History:
L. 1941, ch. 295, § 6; L. 1970, ch. 182, § 1; L. 1972, ch. 185, § 1; L. 1980, ch. 137, § 5; L. 1986, ch. 318, § 31; L. 1988, ch. 356, § 98; Repealed, L. 1997, ch. 8, § 15; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Statutory duties and authority of commissioner of insurance under section considered and applied. Blue Cross & Blue Shield v. Bell, 227 Kan. 426, 427, 429, 430, 431, 433, 434, 435, 438, 439, 442, 607 P.2d 498.
2. Compliance with statute not prerequisite to determination of question of law; provision in Blue Cross insurance service contracts rendering benefits personal and nonassignable upheld. Augusta Medical Complex, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Kansas, Inc., 230 Kan. 361, 363, 634 P.2d 1123 (1981).
Blue Cross of Kansas, Inc. v. Bell, 607 P.2d 498 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 18ד: Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas (BCBSK) commenced an action in the Shawnee County District Court against Fletcher Bell, Commissioner of Insurance, of Kansas (Commissioner), as provided for in K.S.A. 40-1806 and 40-1906 to seek review of an order of the Commissioner…”
Augusta Med. Complex, Inc. v. Blue Cross of Kansas, Inc., 634 P.2d 1123 (Kan. 1981). “Blue Cross notes that K.S.A. 1980 Supp. 40-1806 required it to first submit the rider in controversy to the insurance commissioner, who has certain statutory duties in connection therewith.”
Comanche Cnty. Hosp. v. Blue Cross of Kansas, Inc., 613 P.2d 950 (Kan. 1980). “40-1806 and 40-1906 to review rate filings of Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and to consider, among other things, the trend projections and reasonableness of projected loss experience used in the rate filings. In order for him to approve rate filings as being reasonable the…”
— K.S.A. § 40-1806(c) — 1 case
Blue Cross of Kansas, Inc. v. Bell, 607 P.2d 498 (Kan. 1980). “: Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas (BCBSK) commenced an action in the Shawnee County District Court against Fletcher Bell, Commissioner of Insurance, of Kansas (Commissioner), as provided for in K.S.A. 40-1806 and 40-1906 to seek review of an order of the Commissioner…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.