Osgood v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 848 F.2d 141 (10th Cir. 1988).

Osgood v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 848 F.2d 141 (10th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite

green Positive treatment published 72.7 score

Quick Summary

To recover punitive damages in a breach of contract action under Kansas law, a plaintiff must allege and prove an independent tort that results in additional injury beyond the contractual loss.

An administratrix of an estate sued an insurance company for fraud and punitive damages, alleging the company misrepresented the limits of underinsured motorist coverage, which induced the estates to settle with a third party. The district court granted partial summary judgment dismissing the fraud claim. Although Kansas law allows punitive damages in breach of contract actions if an independent tort causes additional injury, the plaintiff failed to allege any damages separate from those arising from the contract claim. Because the plaintiff's requested compensatory damages were identical for both the contract and fraud counts, the court held that the failure to allege additional injury barred the recovery of punitive damages.

268 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.

Strongest positive: Bragg v. Big Heart Pet Brands, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-02047 (D. Kan. Sept. 14, 2021)

Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of

1989 2007 2026

How cited ↗

Cited for

At page 143 Determining scope of search incident to arrest217 citing cases“when a motion for summary judgment is granted, it is the appellate court's duty to examine the record to determine if any genuine issue of material fact was in dispute; if not, the court must determine if the substantive law was correctly applied.”3 citing courts quote it · 163 listed here

Underground Vaults & Storage, Inc. v. Cintas Corp., 632 F. App'x 917 (10th Cir. 2015).unpublished
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Warren v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins., 555 F.3d 1141 (10th Cir. 2009).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Lockaby v. Young, 42 F. App'x 313 (10th Cir. 2002).unpublished
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Wright ex rel. Trust Co. v. Abbott Labs., Inc., 259 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2001).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Barr v. Runyon, No. 98-6395 (10th Cir. June 13, 2000).unpublished
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir. 1988).
Chappell v. McKune, No. 99-3171 (10th Cir. Nov. 30, 1999).unpublished
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir. 1988).
Brown v. Royal MacCabees Life Ins., 137 F.3d 1236 (10th Cir. 1998).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
William Stephen Hance, Kathryn Mary Colgin v. Regina M. Karlis, Mel Powers, Alvaro Edward Corredor, Cynthia Guthrie v. Arkansas Valley Aviation, Inc., Doing Bus. as Mountain Flight Ctr., Inc., William Stephen Hance, Kathryn Mary Colgin, Mel Powers, Alvaro Edward Corredor, Cynthia Guthrie v. Regina M. Karlis v. Arkansas Valley Aviation, Inc., Doing Bus. as Mountain Flight Ctr., Inc., William Stephen Hance, Regina M. Karlis, Kathryn Mary Colgin v. Mel Powers, Alvaro Edward Corredor, Cynthia Guthrie v. Arkansas Valley Aviation, Inc., Doing Bus. as Mountain Flight Ctr., Inc., 94 F.3d 655 (10th Cir. 1996).published
Miller v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc., 949 F.2d 1088, 1090 (10th Cir.1991); Osgood v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Dr. John Hagelin for President Comm. of Kansas v. Graves, 25 F.3d 956 (10th Cir. 1994).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
United States v. One Ohaus Digit. Elec. Scale, 25 F.3d 1059 (10th Cir. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).

Show 153 more citing cases

Pitman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Oklahoma, 24 F.3d 118 (10th Cir. 1994).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988); Fed.
Dr. Arthur P. Taliaferro v. Dr. Eric Voth, 25 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988). 6 We find no genuine issues of material fact in dispute.
Thrifty Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc. v. Thomas A. Toye Salient Grp., Inc., 25 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
David S. Peterson v. Rita Vargas, 17 F.3d 1437 (10th Cir. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988)). 5 This court has noted that prison officials may not deliberately interfere with a prisoner's access to court.
Brunetti v. Resolution Trust Corp., 16 F.3d 415 (10th Cir. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
DePaolo v. United States ex rel. Internal Revenue Serv. (In re DePaolo), 165 B.R. 491 (D. Wyo. 1994).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
O'Driscoll v. Hercules Inc., 12 F.3d 176 (10th Cir. 1994).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Lawrence Gladson v. Gary Henman, 13 F.3d 405 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Gaylen Christensen v. Oshkosh Truck Corp., 12 F.3d 980 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Bldg. & Constr. Dep't v. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 7 F.3d 1487 (10th Cir. 1993).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988), and must determine if defendants as the moving parties have met their burden of showing a lack of any genuine issue of material fact such that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 4 Fed.…
Orvil Harris v. State of Oklahoma, 13 F.3d 405 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa, a Pennsylvania Corp., Plaintiff--Counter-Defendant--Appellee v. Emhart Corp., a Virginia Corp., Counterclaimant, Third Party v. Richard F. Vitkus, Third-Party-Defendant, 11 F.3d 1524 (3d Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Nat'l Union Fire Ins. v. Emhart Corp., 11 F.3d 1524 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
D. Jean Whiles v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 7 F.3d 1046 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Belinda MARTIN v. NANNIE & THE NEWBORNS, INC., 3 F.3d 1410 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Slavens v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs for Unita Cnty., Wyo., 2 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Jeffery Dean Cooper v. Ellsworth Corr. Work Facility Capt. J. Beurer Lt. Fletcher Unknown Sgt. Unknown Officers Unknown Major, 2 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Donald L. Nicely v. Donald B. Rice, 1 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Lewis v. Babbitt, 998 F.2d 880 (10th Cir. 1993).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Jackson v. Montgomery, 999 F.2d 547 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Arthur T. Duggins v. Boeing Military Airplanes, 996 F.2d 310 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma v. John E. Green, 995 F.2d 179 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir. 1988).
Nannette Wells v. John H. Scaggs, 993 F.2d 1552 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Alexander Shapolia v. Los Alamos Nat'l Lab'y, 992 F.2d 1033 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Scott E. McIntosh v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 992 F.2d 251 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
William Frank Schlicher v. Lee Gibbens Madden, 991 F.2d 806 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
W. Heritage Ins. v. Chava Trucking, Inc., 991 F.2d 651 (10th Cir. 1993).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Marvin D. Baker v. Bd. of Regents of the State of Kansas & Univ. of Kansas Med. Sch.--Sch. of Med., 991 F.2d 628 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988).
Delaney v. Cade, 986 F.2d 387 (10th Cir. 1993).published 2 cites
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 143 (10th Cir.1988)).
Riley v. Brown & Root, Inc., 896 F.2d 474 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Smith v. Maschner, 899 F.2d 940 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Oberndorf v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 900 F.2d 1434 (10th Cir. 1990).published
United Bank & Trust Co. of Norman v. Kansas Bankers Sur. Co., 901 F.2d 1520 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Verna Lewis v. City of Ft. Collins Barbara Liebler, 903 F.2d 752 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Charles G. Koch v. William I. Koch, 903 F.2d 1333 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Anderson v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 907 F.2d 936 (10th Cir. 1990).published
David TORREZ v. Pub. Serv. Co. OF NEW MEXICO, INC., 908 F.2d 687 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Martin v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of the Cnty. of Pueblo, 909 F.2d 402 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Eileen M. Thournir v. Natalie Meyer, 909 F.2d 408 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Richard W. Lucas v. Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Commc'ns Workers of Am., Dist. 7, 909 F.2d 419 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Hecla Mining Co. v. United States, 909 F.2d 1371 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Jim L. Considine v. Bd. Of Cnty. Commissioners Of The Cnty. Of Adams, 910 F.2d 695 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Edo Corp. v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 911 F.2d 1447 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Anesthesia Advantage, Inc. v. Metz Grp., 912 F.2d 397 (10th Cir. 1990).published
John H. Held v. Mfrs. Hanover Leasing Corp., 912 F.2d 1197 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Applied Genetics Int'l, Inc. v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc. Am. First Corp. Jack A. Alexander Kenneth W. Elsberry Richard P. Woltman & William J. Patton, Defendants/third- Party v. Norman Jay Hayes, Third-Party-Defendant-Appellee, 912 F.2d 1238 (1st Cir. 1990).published
Peggy J. Neece Buel H. Neece v. Internal Revenue Serv. of the United States United States First Nat'l Bank of Turley, N.A., 922 F.2d 573 (1st Cir. 1990).published
Willie Dixon v. Deputy Sheriff Donald Richer, 922 F.2d 1456 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Trapper Mining Inc. v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., Neil Morck, Bruce Harris, & R.W. Mullin, Wyodak Resources Dev. Corp. v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., Sec'y of the Dep't of Interior & William H. Lee, Chief, Branch of Mining Law & Solid Minerals, Wyoming State Off. Bureau of Land Mgmt., United States Dep't of the Interior, 923 F.2d 774 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Claro Gonzales v. Millers Cas. Ins. Co. of Texas, 923 F.2d 1417 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Raymond Lee Clifton v. Manfred R. Craig, 924 F.2d 182 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Kenneth W. Wright v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 925 F.2d 1288 (10th Cir. 1991).published
John C. Budd v. Am. Excess Ins. Co., Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellee, Swett & Crawford v. Prot. Ins. Co., Third-Party-Defendant. John C. Budd v. Swett & Crawford, Am. Excess Ins. Co., Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellee v. Prot. Ins. Co., Third-Party-Defendant-Appellant, 928 F.2d 344 (3d Cir. 1991).published
Church Ins. Co. v. Virginia Ann Shaw, 930 F.2d 32 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Callins v. Bd. of Cnty. Com'rs of Cnty. of Greer, Okl., 930 F.2d 32 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Rodger D. Ives v. Montezuma Cnty., 930 F.2d 33 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Rains v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 930 F.2d 34 (3d Cir. 1991).unpublished
Piatti v. Indus. Lasers, Inc., 930 F.2d 34 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Pipkin v. City of Moore, Okl., 930 F.2d 34 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Kenneth McHenry v. Aetna Life & Cas. Ins. Co., 930 F.2d 34 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Forrest Delayne Martinson v. James Wolney, 930 F.2d 34 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Leona T. Langs v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 930 F.2d 34 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Lloyd H. Sweger, Et Ux v. Texaco, Inc., Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Pennzoil Co., Sun Oil Co., Mobil Oil Corp., Atl. Richfield Co., Texaco Refining & Mktg. Inc., Sinclair Oil, Gulf Oil Corp., Phillips Oil Corp., Lloyd H. Sweger, Et Ux. v. Texaco, Inc., Pennzoil Co., Sinclair Oil, Gulf Oil Corp., Phillips Oil Corp., Texaco Refining & Mktg. Inc., Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Sun Oil Co., Mobil Oil Corp., Atl. Richfield Co., Lloyd H. Sweger, Et Ux. v. Texaco, Inc., Sinclair Oil, Gulf Oil Corp., Phillips Oil Corp., Chevron U.S.A., Inc., Pennzoil Co., Sun Oil Co., Mobil Oil Corp., Atl. Richfield Co., Texaco Refining & Mktg. Inc., 930 F.2d 35 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Sullivan v. Scoular Grain Co. of Utah, 930 F.2d 798 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Lloyd T. Solon v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 930 F.2d 922 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Richard Lee Dowling v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 931 F.2d 62 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Curtis Eugene Boroff v. Mail-Well Envelope Co., 931 F.2d 62 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Comcoa, Inc. v. Nec Telephones, Inc., 931 F.2d 655 (10th Cir. 1991).published
State Farm Mut. Ins. v. Schwartz, 933 F.2d 848 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Boren v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 933 F.2d 891 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Edward J. Romero v. Albert Aguayo, 934 F.2d 326 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Beatrice Hinds Carland v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 935 F.2d 1114 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Russillo v. Scarborough, 935 F.2d 1167 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Mortg. Clearing Corp. v. Verex Assurance, Inc., 936 F.2d 583 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
Joseph G. Braun v. Harvey Annesley Joe E. Bradley, 936 F.2d 1105 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Searl v. Ogden Bd. of Realtors, 937 F.2d 616 (10th Cir. 1991).unpublished
United States v. Harold Carr, 939 F.2d 1442 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Jacobs v. Dujmovic, 940 F.2d 1392 (10th Cir. 1991).published
United States v. Thompson, 941 F.2d 1074 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Hicks v. City of Watonga, 942 F.2d 737 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Devery Implement Co. v. J.I. Case Co., 944 F.2d 724 (10th Cir. 1991).published
John G. Miles v. Denver Pub. Schs., 944 F.2d 773 (10th Cir. 1991).published
St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Dallarosa, 944 F.2d 911 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Adolph Coors Co. v. Brady, 944 F.2d 1543 (10th Cir. 1991).published
United States v. Frank Velarde, 945 F.2d 412 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Resolution Trust Corp., in Its Capacity as Conservator for Savers Sav. Ass'n v. Mustang Partners, a Missouri Ltd. P'ship v. Resolution Trust Corp., in Its Capacity as Receiver for Savers Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, Third-Party-Defendant-Appellee, 946 F.2d 103 (3d Cir. 1991).published
Brack v. Gardner, 946 F.2d 900 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Margie Izard v. United States, 946 F.2d 1492 (10th Cir. 1991).published
S & S Pawn Shop Inc. v. City of Del City, 947 F.2d 432 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Robert Parry Hagen v. Steven E. Coon, 947 F.2d 953 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Ershick v. United Missouri Bank of Kansas City, N.A., 948 F.2d 660 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Renfro v. City of Emporia, 948 F.2d 1529 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Eastman Kodak Co. v. Westway Motor Freight, Inc., 949 F.2d 317 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Bank Of Kansas v. Nelson Music Co., 949 F.2d 321 (1st Cir. 1991).published
Adair State Bank, an Oklahoma Banking Corp., Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Pennsylvania, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee. Adair State Bank, an Oklahoma Banking Corp. v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Pennsylvania, 949 F.2d 1067 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Miller v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 949 F.2d 1088 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Davis v. City of Elk City, 951 F.2d 1258 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Aircraft Sales of California, Inc. v. Insured Aircraft Title Serv., Inc., 951 F.2d 1258 (3d Cir. 1991).published
Floy Hanke v. Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 951 F.2d 1259 (10th Cir. 1991).published
United Siding Supply v. Grady Bros., 951 F.2d 1260 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Dale Robertson v. Granite Sch. Dist., 951 F.2d 1260 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Utah Const. & Dev. Co. v. Reynolds Elec. & Eng'g Co., 951 F.2d 1261 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Colorado Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. Harmon, 951 F.2d 1571 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Johnnie L. Phelps v. Fina Oil & Chem. Co., 952 F.2d 354 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Sun Refining & Mktg. Co. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 952 F.2d 409 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Vigil v. Rhoades, 953 F.2d 1225 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Debbie D'Zurella v. State of Kansas Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs. Ernie Dyer & Barbara Gaines, 953 F.2d 1391 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Oaklawn Apts., 953 F.2d 1391 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Janice L. Skinner v. Admin. Comm. of the W.R. Grace & Co. Long Term Disability Income Plan, 956 F.2d 278 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Bowdry v. United Air Lines, Inc., 956 F.2d 999 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Edward Lee Clemmons v. Dale Bohannon, 956 F.2d 1523 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Robert E. Hatfield v. Burlington N. R.R. Co., 958 F.2d 320 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Arkansas-Platte & Gulf P'ship v. Van Waters & Rogers, Inc., 959 F.2d 158 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Oaklawn Apts., 959 F.2d 170 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Green Mountain Bowling Ctr., Ltd. v. Brunswick Corp., 959 F.2d 245 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Christopher E. Longstreth v. Gary Maynard Stephen Kaiser Susan Gilbert, Unit Manager David Rowden, Unit Manager Bob Affolter, Corr. Couns., C.D. Mosier v. Gary Maynard, D.O.C. Dan M. Reynolds, Warden, Allen Justus v. Gary N. Maynard, Warden Steve Hargett, Deputy Warden Frank Marks, Chaplain Donald Lankford, Food Supervisor, 961 F.2d 895 (10th Cir. 1992).published
United Food & Com. Workers Union v. Quality Plus Stores, Inc. Citicorp of North Am. Buxbaum, Ginsberg & Assocs., Inc., 961 F.2d 904 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Shirley L. Aronson v. Gene M. Gressly, 961 F.2d 907 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Fullick v. Breckenridge Ski Corp., 962 F.2d 17 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Phillips Petroleum Co., a Corp. v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., Sec'y, Dep't of the Interior, Robert Kallman, Dir., or Acting Dir., Mineral Mgmt. Serv., Dep't of the Interior, Kenneth M. Moyers, Chief, Royalty Compliance Div., Nick L. Kelly, Area Manager, Dallas Reg'l Compliance Off., Minerals Mgmt. Serv., United States Dep't of the Interior, the Mineral Mgmt. Serv., Atl. Richfield Co. v. Manuel Lujan, Jr., Sec'y, Dep't of the Interior, Robert Kallman, Dir., or Acting Dir., Mineral Mgmt. Serv., Dep't of the Interior, Kenneth M. Moyers, Chief, Royalty Compliance Div., Nick L. Kelly, Area Manager, Dallas Reg'l Compliance Off., Minerals Mgmt. Serv., United States Dep't of the Interior, the Mineral Mgmt. Serv., 963 F.2d 1380 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Eaton v. Jarvis Prods. Corp., 965 F.2d 922 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Dillon Fam. & Youth Servs., Inc. v. Dep't of Human Servs., 965 F.2d 932 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes Of Oklahoma v. United States, 966 F.2d 583 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Beaver Creek Coal Co. v. Nevada Power Co., 968 F.2d 19 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Charles Mock v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., an Oklahoma Corp., Household Int'l, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Household Merchandising, Inc., an Ohio Corp., Jim L. Clymer v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., an Oklahoma Corp., Household Int'l, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Household Merchandising, Inc., an Ohio Corp., Gary Bailey, Dwayne Hope, Jimmy Hope, Patty Hudson, Glenda Morton, Charles Edwards Owens, Victor E. Silva, Kim Louise Souders v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., an Oklahoma Corp., Household Int'l, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Household Merchandising, Inc., an Ohio Corp., the Gen. Drivers, Chauffeurs, Helpers, Local Union 886, Affiliated With the Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., Gary Bailey, Dwayne Hope, Jimmy Hope, Patty Hudson, Glenda Morton, Charles Edwards Owens, Victor E. Silva, Kim Louise Souders v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., an Oklahoma Corp., Household Int'l, Inc., a Delaware Corp., Household Merchandising, Inc., an Ohio Corp., & the Gen. Drivers, Chauffeurs, Helpers, Local Union 886, Affiliated With the Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., 971 F.2d 522 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Kenneth J. Notari v. Denver Water Dep't, 971 F.2d 585 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Edward D. Rutledge v. Int'l Bus. MacHines Corp., 972 F.2d 357 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Theodore Ruark v. Annette Porter, 972 F.2d 357 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Maldonado v. Josey, 975 F.2d 727 (10th Cir. 1992).published
All Indian Pueblo Council v. United States, 975 F.2d 1437 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Gregory T. Ambus v. Granite Bd. of Educ., 975 F.2d 1555 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Thomas M. Collins v. Nat'l Basketball Players Ass'n Charles Grantham, 976 F.2d 740 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Fred T. Miller v. Coastal Corp., 978 F.2d 622 (10th Cir. 1992).published
James M. Debardeleben v. J.M. Quinlan, 982 F.2d 528 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Utah Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 983 F.2d 1549 (1st Cir. 1993).published
United States v. Royal N. Hardage, Oklahoma Nat'l Stockyards Co., J.O.C. Oil Expl., Dal-Worth Indus., Double Eagle, Samuel Bishkin, Doing Bus. as Eltex Chem., L & S Bearing Co., Kerr-Mcgee Corp., Cato Oil, Advance Chem. Distrib., Inc., Allied-Signal, Inc., at & T Tech., Inc., Ashland Oil, Inc., Atl. Richfield Co., Borg-Warner Corp., Exxon Corp., the Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., Foster Feed & Seed Co., Gencorp, Inc., Bull Hn Info. Sys. Inc., Magnetic Peripherals, Inc., Maremont Corp., Mobil Chem. Co., Nalco Chem. Co., Oklahoma Gas & Elec. Co., the Oklahoma Publ'g Co., Rockwell Int'l Corp., Texaco, Inc., Texas Instruments, Inc., Uniroyal Inc., Uop, Inc., Westinghouse Elec. Corp., Weyerhaeuser Co., Powell Sanitation Serv., Inc., & United States Pollution Control, McDonnell Corp. v. A.H. Belo, Doing Bus. as Dallas Morning News, Acme Fence & Iron Co., Alamo Grp. Texas, Inc., Aircraftsman, Inc., Agnew Auto Parts, Am. Nat'l Can Corp., Anadite, Inc., Arrow Tank Trucks, Aztec Mfg., Arrow Indus., Aviall of Texas, Inc., Basf, Betz Labs., Inc., Blanks Engraving, Beazers Materials, Blackwell Zinc Co., Inc., Broadway Mach. & Motor Supply, Inc., the Bucket Shop, Inc., Charles Mach. Works, Inc., Container Supply, Inc., Carnation Co., Container Corp. Of Am., Cont'l Can Co., Inc., Cook Paint & Varnish Co., Ctu of Delaware, Country Home Meat Co., Dart Indus., Delta Faucet Co., Del Paint Corp., Dixico, Inc., Downtown Airpark, Inc., Drilex Sys., Inc., Dubois Chemicals, Inc., Dresser Indus., Inc., Drillers Engine & Supply, Inc., Dura Chrome, Fisher Controls, Gaf, E C Indus., Fred Jones Mfg. Co., Gen. Dynamics, Gen. Motors Corp., Glidden Co., SCM Corp., Groendyke Transp., Inc., Gen. Elec. Co., Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Inc., H.W. Allen, Hudiberg Chevrolet, Ingersoll-Rand Oilfield Prods. Co., Hinderliter Tool, Ico, Inc., Formerly Known as Rodco, Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Johnson & Johnson Med., Inc., Ortho Pharm. Corp., Johnson-Johnson Hosp., Surgikos, Inc., Kelly Moore Paint, Kerr Glass Mfg., Jones-Blair Co., Laidlaw Waste, W.J. Lamberton, Master Motor Rebuilders, Inc., Morris Fixture Co., Madix, George McKiddie Doing Bus. as Capitol Greese Co., Motorolla, Northrop Worldwide Aircraft, Doing Bus. as Earl D. Mills, Packaging Corp. of Am., Parker-Hannifin Corp., O'Brien Corp., Printpack, Inc., Proctor & Gamble Mfg. Co., Quebecor Printing, Maxwell Commc'n, Riverside Press, Reliance Universal, Inc., Rotex Corp., Sherwin Williams Co., Star Mfg., Sermatech, Sw. Elec. Co., Stearns & Foster Bedding, Susan Crane, Teccor Elec., Inc., Trw, Inc., Turbodel, United Plating Works, Inc., Valley Steel Prods. Co., Unit Parts Co., United States Brass Corp., Van Der Horst Usa, Waste Mgmt. of Oklahoma, W. Unif. & Towel Serv., Zoecon Corp., Xerox, Consol. Cleaning, Abco, Inc., Advance Packaging, Inc., Amedco Steel Inc., Am. Trailers, Anthes Inc., Doing Bus. as Anthes Hi-Reach, Arthur G. McGee & Co., B & J Tank Truck Serv., Inc., B.W. Solutions, Inc., Bacon Transp. Co., Inc., Beauty Craft Vanities, Blackwell Indus., Paul Boone, Individually & Formerly Doing Bus. as Lawton Plating Co., Broadway Mach. & Motor Supply, Inc., C & H Servs., Inc., Cmi Corp., Cent. Oklahoma Equip. Corp., Cimarron Aircraft Corp., Cimarron Mfg. Co., Cliftco, Inc., Day Int'l Corp., Diffee Motor Co., D-Mac Leasing, Inc., Eureka Tool Co., Ferris Resources, Inc., Fruehauf Corp., Fruehauf Div., Fruehauf Corp., Doing Bus. as Hobbs Trailer, Hobbs Trailer, Vernon Garney, Individually & Doing Bus. as Auto Saver, Glidden Coating, a Div. of SCM Corp., Hamm & Phillips Serv. Co., Indus. Fabrication Co., Jackie Cooper Olds-Gmc, Inc., James Bute Co., William Jenkins, Individually & Doing Bus. as Foster Septic Tank, J.F. Smith & Sons, Inc., Kelsey-Hayes Corp., Also Known as Kelsey Axle & Brakes Co., Bill Lance, Larry Goad & Co., Lassiter Enter., Inc., Materials Recovery Enter., Inc., McAlester Pub. Schs., Bob McBroom Individually & Doing Bus. as Am. Furniture Stripping, Ray McGee Individually & Doing Bus. as Quality Drum Serv., Grease Co., Medley Material Handling Inc., Metroplex Sanitation, Inc., Mistletoe Express Serv., Inc., Napko Corp., Newman Bros. Trucking Co., Noble Chem. Corp., the City of Norman, Oklahoma Tank Serv., Oklahoma Transp. Co., Page Indus., Inc., Powell Elec. Mfg. Co., George Powell, Individually & Doing Bus. as Powell Serv. Co., Premier Indus. Corp., Doing Bus. as Kent Indus., Rwr Steel Co., Rabar Enter., Inc., Ram Transports, Inc., Reliance Universal Inc., S & S Plating Co., Solvent Mfg. Co., Inc., Sooner Oil Patch Servs., Inc., Spector Red Ball, Inc., Steelcraft, Inc., Sublett & Assocs., Inc., Sunwest Indus. of Oklahoma, Inc., Raymond Switzer, Individually & Doing Bus. as Switzer & Gypsum Lime Co., T.I.P., Inc., Thermo King Sales & Serv. of Oklahoma, Inc. Triangle Eng'g Co., Trigg Drilling Co., Inc., Victor Equip. Co., Waste Servs., Inc., Welch Enter., Inc., Jim Wesley, Individually & Doing Bus. as Jim's Septic Tank, W. Com. Transp., Inc., Westran Corp., Witco, Inc., Xal Corp., Thomas Engel, A-Better Sanitation Serv., Inc., Reagent Chem. & Rsch., Inc., Sun Expl. & Prod. Co., Cameron Iron Works, J.C. Penney Co., Inc., Rohm & Haas Seeds, Inc., Phillips Petroleum Co., South Prairie Constr. Co., the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., Nordam Corp., Nat'l Can Corp., Land & Marine Rental Co., Formerly Known as Tesoro Land & Marine Rental Co., Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Inc., Crowl Mach. & Heat Treating Co., Crane Carrier Co., Corning Glass Works, Delta Faucet Co., Occidental Chem., John Zink Co., Gen. Motors Corp., Dura-Chrome Indus., Inc., the Dow Chem. Co., Also Known as Dow Indus. Serv. of the Dow Chem. Co., Dowell Div. of the Dow Chem. Co., & Brasos Oil & Gas Div. of the Dow Chem. Co., Iuts Liquidating Corp., Formerly Know as Indus. Unif. & Towel Supply Inc., Clyde's Carburetor Serv., Inc., Amoco Prod. Co., Formerly Known as Pan Am. Petroleum, Dover Resources, Inc., Hudiburg Chevrolet, Inc., Amf Tuboscope, Eason Oil Co., Fox-Smythe Transp. Co., Int'l Crystal Mfg. Co., Kobe, Inc., Nelson Elec. Power Serv., Inc., Newspaper Printing Corp., Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., Formerly Known as Wilco Truck Rental, Inc., Sw. Elec. Co., Star Mfg. Co. Of Oklahoma, Corken Int'l Corp., Formerly Known as Corken Pump Co., Glow-Lite Corp., (Artra), Gen. Elec. Co., Ford Motor Co., Conoco, Inc., E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., Cont'l Oil Co., Day Int'l Corp., (Elec. Hose & Rubber), Cent. Sales Promotion, Inc., Sooner Ford Truck Sales, Inc., W & W Steel Co., Chromalloy Am., Brittain Bros., Ico, Inc., Formerly Known as Fodco, Inc., Sucker Rod Serv., & Rodcore, Inc., Homco Int'l, Doing Bus. as A-1 Bit & Tool, Tom Brown's Optical Serv., Inc., Third-Party-Defendants, 985 F.2d 1427 (3d Cir. 1993).published
Perry Du. Wayne Caudle v. Eddie Geouge, E.H. Anderson, 986 F.2d 1426 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Robert Henry Werner v. Janet Knudsen, 986 F.2d 1431 (10th Cir. 1993).published
Smith v. MCI Telecomm. Corp., 755 F. Supp. 354 (D. Kan. 1990).published
Zurn Constructors, Inc. v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 746 F. Supp. 1051 (D. Kan. 1990).published
Lewis v. City of Ft. Collins, 903 F.2d 752 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Considine v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 910 F.2d 695 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Applied Genetics Int'l, Inc. v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 912 F.2d 1238 (10th Cir. 1990).published
Trapper Mining Inc. v. Lujan, 923 F.2d 774 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Budd v. Am. Excess Ins., 928 F.2d 344 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Mustang Partners, 946 F.2d 103 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Bank of Kansas v. Nelson Music Co., 949 F.2d 321 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Adair State Bank v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, 949 F.2d 1067 (10th Cir. 1991).published
Longstreth v. Maynard, 961 F.2d 895 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Lujan, 963 F.2d 1380 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Mock v. T.G. & Y. Stores Co., 971 F.2d 522 (10th Cir. 1992).published
Utah Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Ins., 983 F.2d 1549 (10th Cir. 1993).published
United States v. Hardage, 985 F.2d 1427 (10th Cir. 1993).published

At page 144 Kansas law does not recognize tort of bad faith2 citing casesKansas law does not recognize tort of bad faith in context of first-party litigation against insurance companies1 citing court put it this way

Bragg v. Big Heart Pet Brands, Inc., No. 2:21-cv-02047 (D. Kan. Sept. 14, 2021).
(Kansas law does not recognize tort of bad faith in context of first-party litigation against insurance companies)
Kansas Mun. Gas Agency v. Vesta Energy Co., 840 F. Supp. 814 (D. Kan. 1993).published
Co., 848 F.2d 141, 144 (10th Cir.1988).

At page 145 Requiring proof of additional damages for punitive awards2 citing casesKansas law requires additional injury beyond contract damages to assert independent tort claim for punitive damages1 citing court put it this way · 1 listed here

Fed. Kemper Life Assurance Co. v. Ellis, 28 F.3d 1033 (10th Cir. 1994).published 2 cites
(Kansas law requires additional injury beyond contract damages to assert independent tort claim for punitive damages)

Treatment classes

Cited as authority (rule) 224

Mentioned in passing 42

Cited "see" 2

Treatment by court

ca10	0R/0Y/209G	241
ksd	0R/0Y/4G	13
ca3	0R/0Y/6G	7
ca1	0R/0Y/4G	4
cod	0R/0Y/1G	1
kanctapp	0R/0Y/1G	1
wyd	0R/0Y/1G	1

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…

Patricia M. OSGOOD, Administratrix With-Will-Annexed of the Estates of Delbert A. Stroud and Gertrude Evelyn Stroud
v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

No. 86-1427.

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

May 26, 1988.

Published opinion

848 F.2d 141

1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 7077

Google Scholar ↗ | CourtListener ↗

Kevin D. Buchanan (Denzil D. Garrison, with him on the brief), Garrison, Brown, Carlson & Buchanan, Bartlesville, Okl, for plaintiff-appellant., Joseph F. Glass of Best, Sharp, Thomas, Glass & Atkinson (Joseph A. Sharp; and Jody R. Nathan of Thomas, Glass, Atkins, Haskins, Nellis & Boudreaux, with him on the brief), Tulsa, Okl., for defendant-appel-lee.

Baldock, Connor, Earl, Moore.

Cited by 1 opinion | Published

EARL E. O’CONNOR, District Judge.

Appellant, Patricia M. Osgood, appeals from a district court order granting a motion for partial summary judgment filed by the appellee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company [hereinafter “State Farm”]. Count II of the appellant’s complaint, which alleged fraud and requested punitive damages, was dismissed on the ground that it failed to state a cognizable claim under Kansas law. On appeal, the appellant contends that the fraud claim was an independent tort entitling her to seek punitive damages from State Farm.

The facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the appellant, are as follows. On October 3, 1982, Delbert A. and Gertrude Evelyn Stroud [hereinafter “the Strouds”] were killed in an automobile accident in Osage County, Oklahoma, as a result of the negligence of another driver, Eugene Wells. At the time of their deaths, the Strouds were insured by State Farm. During negotiations with Wells’ liability insurance carrier, representatives of the estates contacted State Farm, inquiring about the limits of the underinsured motorist coverage contained in the Strouds’ State Farm policy. Agents of State Farm allegedly indicated that the Strouds only had the minimum underinsured motorist coverage; in Kansas, the minimum coverage was $25,-000.00 per person and $50,000.00 per accident. Based on this information, the Strouds’ estates settled with Wells for the full amount of his liability coverage. State Farm received payment from the settlement through its subrogation rights. Since the Strouds’ underinsured coverage purportedly equaled or was less than Wells’ liability coverage, the estates made no claim on the State Farm policy.

In March of 1984, the heirs of the estates discovered information indicating that the Strouds’ State Farm policy provided more underinsured motorist coverage than originally represented by the insurance company; the policy provided coverage of $100,-000.00 per person and $300,000.00 per accident. The estates made a demand upon State Farm for proceeds under the underin-sured provisions of the policy, which State Farm refused to pay. The appellant, as administratrix of the estates, filed the action which is the subject of this appeal. Her complaint first alleged a contract claim under the underinsured motorist provisions of the Strouds’ policy for damages totaling $187,526.80.^[1] In Count II, the appellant alleged that representatives of State Farm made “fraudulent, intentional, false and material misrepresentations” pertaining to the underinsured motorist coverage. Appellant further alleged that the misrepresentations were made to induce the estates to settle all their claims under Wells’ liability coverage and to forego their rights under the underinsured motorist provision of the State Farm policy. The appellant claimed compensatory damages of $187,-526.80, plus punitive damages.

State Farm filed a motion for partial summary judgment. In its motion, State Farm argued that Count II asserted a claim of “bad faith” and that Kansas law^[2] did not recognize such a claim. The appel[*143]lant responded, asserting that Count II alleged a claim of fraud or misrepresentation and that Kansas law permitted such actions against insurance companies. The trial court ruled in favor of State Farm and dismissed Count II of the complaint. After a jury trial commenced, the parties reached a settlement on the claim for proceeds under the policy. Appellant then filed a timely notice of appeal with respect to the dismissal of Count II and her claim for punitive damages.

In reviewing a summary judgment order, the appellate court applies the same standard employed by the trial court under Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ewing v. Amoco Oil Co., 823 F.2d 1432, 1437 (10th Cir.1987). When a motion for summary judgment is granted, it is the appellate court’s duty to examine the record to determine if any genuine issue of material fact was in dispute; if not, the court must decide if the substantive law was correctly applied. APC Operating Partnership v. Mackey, 841 F.2d 1031, 1033 (10th Cir.1988); Franks v. Nimmo, 796 F.2d 1230, 1235 (10th Cir.1986). During this review, the court must examine the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Ewing v. Amoco Oil Co., 823 F.2d at 1437. In this case, the facts as alleged in Count II were strenuously disputed. However, the trial court determined that any factual disputes were not material, and that the allegations failed to state a claim under Kansas law. In this situation, we are left to determine if the district court correctly applied the substantive law.

The district court dismissed Count II of the complaint on the ground that Kansas law “does not permit plaintiff to bring an action sounding in fraud ... since all damages (save the punitive damages) flow from State Farm’s alleged breach of its contractual duties and since plaintiff has alleged no independent or additional injury.” In dismissing the claim on this ground, the trial judge implicitly determined that appellant’s claims arose from the insurance contract between the Strouds and State Farm. Inasmuch as appellant does not dispute this assumption, her claim of fraud and request for punitive damages must be judged on the basis of Kansas law as it pertains to the availability of punitive damages for contract-based claims.

Kansas has long applied the rule that in actions for breach of contract, damages generally are limited to the pecuniary losses sustained; exemplary or punitive damages are not recoverable in the absence of an independent tort which causes additional injury to the complaining party. Plains Resources, Inc. v. Gable, 235 Kan. 580, 593-94, 682 P.2d 653, 664 (1984) (quoting Guarantee Abstract & Title Co. v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co., 232 Kan. 76, 78, 652 P.2d 665, 667 (1982)). The Kansas Supreme Court discussed this “independent tort” exception in Guarantee Abstract: “Th[e] exception to the rule of unavailability of punitive damages in breach of contract actions is recognized when some independent tort or wrong results in additional injury which justifies the assessment of punitive damages by way of punishment of the wrongdoer. In such a case the proof of the independent tort must indicate the presence of malice, fraud or wanton disregard for the rights of others.” Guarantee Abstract, 232 Kan. at 78-79, 652 P.2d at 667 (emphasis added). These general rules have been specifically applied to claims involving insurance contracts, where courts have required the presence of an independent tort causing additional injury before allowing the plaintiff to assert a claim for punitive damages. See, e.g., United of Omaha Life Ins. Co. v. Reed, 649 F.Supp. 837, 839-40 (D.Kan.1986); Guarantee Abstract, 232 Kan. at 79, 652 P.2d at 667; Moffet v. Kansas City Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 173 Kan. 52, 57, 244 P.2d 228, 233 (1952). With these general rules in mind, we must determine whether or not the district court erred in ruling that Count II failed to state sufficient facts to support a claim for punitive damages.

The allegations of appellant’s complaint parallel the elements of actionable fraud[*144] under Kansas law.^[3] In its motion for summary judgment, State Farm asserted that these allegations constituted a claim based on the “tort of bad faith” which has not been recognized by Kansas courts. The tort of bad faith, recognized in some jurisdictions, permits a person covered by an insurance policy to sue their insurer when the company unreasonably refuses to pay a claim or otherwise carry out its contractual obligations. See, e.g., Gruenberg v. Aetna Ins. Co., 9 Cal.3d 566, 108 Cal.Rptr. 480, 510 P.2d 1032 (1973).

State Farm is correct in asserting that Kansas law does not recognize the tort of bad faith in the context of “first party” litigation against insurance companies. In Spencer v. Aetna Life & Cas. Ins. Co., 227 Kan. 914, 611 P.2d 149 (1980), the parties raised the question of whether Kansas should recognize the tort of bad faith against insurance companies. Id. at 916, 611 P.2d at 150. Finding that state laws regulating insurance companies adequately protected policy-holders from abusive tactics by insurers, the court saw no reason to recognize a new cause of action in this situation. Id.

There is a clear distinction, however, between a claim of fraud and a claim of “bad faith.” Both Spencer and Guarantee Abstract involved issues of whether a plaintiff could assert the tort of bad faith against a defendant-insurer who failed to pay under the terms of its insurance policy. See NL Indus., Inc. v. Gulf & Western Indus., Inc., 650 F.Supp. 1115, 1132 (D.Kan.1986). The failure to recognize the tort of bad faith, however, does not bar an insured from bringing other types of tort actions against his or her insurer. For instance, in one case the plaintiffs were permitted to bring an action for the tort of outrage when their insurer refused to pay a claim. State Farm Fire & Cos. Co. v. Liggett, 236 Kan. 120, 122-23, 689 P.2d 1187 (1984). In other cases, Kansas courts have allowed the insured to pursue claims based on fraud and misrepresentation. See, e.g., United of Omaha Life Ins. Co. v. Reed, 649 F.Supp. 837, 839 (D.Kan.1986) (misrepresentation claim allowed); Earth Scientists (Petro Serv.) Ltd. v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 619 F.Supp. 1465, 1472-73 (D.Kan.1985) (permitting fraud claim against insurance company); Dreiling v. Home State Life Ins. Co., 213 Kan. 137, 515 P.2d 757 (1973) (recision of insurance contracts permitted due to fraudulent misrepresentations of insurer’s agents). Clearly Kansas law does not per se prohibit actions against insurance carriers for fraud or misrepresentation.

This finding, however, does not end our analysis. As stated earlier, Kansas law only permits punitive damages in contract actions when (1) there is some independent tort amounting to fraud or wanton conduct, and (2) the independent tort results in additional injury. See Guarantee Abstract, 232 Kan. at 78, 652 P.2d at 667. In the instant case, appellant has failed to allege any additional injury arising from State Farm’s alleged misrepresentations. In her complaint, she requested the same amount of actual damages on both her contract and tort claims; this amount equaled the difference between the policy coverage and the amount actually received by the estates. Significantly, appellant’s counsel conceded during his offer of proof before trial that the pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages claimed in both counts were identical. (Rec., Vol. II, p. 9-10.)^[4]

[*145] Appellant contends that the Kansas courts, in actual practice, have not required a showing of additional damages in these types of cases. She cites various Kansas decisions where the courts have discussed the requirement of an independent tort without specifically mentioning the need for additional or independent damages. See, e.g., Nordstrom v. Miller, 227 Kan. 59, 605 P.2d 545 (1980); Dold v. Sherow, 220 Kan. 350, 552 P.2d 945 (1976); Atkinson v. Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc., 5 Kan. App.2d 739, 625 P.2d 505, aff'd, 280 Kan. 277, 634 P.2d 1071 (1981).

We need not address the appellant’s interpretation of the above cases. In more recent decisions, the Kansas Supreme Court has expressly required plaintiffs to show additional injuries in order to recover punitive damages. For example, in Plains Resources, Inc. v. Gable, 235 Kan. 580, 682 P.2d 653 (1984), the state supreme court affirmed a judgment awarding compensatory and punitive damages to the plaintiff. The plaintiff had brought a claim for breach of an oil and gas drilling contract and related tort claims; the tort claims arose from damage done to plaintiffs oil well when it was sabotaged by defendant’s agent. Id. at 581-82, 682 P.2d at 655. The court found that the sabotage constituted an independent tort and that separate damages for the sabotage were included in the lump sum compensatory award entered by the trial court. Id. at 593, 682 P.2d at 664. Since there was an independent tort resulting in additional damages, the court permitted the fact finder’s award of punitive damages to stand. Id.

In Cornwell v. Jespersen, 238 Kan. 110, 708 P.2d 515 (1985), the court dismissed a punitive damage claim for the express reason that the plaintiff had not alleged or proved additional injury arising from an independent tort. The plaintiffs brought an action for damages to their crops and land allegedly arising from the defendants’ oil drilling activities. The plaintiffs, as third-party beneficiaries, contended that defendants had failed to fulfill certain duties imposed on them under the terms of oil and gas leases. Id. at 111-14, 708 P.2d at 517-19. The trial court awarded the plaintiffs compensatory and punitive damages. On appeal, the supreme court vacated the judgment awarding punitive damages. After reciting the general rules regarding the availability of punitive damages in actions for breach of contract, the court found that the plaintiffs had failed to prove additional damages flowing from an independent tort. “All injury to the plaintiffs flowed directly from the breach of the defendants’ contractual duty to fill the holes, restore the surface and pay damages. Their failure to do so — even if intentional or unjustified — was not an independent tort causing additional injury.” Id. at 121, 708 P.2d at 524 (emphasis in original).

The requirement of additional injury also has been imposed by federal courts applying Kansas law. See, e.g., Mackey v. Burke, 751 F.2d 322, 329 (10th Cir.1984) (plaintiffs failed to show the alleged independent tort caused additional damages beyond those suffered by the breach of contract); United of Omaha Life Ins. Co. v. Reed, 649 F.Supp. 837, 840 (D.Kan.1986) (plaintiff failed to allege any additional injury or damages caused by the insurer’s alleged misrepresentations). Based on this clear authority, we must reject appellant’s argument that additional injury is not required.

Appellant’s final argument on appeal is that she has, in fact, sustained additional damages in the nature of attorney’s fees and litigation costs. We find this argument unpersuasive. Appellant’s complaint clearly requested damages in the amount purportedly due under the insurance contract; no additional sum was claimed in Count II. Furthermore, in a hearing before the trial court, appellant’s counsel conceded that the actual damages claimed in both counts of the complaint were the same. (Rec., Vol. II, p. 9-10).

[*146] In summary, the court finds that Kansas law required the appellant to allege and prove an independent tort which resulted in additional damages in order to recover punitive damages. Appellant’s complaint clearly failed to allege separate or independent damages arising from State Farm’s purported misrepresentations. In addition, she conceded before the trial court that the actual damages sustained under both the contract and fraud claims were identical. By failing to allege additional damages, she is barred from seeking punitive damages. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

This amount reflects the difference between the amount of money collected by the estates from Wells’ insurer and the amount of coverage provided under the State Farm policy.

The parties conceded to the trial court that Kansas law governed the action.

To establish a claim for fraud, a plaintiff must allege and prove four elements: (1) the defendant knowingly made untrue statements of fact; (2) the statements were made with the intent to deceive or recklessly made with disregard for the truth; (3) the plaintiff justifiably relied on the statements; and (4) the plaintiff was damaged. Nordstrom v. Miller, 227 Kan. 59, 65, 605 P.2d 545, 551-52 (1980).

⁴

THE COURT: ... Should I understand that the significance of the offer is this: Cause of action Number Two sought the same measure of compensatory damages as Cause of Action Number One, if I recall, and in that regard, of course, if Plaintiff prevails on the compensatory damages, to include both pecuniary and non-pecuniary elements here, the same compensation would flow as if cause of action two had been presented and Plaintiff succeeded, it is the punitive damages that represent the differential; is that what we are talking about?

MR. GARRISON: Yes, sir. This offer of proof touches upon our prayer for punitive damages based on fraud.

[*145] THE COURT: Yes, that’s right. But the compensatory damages are in common between Cause of Action Number One and Cause of Action Number Two?

MR. GARRISON: That’s right, yes, sir.

Your account

Appearance

Create a free account

You’re in.