K.S.A. » Chapter 60
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-3305 (2026)

Manufacturer's or seller's duty to warn or protect against danger, when

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

60-3305. Manufacturer's or seller's duty to warn or protect against danger, when. In any product liability claim any duty on the part of the manufacturer or seller of the product to warn or protect against a danger or hazard which could or did arise in the use or misuse of such product, and any duty to have properly instructed in the use of such product shall not extend: (a) To warnings, protecting against or instructing with regard to those safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product, with the training, experience, education and any special knowledge the user or consumer did, should or was required to possess, could and should have taken for such user or consumer or others, under all the facts and circumstances;

(b) to situations where the safeguards, precautions and actions would or should have been taken by a reasonable user or consumer of the product similarly situated exercising reasonable care, caution and procedure; or

(c) to warnings, protecting against or instructing with regard to dangers, hazards or risks which are patent, open or obvious and which should have been realized by a reasonable user or consumer of the product.

History: L. 1981, ch. 231, § 5; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Delaney v. Deere & Co., 999 P.2d 930 (Kan. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Delaney v. Deere & Co., 999 P.2d 930 (Kan. 2000). · cites it 51× “In its grant of summary judgment to Deere, the district court first relied upon the pertinent provisions of K.S.A. 60-3305: “In any product liability claim any duty on the part of the manufacturer or seller of the product to warn or protect against a danger or hazard which could…”
Wright Ex Rel. Trust Co. v. Abbott Labs., Inc., 259 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2001). · cites it 3× “See K.S.A. § 60-3305. However, the duty to warn “shall not extend”: (a) To warnings, protecting against or instructing with regard to those safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product, with the training, experience, education and any…”
Gaumer v. Rossville Truck & Tractor Co., 257 P.3d 292 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 8× “For example, K.S.A. § 60-3305 provides that ‘[i]n any product liability claim any duty on the part of the .”
Patton v. Hutchinson Wil-Rich Mfg. Co., 861 P.2d 1299 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 5× “See K.S.A. 60-3305. Patton responds to the contention of amicus Kansas Product Liability Advisory Council that the legislature is the proper forum to create a continuing duty.”
Miller v. Pfizer Inc.(Roerig Div.), 196 F. Supp. 2d 1095 (D. Kan. 2002). · cites it 6× “In support of their claim that the Kansas Supreme Court is likely to find that K.S.A. § 60-3305 has overruled the learned intermediary doctrine, plaintiffs again cite Delaney, 268 Kan.”
Cooper v. Zimmer Holdings, Inc., 320 F. Supp. 2d 1154 (D. Kan. 2004). · cites it 4× “§ 60-3304 (providing that a product is not defective where it complied with regulatory standards at the time of manufacture); K.S.A. § 60-3305 (providing that duty to warn shall not extend to certain situations); and K.”
Miller v. Lee Apparel Co., 881 P.2d 576 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “K.S.A. 60-3305 (manufacturer’s duty to warn or protect against danger); Long v.”
Meyerhoff v. Michelin Tire Corp., 852 F. Supp. 933 (D. Kan. 1994). · cites it 5× “Michelin contends that, despite the jury’s verdict, it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because (1) there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to have found, in light of K.”
Kerns Ex Rel. Kerns v. G.A.C., Inc., 875 P.2d 949 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 60-3305. SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO INDIVIDUAL LIABILITY Plaintiff sued the Orindgreffs as individuals and G.”
Pfeiffer v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 771 F. Supp. 1133 (D. Kan. 1991). · cites it 5× “safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product ... should or was required to possess.”
Hiner v. Deere & Co., 161 F. Supp. 2d 1279 (D. Kan. 2001). · cites it 7× “The Kansas Supreme Court summarized these exceptions 6 as follows: The three K.S.A. 60-3305 categories which exclude a duty to warn are: (a) warnings related to precautionary conduct that a reasonable user or consumer would take for protection; (b) precautions that a reasonable…”
Messer v. Amway Corp., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1217 (D. Kan. 2002). · cites it 2× “The KPLA, K.S.A. § 60-3305, provides, in pertinent part: In any product liability claim any duty on the part of the manufacturer or seller of the *1230 product to warn or protect against a danger or hazard which could or did arise in the use or misuse of such product, and any…”
Show all 41 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 60-3305(a) — 9 cases
Wright Ex Rel. Trust Co. v. Abbott Labs., Inc., 259 F.3d 1226 (10th Cir. 2001). “See K.S.A. § 60-3305. However, the duty to warn “shall not extend”: (a) To warnings, protecting against or instructing with regard to those safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product, with the training, experience, education and any…”
Pfeiffer v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 771 F. Supp. 1133 (D. Kan. 1991). “safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product ... should or was required to possess.”
Olson v. U.S. Indus., Inc., 649 F. Supp. 1511 (D. Kan. 1986).
Stillie v. AM Int'l, Inc., 841 F. Supp. 370 (D. Kan. 1993).
Wright Ex Rel. Trust Co. of Kansas v. Abbott Labs., 62 F. Supp. 2d 1186 (D. Kan. 1999).
— K.S.A. § 60-3305(b) — 1 case
Davison v. C. R. Bard, Inc. (D. Kan. 2020).
— K.S.A. § 60-3305(c) — 10 cases
Delaney v. Deere & Co., 999 P.2d 930 (Kan. 2000). “In its grant of summary judgment to Deere, the district court first relied upon the pertinent provisions of K.S.A. 60-3305: “In any product liability claim any duty on the part of the manufacturer or seller of the product to warn or protect against a danger or hazard which could…”
Gaumer v. Rossville Truck & Tractor Co., 257 P.3d 292 (Kan. 2011). “For example, K.S.A. § 60-3305 provides that ‘[i]n any product liability claim any duty on the part of the .”
Wheeler v. John Deere Co., 935 F.2d 1090 (10th Cir. 1991).
Neff v. Coleco Indus., Inc., 760 F. Supp. 864 (D. Kan. 1991).
Pfeiffer v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 771 F. Supp. 1133 (D. Kan. 1991). “safeguards, precautions and actions which a reasonable user or consumer of the product ... should or was required to possess.”
— K.S.A. § 60-3305(e) — 1 case
Delaney v. Deere & Co., 985 F. Supp. 1009 (D. Kan. 1997).
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.