K.S.A. 60-249.Special verdict; general verdict; written questions
Last amended July 1, 2011 · Last verified July 28, 2026
In one sentenceK.S.A. 60-249 lets a Kansas court require a special verdict of written findings on each fact issue, or a general verdict paired with written questions, and sets out how the court must handle answers that conflict with each other or with the general verdict.
(1)In general. The court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact. The court may do so by:
(A)Submitting written questions susceptible of a categorical or other brief answer;
(B)submitting written forms of the special findings that might properly be made under the pleadings and evidence; or
(C)using any other method that the court considers appropriate.
(2)Instructions. The court must give the instructions and explanations necessary to enable the jury to make its findings on each submitted issue.
(3)Issues not submitted. A party waives the right to a jury trial on any issue of fact raised by the pleadings or evidence but not submitted to the jury unless, before the jury retires, the party demands its submission to the jury. If the party does not demand submission, the court may make a finding on the issue. If the court makes no finding, it is considered to have made a finding consistent with its judgment on the special verdict.
(b)General verdict with answers to written questions.
(1)In general. The court may on written request, submit to the jury forms for a general verdict, together with written questions on one or more issues of fact that the jury must decide. The court must give the instructions and explanations necessary to enable the jury to render a general verdict and answer the questions in writing, and must direct the jury to do both.
(2)Verdict and answers consistent. When the general verdict and the answers are consistent, the court must approve an appropriate judgment on the verdict and answers.
(3)Answers inconsistent with the verdict. When the answers are consistent with each other, but one or more is inconsistent with the general verdict, the court may:
(A)Approve an appropriate judgment according to the answers, notwithstanding the general verdict;
(B)direct the jury to further consider its answers and verdict; or
(C)order a new trial.
(4)Answers inconsistent with each other and the verdict. When the answers are inconsistent with each other and one or more is also inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment must not be entered; instead, the court must direct the jury to further consider its answers and verdict, or must order a new trial.
Amendment History
L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-249; L. 2010, ch. 135, § 119; L. 2011, ch. 48, § 11; July 1.
Plain-English Summary
Subsection (a) lets the court require the jury to return only a special verdict -- a written finding on each fact issue -- using written questions calling for brief answers, written forms for the special findings the pleadings and evidence support, or any other method the court considers appropriate. The court must give whatever instructions are necessary for the jury to make those findings. If an issue raised by the pleadings or evidence isn't submitted to the jury, a party waives the right to a jury trial on it unless the party demands submission before the jury retires; without that demand, the court can make its own finding, and if it makes none, the court is treated as having found consistently with its judgment on the special verdict.
Subsection (b) covers the alternative: on written request, the court can submit a general verdict form along with written questions on specific fact issues, instructing the jury to answer both. When the general verdict and the answers agree, the court approves judgment on them. When the answers agree with each other but one conflicts with the general verdict, the court can approve judgment based on the answers despite the general verdict, send the jury back to reconsider both, or order a new trial. When the answers conflict with each other, and at least one also conflicts with the general verdict, the court can't enter judgment at all -- it must send the jury back to reconsider or order a new trial.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a special verdict under 60-249?
Subsection (a)(1) defines it as a written finding by the jury on each issue of fact, which the court can obtain through written questions, written forms for special findings, or any other method it considers appropriate.
What happens if I don't ask the court to submit a fact issue to the jury?
Subsection (a)(3) treats that as a waiver of the right to a jury trial on that issue, unless you demand its submission before the jury retires. The court can then make its own finding, and if it makes none, it's considered to have found consistently with its judgment on the special verdict.
Can a Kansas court combine a general verdict with written questions on specific facts?
Yes. Subsection (b)(1) lets the court, on written request, submit general verdict forms along with written questions on one or more fact issues, and instructs the jury to answer both.
What if the jury's written answers contradict its general verdict?
Subsection (b)(3) gives the court three options when the answers agree with each other but conflict with the general verdict: approve judgment based on the answers, send the jury back to reconsider, or order a new trial.
What if the jury's answers conflict with each other and with the verdict?
Subsection (b)(4) bars entering judgment at all in that situation -- the court must direct the jury to reconsider its answers and verdict, or order a new trial.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from the
Kansas Statutes Annotated, enacted by the Kansas Legislature. Last verified July 28, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:kansas special verdict rulegeneral verdict written questions kansasjury answers conflict verdict kansas60-249 kansas civil procedureinconsistent jury verdict kansas