Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Pullen v. Westgreen2 sentences2010As pointed out in Pemberton, our Supreme Court in Pullen v. West, 278 Kan. 183, 199-201 , 92 P.3d 584 (2004), held that violation of rules and regulations for the storage, use, and sales of fireworks and firecrackers did not create a private cause of action and could not be a basis for a negligence per se claim. 2010As pointed out in Pemberton, our Supreme Court in Pullen v. West, 278 Kan. 183, 199-201 , 92 P.3d 584 (2004), held that violation of rules and regulations for the storage, use, and sales of fireworks and firecrackers did not create a private cause of action and could not be a basis for a negligence per se claim. | 1 | 2 |
Bland v. Scottgreen2 sentences2010See also Bland v. Scott, 279 Kan. 962, 972 , 112 P.3d 941 (2005) (holding that plaintiff could not pursue negligence per se claim against defendant based on criminal statutes prohibiting furnishing liquor or cereal malt beverages to minor where legislature did not intend civil cause of action). 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Shirley alleges that the appellees also violated 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (a) by selling a firearm to a straw-person purchaser, whom they knew was not the actual buyer. 18 U.S.C. § 924 provides in relevant part: "(a)(1) Except as otherwi 2010See also Bland v. Scott, 279 Kan. 962, 972 , 112 P.3d 941 (2005) (holding that plaintiff could not pursue negligence per se claim against defendant based on criminal statutes prohibiting furnishing liquor or cereal malt beverages to minor where legislature did not intend civil cause of action). 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Shirley alleges that the appellees also violated 18 U.S.C. § 924 (a)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (a) by selling a firearm to a straw-person purchaser, whom they knew was not the actual buyer. 18 U.S.C. § 924 provides in relevant part: "(a)(1) Except as otherwi | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Shirley ex rel. Graham v. Glass
green
1 sentence2019Our Supreme Court, however, concluded that plaintiff had not pleaded a negligence per se claim as a separate cause of action created by statute but, instead, she was alleging only a claim of "simple negligence." 297 Kan. at 894 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Shirley Ex Rel. Graham v. Glass
green
1 sentence2013Shirley v. Glass, 44 Kan. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Noland v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
green
2 sentences2010In holding the plaintiff's negligence per se claim should have been submitted to the jury, the Kansas Supreme Court stated: "It is the unquestioned rule of this jurisdiction that the breach of a duty imposed by law or ordinance constitutes negligence per se, providing a basis for the recovery of damages proximately resulting therefrom. [Citation omitted.]" 207 Kan. at 74-75 , 483 P.2d 1029 . 2010In holding the plaintiff's negligence per se claim should have been submitted to the jury, the Kansas Supreme Court stated: "It is the unquestioned rule of this jurisdiction that the breach of a duty imposed by law or ordinance constitutes negligence per se, providing a basis for the recovery of damages proximately resulting therefrom. [Citation omitted.]" 207 Kan. at 74-75 , 483 P.2d 1029 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Kerns Ex Rel. Kerns v. G.A.C., Inc.
green
2 sentences2010The district court allowed the plaintiff's negligence per se claim to go to the jury, and the plaintiff recovered damages. 255 Kan. at 266-68 , 875 P.2d 949 . 2010The district court allowed the plaintiff's negligence per se claim to go to the jury, and the plaintiff recovered damages. 255 Kan. at 266-68 , 875 P.2d 949 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
PHILLIPS AS TUTRIX OF PHILLIPS v. Roy
green
1 sentence2006In Phillips as Tutrix of Phillips v. Roy, 431 So. 2d 849 (La. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Knight Ex Rel. Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006In Knight , the district court rejected a negligence per se claim under the federal Act, 889 F. Supp. at 1537 , but the court found there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the seller breached a duty under the Restatement § 390. 889 F. Supp. at 1539-41 . 2006In Knight , the district court rejected a negligence per se claim under the federal Act, 889 F. Supp. at 1537 , but the court found there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the seller breached a duty under the Restatement § 390. 889 F. Supp. at 1539-41 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Schlobohm v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994In Schlobohm v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 248 Kan. 122, 127 , 804 P.2d 978 (1991), a city building code which set the maximum elevation differential between the landing and the top of the threshold in a building entrance was determined to have been enacted to protect a special class of individuals, i.e., those individuals entering and leaving the building. 1994In Schlobohm v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 248 Kan. 122, 127 , 804 P.2d 978 (1991), a city building code which set the maximum elevation differential between the landing and the top of the threshold in a building entrance was determined to have been enacted to protect a special class of individuals, i.e., those individuals entering and leaving the building. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Osterman v. Peters
green
2 sentences1994G.A.C. notes no reported Kansas case has involved a negligence per se claim by a trespasser but offers a Maryland case, Osterman v. Peters, 260 Md. 313 , 272 A.2d 21 (1971), for support. 1994G.A.C. notes no reported Kansas case has involved a negligence per se claim by a trespasser but offers a Maryland case, Osterman v. Peters, 260 Md. 313 , 272 A.2d 21 (1971), for support. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Kansas State Bank & Trust Co. v. Specialized Transportation Services, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994Co. v. Specialized Transportation Services, Inc., 249 Kan. 348, 371-72 , 819 P.2d 587 (1991), this court determined that a statute requiring reporting of suspected child *282 abuse incidents did not support a negligence per se claim by a child who was abused. 1994Co. v. Specialized Transportation Services, Inc., 249 Kan. 348, 371-72 , 819 P.2d 587 (1991), this court determined that a statute requiring reporting of suspected child *282 abuse incidents did not support a negligence per se claim by a child who was abused. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.