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 2002–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ray v. Caudillgreen2 sentences2014See Ray v. Caudill, 266 Kan. 921, 924 , 974 P.2d 560 (1999); see also 9 Couch on Insurance 3d § 122:5, p. 122-16 (Rev. ed. 2008) (stating that UM/UIM coverage “provides first-party benefits as opposed to a liability policy which pays third-party benefits”). 2014See Ray v. Caudill, 266 Kan. 921, 924 , 974 P.2d 560 (1999); see also 9 Couch on Insurance 3d § 122:5, p. 122-16 (Rev. ed. 2008) (stating that UM/UIM coverage “provides first-party benefits as opposed to a liability policy which pays third-party benefits”). | 1 | 1 |
Cashman Ex Rel. Cashman v. Cherrygreen1 sentence2002The second paragraph of the syllabus contains even broader language: "The underinsured motorist provider is responsible for paying the difference between the insured's pro rata share of the settlement and the total amount of damages up to the insured's underinsured liability limits...." 270 Kan. at 295, Syl. ¶ 2. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Loucks v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance
green
2 sentences2025In Loucks, this court analyzed the general procedure of a UIM claim and held that two separate causes of action are triggered when an insured motorist is injured in an accident caused by an underinsured motorist. 33 Kan. 2025In Loucks, this court analyzed the general procedure of a UIM claim and held that two separate causes of action are triggered when an insured motorist is injured in an accident caused by an underinsured motorist. 33 Kan. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Elliott v. Farm Bureau Ins. Co., Inc.
neutral
2 sentences2004App. 2d 790, 793 , 995 P.2d 885 (1999), rev. denied 269 Kan. 932 (2000). *294 Before turning to the specific dispute between Loucks and Farm Bureau, we will review the substance and procedure of a UIM claim in general. 2004App. 2d 790, 793 , 995 P.2d 885 (1999), rev. denied 269 Kan. 932 (2000). *294 Before turning to the specific dispute between Loucks and Farm Bureau, we will review the substance and procedure of a UIM claim in general. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Jones v. Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange
green
2 sentences2003The court remanded the case with instructions for the district court to determine the actual damages of Terry Burris and Everetta Burris to eliminate any potential for collusion between Jones, Terry Burris, and Everetta Burris. 26 Kan. 2003The court remanded the case with instructions for the district court to determine the actual damages of Terry Burris and Everetta Burris to eliminate any potential for collusion between Jones, Terry Burris, and Everetta Burris. 26 Kan. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.