8 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
McLellan v. Rainesgreen2 sentences2011The panel appeared to similarly dispose of the negligent misrepresentation claim. 36 Kan.App.2d 1 , Syl. ¶ 7, 140 P.3d 1034 ("the district court was correct in granting summary judgment to buyer's agent and the sellers for lack of proof of a duty to disclose"). 2011The panel appeared to similarly dispose of the negligent misrepresentation claim. 36 Kan.App.2d 1 , Syl. ¶ 7, 140 P.3d 1034 ("the district court was correct in granting summary judgment to buyer's agent and the sellers for lack of proof of a duty to disclose"). | 1 | 2 |
Rinehart v. Morton Buildings, Inc.green2 sentences2022See Rinehart v. Morton Buildings, Inc., 297 Kan. 926, 937 , 305 P.3d 622 (2013). 2022See Rinehart v. Morton Buildings, Inc., 297 Kan. 926, 937 , 305 P.3d 622 (2013). | 1 | 1 |
Osterhaus v. Schunkgreen1 sentence2013See 291 Kan. at 790-92 . | 1 | 1 |
Munsell v. Ideal Food Storesgreen2 sentences2000It relies on Munsell v. Ideal Food Stores, 208 Kan. 909 , Syl. ¶ 7, 494 P.2d 1063 (1972) (“trial court erred in submitting only one general verdict to the jury allowing it to return one verdict determining damages in a lump sum under all four counts of plaintiff s petition.”). 2000It relies on Munsell v. Ideal Food Stores, 208 Kan. 909 , Syl. ¶ 7, 494 P.2d 1063 (1972) (“trial court erred in submitting only one general verdict to the jury allowing it to return one verdict determining damages in a lump sum under all four counts of plaintiff s petition.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stechschulte v. Jennings
green
2 sentences2026The Stechschulte court held that the buyers' negligent misrepresentation claim could survive summary judgment. 297 Kan. at 27 . 2022All negligent misrepresentation claims involve a person "who in the course of any transaction in which he or she has a pecuniary interest, supplies false information for the guidance of another person." Stechschulte v. Jennings, 297 Kan. 2, 22 , 298 P.3d 1083 (2013). | 2 | 2022–2026 |
Tromp v. National Reserve Life Insurance
green
2 sentences2022Co., 143 Kan. 98 , Syl. ¶ 1, 53 P.2d 831 (1936) (holding that unless the insured names an irrevocable beneficiary, the beneficiary of a life insurance policy has no vested interest in the death benefits under the insured's policy until the insured's death). 20 As a result, even if we were to assume that Guinn negligently misrepresented information about converting Alan's term life insurance policy, Cathy does not have a negligent misrepresentation claim against Guinn because Guinn negligently misrepresented the information to influence Alan—the term life insurance policy owner. 2022Co., 143 Kan. 98 , Syl. ¶ 1, 53 P.2d 831 (1936) (holding that unless the insured names an irrevocable beneficiary, the beneficiary of a life insurance policy has no vested interest in the death benefits under the insured's policy until the insured's death). 20 As a result, even if we were to assume that Guinn negligently misrepresented information about converting Alan's term life insurance policy, Cathy does not have a negligent misrepresentation claim against Guinn because Guinn negligently misrepresented the information to influence Alan—the term life insurance policy owner. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Gerhardt v. Harris
green
1 sentence2013Allowing a promise to perform to serve as the basis of a negligent misrepresentation claim might mean “any breach of contract claim action could be treated as also including a negligent misrepresentation claim.” 261 Kan. at 1021 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Hamtil v. J.C. Nichols Real Estate
green
2 sentences2008App.2d 809, 811 , 923 P.2d 513 (1996), determined that the sellers would not be liable under a negligent misrepresentation claim because McLellen, the buyer, could not show justifiable reliance. 2008Finding that the plaintiffs had agreed in writing not to rely on the representations of the defendants, the Hamtil court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the plaintiffs' negligent misrepresentation claim. 22 Kan.App.2d at 811 , 923 P.2d 513 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Eckholt v. American Business Information, Inc.
green
1 sentence2000In analyzing Gerhardt’s claim, the court discussed and quoted from Eckholt v. American Business Information, Inc., 873 F.Supp. 521 (D. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.