essential element claim (Kansas) · Go Syfert
← Kansas issues

essential element claim in Kansas

8 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 5 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Grahamgreen
kanctapp · 2010 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021See Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Graham, 44 Kan.

11
Patterson v. Cowley County, Kansasgreen
kan · 2018 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020See Patterson v. Cowley County, 307 Kan. 616, 621 , 413 P.3d 432 (2018).

2020See Patterson v. Cowley County, 307 Kan. 616, 621 , 413 P.3d 432 (2018).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Stechschulte v. Jennings green
kan · 2013
2 sentences

2026The district court correctly granted judgment on the pleadings to Clinch Realty because there is no indication from the record that it ever supplied any false information. "'[N]egligent misrepresentation can never be premised on a claim of nondisclosure because a failure to speak does not satisfy an essential element of the claim: affirmatively supplying false information.'" Stroud, 320 Kan. at 209 (applying the elements as stated in Stechschulte v. Jennings, 297 Kan. 2, 22 , 298 P.3d 1083 [2013]).

2026The district court correctly granted judgment on the pleadings to Clinch Realty because there is no indication from the record that it ever supplied any false information. "'[N]egligent misrepresentation can never be premised on a claim of nondisclosure because a failure to speak does not satisfy an essential element of the claim: affirmatively supplying false information.'" Stroud, 320 Kan. at 209 (applying the elements as stated in Stechschulte v. Jennings, 297 Kan. 2, 22 , 298 P.3d 1083 [2013]).

12026–2026
In Re Phillips green
kan · 2004
1 sentence

2026App. 2d 814, 815-16 , 48 P.3d 681 (2002) (finding the trial court properly dismissed plaintiffs' claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress for failure to state a claim for relief because the petition failed to allege physical injury, an essential element of that claim), disapproved of on other grounds by Hallam v. Mercy Health Center of Manhattan, Inc., 278 Kan. 339 , 97 P.3d 492 (2004). 15 In support of their claim, Appellants alleged that Appellees spread unsubstantiated rumors and spurred unnecessary investigations, which led to D.U. and his family members' removal from WSE: • "Ma

12026–2026
Hallam v. Mercy Health Center of Manhattan, Inc. green
kan · 2004
1 sentence

2026App. 2d 814, 815-16 , 48 P.3d 681 (2002) (finding the trial court properly dismissed plaintiffs' claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress for failure to state a claim for relief because the petition failed to allege physical injury, an essential element of that claim), disapproved of on other grounds by Hallam v. Mercy Health Center of Manhattan, Inc., 278 Kan. 339 , 97 P.3d 492 (2004). 15 In support of their claim, Appellants alleged that Appellees spread unsubstantiated rumors and spurred unnecessary investigations, which led to D.U. and his family members' removal from WSE: • "Ma

12026–2026
Curts v. Dillard's, Inc. green
kanctapp · 2002
1 sentence

2026App. 2d 814, 815-16 , 48 P.3d 681 (2002) (finding the trial court properly dismissed plaintiffs' claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress for failure to state a claim for relief because the petition failed to allege physical injury, an essential element of that claim), disapproved of on other grounds by Hallam v. Mercy Health Center of Manhattan, Inc., 278 Kan. 339 , 97 P.3d 492 (2004). 15 In support of their claim, Appellants alleged that Appellees spread unsubstantiated rumors and spurred unnecessary investigations, which led to D.U. and his family members' removal from WSE: • "Ma

12026–2026
Hanson v. HACKMAN CORP. green
kanctapp · 2008
1 sentence

2025Accordingly, we find Hanson's claim for negligent misrepresentation based on nondisclosure is without merit." 2008 WL 4471679, at *6 .

12025–2025
Farrar v. Hobby green
scotus · 1992
1 sentence

2022Under these facts, the Supreme Court determined that while plaintiff, having been awarded nominal damages, was a prevailing party under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 , "[w]hen a plaintiff recovers only nominal damages because of his failure to prove an essential element of his claim for monetary relief, . . . the only reasonable fee is usually no fee at all." (Emphasis added.) 506 U.S. at 115 .

12022–2022
Crooks v. Greene green
kanctapp · 1987
2 sentences

2018Crooks v. Greene, 12 Kan.

2018Crooks v. Greene , 12 Kan.

12018–2018
State v. Redford green
kan · 1988
2 sentences

1994The State relies on State v. Redford, 242 Kan. 658, 671 , 750 P.2d 1013 (1988), for the principle that omission of an essential element in an instruction is not necessarily a reversible error. *409 In Redford, the district court instructed the jury that rape is “nonconsensual sexual intercourse,” but failed to add that the victim must be overcome by force or fear. 242 Kan. at 671 .

1994The State relies on State v. Redford, 242 Kan. 658, 671 , 750 P.2d 1013 (1988), for the principle that omission of an essential element in an instruction is not necessarily a reversible error. *409 In Redford, the district court instructed the jury that rape is “nonconsensual sexual intercourse,” but failed to add that the victim must be overcome by force or fear. 242 Kan. at 671 .

11994–1994

Statutes the citing opinions construe

KS § K.S.A. § 60-256 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

NC 401 (1977–2026) TN 391 (1966–2026) CA 177 (1922–2026) TX 168 (1920–2026) IN 124 (1897–2024) MA 97 (1984–2026) MS 93 (1963–2026) OH 90 (1872–2026) ND 75 (1984–2025) WA 68 (1931–2026) NY 68 (1952–2025) GA 60 (1924–2025) IL 54 (1883–2026) AR 51 (1953–2025) LA 50 (1967–2022) WY 47 (1975–2026) MO 41 (1909–2024) MI 41 (1976–2026) AZ 40 (1966–2025) FL 38 (1951–2022) AL 32 (1978–2018) CT 28 (1972–2022) WI 28 (1951–2025) ID 26 (1965–2026) ME 23 (1982–2025) MN 22 (1924–2014) IA 22 (1915–2024) PA 20 (1900–2022) NM 17 (1967–2026) SC 17 (1924–2026) DE 17 (1941–2026) UT 16 (1994–2026) NJ 15 (1984–2023) MT 11 (2000–2026) KY 9 (1929–2024) OK 9 (1937–2009) SD 9 (1946–2016) RI 9 (1984–2026) NV 9 (1986–2022) MD 8 (1966–2024) NE 8 (1942–2023) KS 8 (1994–2026) HI 8 (1984–2018) OR 8 (1922–2010) WV 7 (1982–2025) CO 7 (1981–2025) VT 6 (2010–2025) DC 6 (1964–2021) VA 5 (1989–2023) NH 4 (1996–1999) VI 3 (2013–2023) AK 3 (1989–1998)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check