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.
6 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2022 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 |
|---|---|---|
Frith v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of Americagreen1 sentence2022Co. of America, 9 F. Supp. 2d 734, 742 [S.D. | 1 | 1 |
United American State Bank v. Wild West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc.green2 sentences2017See United American State Bank & Trust Co. v. Wild West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 221 Kan. 523, 526 , 561 P.2d 792 (1977) ("Waiver in contract law implies that a party has voluntarily and intentionally renounced or given up a known right, or has caused or done some positive act or positive inaction which is inconsistent with the contractual right." [Emphasis added.]); 28 Am. 2017See United American State Bank & Trust Co. v. Wild West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 221 Kan. 523, 526 , 561 P.2d 792 (1977) ("Waiver in contract law implies that a party has voluntarily and intentionally renounced or given up a known right, or has caused or done some positive act or positive inaction which is inconsistent with the contractual right." [Emphasis added.]); 28 Am. | 1 | 1 |
Malone v. University of Kansas Medical Centergreen2 sentences2007See Malone v. University of Kansas Medical Center, 220 Kan. 371, 374-76 , 552 P.2d 885 (1976) (action for failure of medical center to furnish all needed treatment sounded in tort; action could not be characterized as one in contract in order to avoid bar of governmental immunity); Travis v. Bishoff, 143 Kan. 283, 284-85 , 54 P.2d 955 (1936) (action against surgeon for failure to perform operation according to proper surgical practice was one for malpractice even though petition stated action was for breach of contract). 2007See Malone v. University of Kansas Medical Center, 220 Kan. 371, 374-76 , 552 P.2d 885 (1976) (action for failure of medical center to furnish all needed treatment sounded in tort; action could not be characterized as one in contract in order to avoid bar of governmental immunity); Travis v. Bishoff, 143 Kan. 283, 284-85 , 54 P.2d 955 (1936) (action against surgeon for failure to perform operation according to proper surgical practice was one for malpractice even though petition stated action was for breach of contract). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Thompson v. Jiffy Lube International, Inc.
green
1 sentence2022The Thompson court found further support for a heightened pleading standard based on precedent: "'Although the language of Rule 9(b) confines its requirements to claims of . . . fraud, the requirements of the rule apply to all cases where the gravamen of the claim is fraud even though the theory supporting the claim is not technically termed fraud.'" 505 F. Supp. 2d at 932 (quoting Frith v. Guardian Life Ins. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Natanson v. Kline
green
1 sentence2020In Natanson I, the Kansas Supreme Court held, "Where no immediate emergency exists, a physician violates his duty to his patient and subjects himself to liability for malpractice, . . . if he makes no disclosure of significant facts within his knowledge which are necessary to form the basis of an intelligent consent by the patient to proposed . . . treatment." Natanson I, 186 Kan. 393 , Syl. ¶ 4. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Kelly v. Vinzant
green
1 sentence2020In fact, "a plaintiff cannot bring a claim for breach of contract or fraud where the gravamen of the claim is medical malpractice." See 287 Kan. at 516-17 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Travis v. Bishoff
green
2 sentences2007See Malone v. University of Kansas Medical Center, 220 Kan. 371, 374-76 , 552 P.2d 885 (1976) (action for failure of medical center to furnish all needed treatment sounded in tort; action could not be characterized as one in contract in order to avoid bar of governmental immunity); Travis v. Bishoff, 143 Kan. 283, 284-85 , 54 P.2d 955 (1936) (action against surgeon for failure to perform operation according to proper surgical practice was one for malpractice even though petition stated action was for breach of contract). 2007See Malone v. University of Kansas Medical Center, 220 Kan. 371, 374-76 , 552 P.2d 885 (1976) (action for failure of medical center to furnish all needed treatment sounded in tort; action could not be characterized as one in contract in order to avoid bar of governmental immunity); Travis v. Bishoff, 143 Kan. 283, 284-85 , 54 P.2d 955 (1936) (action against surgeon for failure to perform operation according to proper surgical practice was one for malpractice even though petition stated action was for breach of contract). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Modern Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Cinderella Homes, Inc.
green
2 sentences1997Modem Air Conditioning, *1014 Inc. v. Cinderella Homes, Inc., 226 Kan. 70, 78 , 596 P.2d 816 (1979). 1997Modem Air Conditioning, *1014 Inc. v. Cinderella Homes, Inc., 226 Kan. 70, 78 , 596 P.2d 816 (1979). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Edwards v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
green
2 sentences1979Edwards v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 187 Kan. 656 , 360 P.2d 23 (1961); and see PIK Civ. 2d 14.41 (1977). 1979Edwards v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 187 Kan. 656 , 360 P.2d 23 (1961); and see PIK Civ. 2d 14.41 (1977). | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.