Kansas Manufacturing Co. v. Gandy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that \waiver doctrine is discretionary\ and that reviewing courts may \ 'reserve[ ] the right to consider constitutional challenges to the application of statutes in specific cases of plain error or where the rights and interests involved may warrant it' \
• \The best interests of the child and the welfare and protection of the community are paramount considerations in every juvenile proceeding in this state.\
• case involving a five-year-old putting his penis in the mouth of another five-year-old at the direction of another child while the three were “playing doctor”
• case involving a five-year-old putting his penis in the mouth of another five-year-old at the direction of another child while the three were “playing doctor”
• “Even where waiver is clear, this court reserves the right to consider constitutional challenges to the application of statutes in specific cases of plain error or where the rights and interests involved may warrant it.”
• an appellate court’s invocation of the waiver doctrine is discretionary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).