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.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 23 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Brenner v. Oppenheimer & Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brenner v. Oppenheimer & Co. Anchor | green | “where the parties to a contract have entered an agreement that incorporates a choice of law provision, kansas courts generally effectuate the law chosen by the parties to control the agreement.” | 11 |
| 2 | Howard v. Ferrellgas Partners, L.P. | green | “a party fails to make 'a clear showing that another state's law should apply,' kansas choice of law principles require a court to default to kansas substantive law.” | 8 |
| 3 | Brenner v. Oppenheimer & Co. | green | “kansas courts generally effectuate the law chosen by the parties to control the agreement.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.