Guide
Kansas Table of Authorities: The Issue-Based Contents Rule
On this page3 sections
Kansas appellate briefing rules require an issue-based table of contents containing authorities—not simply a separate alphabetical table of authorities. Supreme Court Rule 6.02(a)(1) requires page references to brief divisions and subdivisions, including each issue, and the authorities relied on in support of each issue. Rule 6.03(a)(1) makes the same requirement for an appellee’s brief. A conventional TOA can help organize citations, but it does not replace this Kansas structure.
Extract a Kansas table of authorities from your brief PDF using the standard format. There is no Kansas-specific preset. Review the output as a citation inventory, then arrange the required issue-based contents in Word.
Read Rule 6.02 before choosing a table layout
“A table of contents that includes: (A) page references to each division and subdivision in the brief, including each issue presented; and (B) the authorities relied on in support of each issue.” — Kansas Supreme Court Rule 6.02(a)(1)
The central organizing unit is the issue. A conventional alphabetical TOA answers ‘where does this case appear?’ Kansas’s required contents also answer ‘which authorities support this issue?’ Those are different tasks. If a case supports two issues, check its placement under both rather than assuming one global entry conveys the relationship.
Rule 6.02 does not prescribe a standalone alphabetical list of every authority with every occurrence page. Do not mislabel a generic output as a Kansas-compliant substitute. Retain page references to each division and subdivision, and place supporting authorities where the contents identify the corresponding issue. If you include an additional alphabetical table for convenience, keep the required contents intact and check other applicable formatting instructions.
| Component | Governing provision | Assembly task |
|---|---|---|
| Appellant’s contents | 6.02(a)(1) | List divisions, subdivisions and issues with pages; connect supporting authorities to each issue. |
| Appellee’s contents | 6.03(a)(1) | Build an issue-based contents from the appellee’s own argument. |
| Cross-appeal section | 6.03(a)(5) | Provide comparable appellant content without duplicating existing statements, arguments or authorities. |
| Court-decision citation | 6.08 | Review official citation followed by recognized reporter citation. |
| Optional record appendix | 6.02(b); 6.03(b) | Use limited critical record extracts; do not treat the appendix as an authorities table. |
| District-court motion memorandum | Different document and rule set | Check trial rules, local rules and the judge’s order rather than importing appellate contents. |
Use the official citation, not just the regional reporter
“Citation of a court decision must be by the official citation followed by any generally recognized reporter system citation.” — Kansas Supreme Court Rule 6.08
When reviewing Kansas case entries, do not discard the official reporter information merely because a regional citation already identifies the decision. Preserve the official-plus-reporter form required by Rule 6.08 and verify the full citation against the source decision. A detected short form should be consolidated with its actual full authority, not with a similarly named case.
The same rule says parties normally should be referred to by trial-court status or name unless context requires appellant/appellee distinctions. That is guidance for the brief’s body, not a command to rename cases in the authorities inventory. Keep the table’s case identifiers accurate. The generator does not rewrite the brief to conform to citation conventions. Correct the source citations separately so that the inventory and the text agree.
Build the issue map before the final page check
For a hypothetical two-issue appeal, first identify the headings and subheadings of Issue I and Issue II and their starting pages. Then review the authorities actually used to support each argument, including standard-of-review authorities. Transfer the complete citations into the corresponding contents entries. This example describes a workflow; it is not a filed Kansas brief or a list of invented local cases.
Do not confuse a contents page reference with a reporter pinpoint or record volume/page reference. The contents points into the brief. A reporter pinpoint locates the passage in an opinion. Rule 6.02(a)(4) record references support material facts, while (a)(5) addresses issue preservation. The optional appendix under (b) is for the court’s convenience and is not a substitute for the record. References to it supplement, rather than replace, required record citations.
PDF extraction to editable Word
- Finish the substantive arguments and issue headings. Export the current brief to PDF and retain its matching Word file.
- Open the generator in standard format. Confirm the actual court/settings: automatic detection or a sample may override the initial selection.
- Review every authority, full/short-form match and printed page reference against the PDF. Use that inventory to check the supporting authorities under each Kansas issue.
- With PDF alone, download the editable Word table. Matching Word plus text-layer PDF can insert ordinary table text into the brief; adjust the required issue-based contents manually rather than substituting an alphabetical table.
- After assembling the contents and any optional table, re-export the brief. Recheck all division, subdivision and citation pages after layout changes. Separately check court formatting and filing requirements.
Frequently asked
Does Kansas require a separate alphabetical TOA?
Rules 6.02(a)(1) and 6.03(a)(1) require authorities supporting each issue within the table of contents. They do not state the separate alphabetical TOA requirement used in many other states.
Can I file only the generator’s standard table?
No, not as a substitute for the required contents. Use extraction to audit citations, then provide division/subdivision pages and authorities tied to each issue.
Does an appellee have the same contents obligation?
Yes. Rule 6.03(a)(1) expressly contains both the page-reference and supporting-authorities requirements.
Is the regional reporter alone enough?
Rule 6.08 calls for the official citation followed by a generally recognized reporter system citation. Verify both rather than automatically shortening Kansas case entries.
Can passim replace the issue map?
The cited rules do not provide that substitution. A global ‘throughout’ notation does not identify the contents divisions or connect authorities to the issues they support.
Official sources read October 14, 2026
- Kansas Judicial Branch: Rule 6.02Required appellant contents, argument/preservation references and optional appendix; restyled effective July 1, 2012.kscourts.gov
- Kansas Judicial Branch: Rule 6.03Read official page text for appellee contents and cross-appeal section.kscourts.gov
- Kansas Judicial Branch: Rule 6.08Read official page text for party references and official/reporter citations. The www-host Rule 6.02 request was denied; the non-www official PDF and page text were accessible. General guidance, not legal advice; check current rules and case orders.kscourts.gov
BriefAuthority · free
No account · no upload