S020","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Hemphill v. Ford Motor Co.:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2009/98966.html","Exact read scope":"Assignee language and equitable estoppel","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Court of Appeals; vehicle facts. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S021","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S021","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Portfolio Recovery Associates v. Dixon:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/court-of-appeals/2016/113077.html","Exact read scope":"Debt-buyer enforcement and waiver allocation","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published; predates 2018 act and Morgan. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S022","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S022","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Jackson Trak Group v. Mid States Port Authority:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1988/60-717-2.html","Exact read scope":"Kansas waiver factors","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published; predecessor act. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S023","urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S023","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Morgan v. Sundance official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-328_m6ho.pdf","Exact read scope":"No arbitration-specific prejudice requirement","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh PDF read. PDF index 4/opinion 3 and index 6/opinion 5 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S024","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S024","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Myers v. Papa Texas:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/25-2020/25-2020-2026-02-12.html","Exact read scope":"Current Tenth Circuit waiver/default discussion","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Unpublished/nonprecedential. \nJustia Law\n+4"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S025","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S025","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Wille v. Southwestern Bell:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1976/47-986-1.html","Exact read scope":"Kansas unconscionability factors","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S026","urls":["https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/","https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/","https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/","https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/","https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S026","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"FAA saving-clause and remedy cases:\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/333/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/228/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/531/79/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/565/95/\nhttps://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/587/17-988/","Exact read scope":"Concepcion, Italian Colors, Green Tree, CompuCredit, Lamps Plus","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected reads. No broader federal-consumer-remedy audit. \nJustia Law\n+4"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S027","urls":["https://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S027","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Skewes v. Shearson Lehman:\nhttps://law.justia.com/cases/kansas/supreme-court/1992/65-845-3.html","Exact read scope":"FAA preemption of old Kansas tort exclusion","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh selected read. Published Kansas Supreme Court. \nJustia Law"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S028","urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S028","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Badgerow v. Walters official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1143_m6hn.pdf","Exact read scope":"FAA no independent jurisdiction; look-through text","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh PDF read. PDF index 6/opinion 4 and index 10/opinion 8 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S029","urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S029","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Smith v. Spizzirri official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf","Exact read scope":"Federal stay rather than dismissal","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh PDF read. PDF index 4/opinion 3 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S030","urls":["https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S030","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Coinbase v. Bielski official PDF:\nhttps://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-105_5536.pdf","Exact read scope":"Automatic federal stay during nonfrivolous §16 appeal","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh PDF read. PDF index 6/opinion 4 visually inspected. \nSupreme Court"},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S031","urls":["https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S031","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 4:\nhttps://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/federal-rules-of-appellate-procedure-dec-1-2024_0.pdf","Exact read scope":"Rule 4(a), PDF pages 17–20; 30/60-day branches and tolling","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh parsed read. Screenshots initially captured historical-note pages; operative text verified through parsed official PDF lines. \nUnited States Courts\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh official2024 edition selected completeRule4(a), with4(c)/(d) and incidental4(b) text returned/read; precise bounds in map.","limits":"Not whole78pages/pixels/post2024 current amendment chain; no actual date or universal30/60-day result.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S032","urls":["https://self-help.kscourts.gov/FindCourtForms","https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-60-civil-actions","https://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-61-civil-actions/pleadings"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S032","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"Kansas forms:\nhttps://self-help.kscourts.gov/FindCourtForms\nhttps://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-60-civil-actions\nhttps://www.kjc.ks.gov/legal-forms/chapter-61-civil-actions/pleadings","Exact read scope":"Bounded search for arbitration-specific motion forms","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh bounded search; direct pages intermittently inaccessible. No specific form located; not proof none exists."},"coordinator_verification_status":"unreopened_source_hold","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Original source usage and reported read/access/precedent bounds read; body not reopened.","limits":"All original judicial/secondary/citation/publication/currentness/403/PDF/search/application holds retained.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S033","urls":["https://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S033","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"AAA Consumer Arbitration Rules:\nhttps://www.adr.org/rules-forms-and-fees/consumer/","Exact read scope":"Public consumer rules/status page","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh. Rules updated effective May 1, 2025; actual contract/version unknown. \nAmerican Arbitration Association\n+1"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Explicit dated MT16 public AAA landing plus rule-PDF cover0–4 reread. May1,2025 version shown on cover, not the landing parse alone.","limits":"No whole rules/fee schedule/actual contract/admin case; public cover alias does not reclassify original researcher access.","original_record_unchanged":true}},{"source_id":"S_KS-P17-S034","urls":["https://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards"],"researcher_record":{"Source ID":"S_KS-P17-S034","Title, issuer, and full literal URL":"JAMS Consumer Minimum Standards:\nhttps://www.jamsadr.com/consumer-minimum-standards","Exact read scope":"Public consumer standards","Status, access, and limits":"Fresh. Effective May 1, 2024; private administrator policy, not Kansas law. \nJAMS"},"coordinator_verification_status":"selected_text_checked_with_remaining_limits","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","result":"Fresh complete publicJAMS minimum-standards substantive text/footnote and date parsed.","limits":"Private policy scope/exclusions/negotiation and actual incorporation/eligibility/acceptance remain conditional. No Comprehensive Rules or actual fees computed.","original_record_unchanged":true}}],"coverage":[{"topic":"Current Kansas arbitration statute","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Current Kansas arbitration statute","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C001–C003, C006–C008","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual agreement date"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"2018 transition","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"2018 transition","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C001–C002","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Pre-2018 opt-in record"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Old insurance/employment/tort exclusions","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Old insurance/employment/tort exclusions","Status":"Answered historically","Claims":"C002","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Specialized old-act/FAA facts"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"2026 proposed insurance amendment","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"2026 proposed insurance amendment","Status":"Answered as dead proposal","Claims":"C003","Exact missing evidence or next action":"No further action unless reintroduced"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"FAA commerce scope","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"FAA commerce scope","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C004","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual transaction nexus"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"FAA transportation-worker exclusion","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"FAA transportation-worker exclusion","Status":"Answered at boundary","Claims":"C004","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Ordinarily irrelevant consumer facts"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"EFAA chapter 4 exception","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"EFAA chapter 4 exception","Status":"Answered at boundary","Claims":"C004","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Specialized claim excluded"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q001","S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"FAA preemption","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"FAA preemption","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C006, C023","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Claim-specific state rule"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal subject-matter jurisdiction","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal subject-matter jurisdiction","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C005, C050–C051","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Federal question/diversity facts"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas jurisdiction and venue","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas jurisdiction and venue","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C047–C048","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual parties/hearing place"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Formation","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Formation","Status":"Answered doctrinally","Claims":"C009–C014","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual offer, acceptance, version"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Formation burden","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Formation burden","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C010–C012","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual evidentiary record"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Formation trial","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Formation trial","Status":"Answered federally; Kansas summary process","Claims":"C011–C012","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Court procedure/order"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Electronic assent","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Electronic assent","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C013–C014","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Platform logs and display"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Wet-ink requirement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Wet-ink requirement","Status":"No universal requirement","Claims":"C013","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Authentication/assent facts"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Web-posted terms","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Web-posted terms","Status":"No automatic assent","Claims":"C013–C014","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Notice and acceptance"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Change-in-terms","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Change-in-terms","Status":"Partial/fact-specific","Claims":"C014","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Amendment clause and delivery"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Exact version","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Exact version","Status":"Unresolved without records","Claims":"C013–C014","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Version hash/text"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Whole-contract illegality","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Whole-contract illegality","Status":"Answered gateway only","Claims":"C015–C016","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Substantive merits later"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"KCSOA voidness/arbitration relationship","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"KCSOA voidness/arbitration relationship","Status":"Answered only through separability boundary","Claims":"C015–C016, C034","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual defect/formation theory"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Court-versus-arbitrator default","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Court-versus-arbitrator default","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C007–C009","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual delegation"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Delegation formation","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Delegation formation","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C009, C017","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual clause and assent"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Delegation-specific defense","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Delegation-specific defense","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C017","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual challenge"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Wholly-groundless exception","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Wholly-groundless exception","Status":"Rejected","Claims":"C018","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Valid delegation first required"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Competing agreements","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Competing agreements","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C019","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual agreements"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Incorporation of administrator rules","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Incorporation of administrator rules","Status":"Answered conditionally","Claims":"C020–C021","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Exact named rules/version"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Scope","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Scope","Status":"Answered doctrinally","Claims":"C007–C008, C018–C021","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Clause language and claim"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Class arbitration","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Class arbitration","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C022","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Affirmative contractual basis"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Class waiver","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Class waiver","Status":"Answered under FAA boundary","Claims":"C023","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Formation/other neutral defense"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Assignee enforcement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Assignee enforcement","Status":"Answered as conditional","Claims":"C024–C027","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Assignment terms and chain"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Debt-buyer enforcement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Debt-buyer enforcement","Status":"Answered as nonautomatic","Claims":"C025","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Contract/account link"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Servicer/agent enforcement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Servicer/agent enforcement","Status":"Partial","Claims":"C024–C027","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Agency agreement and scope"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Affiliate enforcement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Affiliate enforcement","Status":"Partial","Claims":"C024–C027","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Express clause or theory"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Equitable estoppel","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Equitable estoppel","Status":"Answered fact-specifically","Claims":"C026","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Intertwined claims and conduct"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Negotiable instrument crossover","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Negotiable instrument crossover","Status":"Answered as distinct","Claims":"C028","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual note/arbitration document"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Unconscionability","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Unconscionability","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C029–C030","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Clause, setting, costs"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Costs","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Costs","Status":"Answered at burden level","Claims":"C031","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual administrator fees/ability"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Effective vindication","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Effective vindication","Status":"Answered narrowly","Claims":"C032","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual prospective remedy waiver"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"CROA arbitration","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"CROA arbitration","Status":"Answered only as arbitrability boundary","Claims":"C033","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Coverage and merits remain open"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"KCSOA anti-waiver","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"KCSOA anti-waiver","Status":"Answered conditionally","Claims":"C034–C035","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual remedy restrictions"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q003"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Statutory remedies in arbitration","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Statutory remedies in arbitration","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C035","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Governing law and clause"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q003"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Litigation-conduct waiver","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Litigation-conduct waiver","Status":"Answered federally","Claims":"C036–C037","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual litigation conduct"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas waiver decisionmaker","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas waiver decisionmaker","Status":"Unresolved after current developments","Claims":"C038","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Later controlling Kansas authority"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"FAA §3 default","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"FAA §3 default","Status":"Answered as distinct","Claims":"C039","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual administrator termination/nonpayment"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Arbitration demand effect","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Arbitration demand effect","Status":"Answered—no court stay by itself","Claims":"C040","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Court motion/order"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas pending-motion stay","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas pending-motion stay","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C041","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual motion"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas post-compulsion stay","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas post-compulsion stay","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C042–C043","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Scope/severability"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal stay","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal stay","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C044","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Application and no statutory default"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Initial Kansas motion service","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Initial Kansas motion service","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C045","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual summons service"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Pending-case motion","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Pending-case motion","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C046","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual court and service"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas response deadline to motion","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas response deadline to motion","Status":"Unresolved generally","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Route, local rule, order"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas evidentiary hearing","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas evidentiary hearing","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C012","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual factual dispute"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal §4 hearing/trial","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal §4 hearing/trial","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C049","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual demand/jury request"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Provisional remedies","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Provisional remedies","Status":"Answered at statute level","Claims":"S001","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Urgency and arbitrator capacity"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q002","S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Chapter 61 arbitration handling","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Chapter 61 arbitration handling","Status":"Partial","Claims":"C062","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Published case/local procedure"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Small-claims arbitration handling","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Small-claims arbitration handling","Status":"Partial","Claims":"C062","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Route/conversion/order"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas denial appeal","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas denial appeal","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C052–C055","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Entry/tolling/stay facts"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas grant appeal","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas grant appeal","Status":"Answered—no ordinary immediate route listed","Claims":"C053","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Extraordinary appellate route not analyzed"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal denial appeal","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal denial appeal","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C056–C058","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Notice date/frivolousness"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal grant appeal","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal grant appeal","Status":"Answered generally","Claims":"C056","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Finality/other statutory route"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Federal automatic appellate stay","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Federal automatic appellate stay","Status":"Answered","Claims":"C057","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Nonfrivolous denial appeal"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Kansas automatic appellate stay","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Kansas automatic appellate stay","Status":"Not located","Claims":"C055","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Stay motion/order"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Official Kansas arbitration form","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Official Kansas arbitration form","Status":"Not located in bounded search","Claims":"C059","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Local forms/orders"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"AAA current rules","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"AAA current rules","Status":"Status answered","Claims":"C060–C061","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual incorporation and case registration"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"JAMS current standards","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"JAMS current standards","Status":"Status answered","Claims":"C060–C061","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual incorporation and eligibility"},"coordinator_acceptance":"bounded_correction_or_atomic_link_UNSENT","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":["S_KS-P17-Q004"],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Administrator fee arithmetic","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Administrator fee arithmetic","Status":"Held","Claims":"C061","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual rule/claim/company"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Award confirmation/vacatur","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Award confirmation/vacatur","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Separate later pass"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Postaward judgment enforcement","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Postaward judgment enforcement","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Separate later pass"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Bankruptcy","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Bankruptcy","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Separate procedure"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Mortgage/security interests","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Mortgage/security interests","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Sector pass"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Medical/government/support/tax","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Medical/government/support/tax","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Sector passes"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Local/tribal/country law","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Local/tribal/country law","Status":"Excluded","Claims":"—","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Separate jurisdictional research"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Actual provider/creditor/account","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Actual provider/creditor/account","Status":"Not reviewed","Claims":"C063–C064","Exact missing evidence or next action":"Actual public/authorized records"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}},{"topic":"Component/state/parent/A066 acceptance","researcher_record":{"Assigned issue":"Component/state/parent/A066 acceptance","Status":"Not evaluated","Claims":"C064","Exact missing evidence or next action":"No acceptance follows"},"coordinator_acceptance":"scoped_coverage_read_with_source_application_holds","coordinator_annotation":{"at":"2026-10-29T03:57:50.325089+00:00","review_file":"[internal evidence reference]","source_checks":"[internal evidence reference]","findings":[],"original_status_and_all_source_application_holds_preserved":true}}],"annotations":{},"corrections":[{"issue_id":"S_KS-P17-Q001","finding":"A1 describes covered disputes accruing after March3,2022. The official402 applicability note includes any dispute OR claim that arises OR accrues ON OR AFTER that date. Section402(b) also supplies a statutory court-decision exception notwithstanding a purported delegation, which should be visible alongside the scoped Chapter4 gateway boundary. The report expressly excludes specialized claims; no real claim is investigated or accepted.","affected_claim_ids":[],"related_claim_ids":["S_KS-P17-C004"],"validated_exact_raw_rows":[],"exact_original_cell_matches":[],"source_urls":["https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-124/t9/s402/"],"localization":"claim_row_matches_available_no_complete_narrative_localization","public_status":"Recorded correction pending; working-paper assertion requires the stated repair or qualification."},{"issue_id":"S_KS-P17-Q002","finding":"H2 divides provisional relief merely into before-versus-after appointment. Section5-430(a)/(b) instead turns on an arbitrator being appointed AND authorized AND able to act. Appointment alone does not establish the post-threshold urgent-court-relief branch; the displayed table omits the cumulative trigger.","affected_claim_ids":[],"related_claim_ids":[],"validated_exact_raw_rows":[],"exact_original_cell_matches":[],"source_urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/"],"localization":"report_level_pending_localization_required","public_status":"Recorded correction pending; working-paper assertion requires the stated repair or qualification."},{"issue_id":"S_KS-P17-Q003","finding":"F4 and C035 group punitive damages, attorney fees and other remedies under a single law-or-agreement authorization phrase. The cited443 default rules differ: punitive relief uses civil-action legal authorization and justified hearing evidence, fees/expenses have a law-or-agreement alternative, and other remedies use the just-and-appropriate branch. The grouped wording should not be used as a standalone agreement-only permission for punitive relief. Section426(a) separately permits variation to the extent permitted by law, so this is a bounded clarity requirement rather than a conclusion that agreement can never vary443.","affected_claim_ids":[],"related_claim_ids":["S_KS-P17-C035"],"validated_exact_raw_rows":[],"exact_original_cell_matches":[],"source_urls":["https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0043_section/005_004_0043_k/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0026_section/005_004_0026_k/"],"localization":"claim_row_matches_available_no_complete_narrative_localization","public_status":"Recorded correction pending; working-paper assertion requires the stated repair or qualification."},{"issue_id":"S_KS-P17-Q004","finding":"Six positive coverage rows lack the actual atomic proposition: transportation/EFAA exceptions point to commerce-only C004; general FAA preemption points to Kansas validity C006 and class-specific C023; provisional remedies points to sourceS001; AAA/JAMS version status points to contract/fee holds C060–C061. The resource inventory also lists public JAMS Comprehensive Rules without a literal locator/source record. S031's PDF-pages17–20 description does not distinguish printed pages from zero-based PDF indices. The AAA landing parse does not itself expose the claimed May1,2025 date; the dated official rule-PDF cover supplies that bounded evidence.","affected_claim_ids":[],"related_claim_ids":[],"validated_exact_raw_rows":[],"exact_original_cell_matches":[],"source_urls":["https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/119-124/t9/s402/","https://www.kslegislature.gov/b2025_26/laws/005_000_0000_chapter/005_004_0000_article/005_004_0030_section/005_004_0030_k/","https://www.adr.org/media/yawntdvs/2025_consumer_arbitration_rules.pdf"],"localization":"report_level_pending_localization_required","public_status":"Recorded correction pending; working-paper assertion requires the stated repair or qualification."}],"resolved_corrections":[],"review_history":[{"id":"S_KS-P17-scoped-review-20261029","status":"reviewed_four_bounded_findings_UNSENT_source_judicial_application_holds","at":null}]}