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.
8 Kansas opinions name it 1 courts 1902–2013 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fifyne Henderson v. Major George Blueminkgreen2 sentences1988Henderson v. Bluemink, 511 F.2d 399, 402-03 (D.C. 1988Henderson v. Bluemink, 511 F.2d 399, 402-03 (D.C. | 1 | 1 |
Hicks v. Statered2 sentences1976In abrogating governmental immunity for all levels of government in New Mexico, the court in Hicks v. State, 88 N.M. 588, 590 , 544 P.2d 1153, 1155 (1975), made some remarks relevant to our present discussion: "... 1976In abrogating governmental immunity for all levels of government in New Mexico, the court in Hicks v. State, 88 N.M. 588, 590 , 544 P.2d 1153, 1155 (1975), made some remarks relevant to our present discussion: "... | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burditt v. Burditt
neutral
2 sentences1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . 1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . | 4 | 1902–1942 |
Corlett v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance
neutral
2 sentences1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . 1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . | 3 | 1902–1942 |
Gibson v. Johnson
neutral
2 sentences1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . 1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . | 2 | 1912–1942 |
Capell v. Dill
neutral
2 sentences1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . 1942On behalf of defendants it is argued plaintiff is endeavoring to use the statute of limitations as a weapon of attack rather than a shield of defense; that such a statute cannot be used to uphold a claim for affirmative relief, citing Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 , and Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 . | 2 | 1912–1942 |
Thompson v. Greer
neutral
2 sentences1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea 1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea | 2 | 1902–1912 |
Osterhaus v. Schunk
green
1 sentence2013Paragraph 5 is not a shield for the defense under Osterhaus, 291 Kan. at 779 , and there is sufficient circumstantial evidence in the record of Jennings’ lack of reasonable care in communicating the information called for in the seller’s disclosure form. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Johnson v. Wynne
neutral
2 sentences1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea 1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Salter v. Corbett
neutral
2 sentences1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea 1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Updegraff v. Lucas
neutral
2 sentences1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea 1912(Corlett v. Insurance Co., 60 Kan. 134 , 55 Pac. 844 ; Thompson v. Greer, 62 Kan. 522 , 64 Pac. 48 ; Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 , 64 Pac. 77 ; Johnson v. Wynne, 64 Kan. 138 , 67 Pac. 549 ; Gibson v. Johnson, 73 Kan. 261 , 84 Pac. 982 ; Updegraff v. Lucas, 76 Kan. 456 , 93 Pac. 630 ; Salter v. Corbett, 80 Kan. 327 , 102 Pac. 452 ; Capell v. Dill, 82 Kan. 652 , 109 Pac. 286 .) Where the holder of the mortgage undertook to recover the debt or foreclose the mortgage, the landowner could plead the statute of limitations and procure an adjudication that a right of action on the mortgage was dea | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Nicholson v. Hale
neutral
1 sentence1911It was said in Nicholson v. Hale, 73 Kan. 599 (followed in Millikin v. Lockwood, 80 Kan. 600 ): “An exception to the rule that a statute of limitations can only be used as a shield of defense and not as a weapon of attack is recognized where the person claiming under the statute has been wrongfully dispossessed after the prescribed period has run.” (p. 602.) Again, it was said in the same opinion: “We think that when a tax deed, valid on its face, has been of record for five years, and the tax-title holder is in possession, claiming by virtue of the tax deed, and one claiming adversely wrongfu | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Millikin v. Lockwood
neutral
1 sentence1911It was said in Nicholson v. Hale, 73 Kan. 599 (followed in Millikin v. Lockwood, 80 Kan. 600 ): “An exception to the rule that a statute of limitations can only be used as a shield of defense and not as a weapon of attack is recognized where the person claiming under the statute has been wrongfully dispossessed after the prescribed period has run.” (p. 602.) Again, it was said in the same opinion: “We think that when a tax deed, valid on its face, has been of record for five years, and the tax-title holder is in possession, claiming by virtue of the tax deed, and one claiming adversely wrongfu | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Holden v. Spier
green
1 sentence1910(Burditt v. Burditt, 62 Kan. 576 ; Holden v. Spier, 65 Kan. 412 .) The defendants successfully defended against the claim of the plaintiff to have his title quieted, but they failed upon their affirmative demand for relief against; him, for the very good reason that they could not quiet their title against the unpaid mortgage. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
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.