History:
L. 1985, ch. 197, § 1; Expired, July 1, 1989.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Statute abrogating collateral source rule (since amended) violates equal protection clauses of state and federal constitutions. Coburn By And Through Coburn v. Agustin, 627 F. Supp. 983, 984, 997 (1985).
2. Cited; K.S.A. 60-3403 violates Kansas equal protection clause; classifications therein do not further legitimate legislative objective. Farley v. Engelken, 241 Kan. 663, 676, 678, 740 P.2d 1058 (1987).
3. Cited; statutes (K.S.A. 60-3407, 60-3409, 60-3411) limiting recovery in medical malpractice actions as unconstitutional examined. Kansas Malpractice Victims Coalition v. Bell, 243 Kan. 333, 334, 757 P.2d 251 (1988).
4. Sufficiency of evidence to support punitive damages award based on fraud examined. Grove v. Orkin Exterminating Co., 18 Kan. App. 2d 369, 375, 855 P.2d 958 (1993).
5. Whether physician's conduct was sufficiently wanton to establish basis for punitive damages examined. Rios v. Bigler, 847 F. Supp. 1538, 1548 (1994).
6. Whether expert witness in medical malpractice trial must be engaged in a clinical practice in same profession as defendant examined. Tompkins v. Bise, 20 Kan. App. 2d 837, 840, 893 P.2d 262 (1995).
7. Expert witness in medical malpractice action not required to be licensed by same professional board as defendant health care provider. Tompkins v. Bise, 259 Kan. 39, 44, 46, 910 P.2d 185 (1996).
8. Evidence of intoxicated driver's conduct sufficient to support award of punitive damages to plaintiff. Reeves v. Carlson, 266 Kan. 310, 313, 969 P.2d 252 (1998).
Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 12דA medical malpractice action for damages for personal injury arising out of the rendering of professional services by a health care provider is governed by K.S.A. 60-3401 et seq. The question is, does K.”
Farley v. Engelken, 740 P.2d 1058 (Kan. 1987). · cites it 4דSee K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 60-3401 through 60-3414.”
Gillespie v. Seymour, 823 P.2d 782 (Kan. 1991). · cites it 2ד"(h) As used in this section the terms defined in K.S.A. 60-3401 and amendments thereto shall have the meaning provided by that statute.”
Kansas Malpractice Victims Coalition v. Bell, 757 P.2d 251 (Kan. 1988). · cites it 2דand K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 60-3401 et seq. ) The trial court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs, ruling that certain new laws violated several constitutional provisions.”
Williamson v. Amrani, 152 P.3d 60 (Kan. 2007). · cites it 2ד; K.S.A. 60-3401 et seq. ; K.S.A. 65-2801 et seq.”
Wisker Ex Rel. Wisker v. Hart, 766 P.2d 168 (Kan. 1988). · cites it 2ד60-3412, which provides: "In any medical malpractice liability action, as defined in K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such…”
Tompkins v. Bise, 893 P.2d 262 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 8ד60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such issue unless at least 50% of such person's professional time within the two-year period preceding the…”
Todd v. Kelly, 837 P.2d 381 (Kan. 1992). “§ 40-3422 (1986), which reads: “In any medical malpractice liability action, as defined by K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 60-3401 and amendments thereto, the proceedings shall be stayed on appeal by the filing of a supersedeas bond in the full amount of the judgment against the health care…”
Williams v. Lawton, 207 P.3d 1027 (Kan. 2009). “60-3412 provides: “In any medical malpractice liability action, as defined in K.S.A. 60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such issue unless at least…”
Schlaikjer v. Kaplan, 293 P.3d 155 (Kan. 2013). “60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such issue unless at least 50% of such person’s professional time within the two-year period *465 preceding the…”
Dawson v. Prager, 76 P.3d 1036 (Kan. 2003). “60-3412 provides: “In any medical malpractice liability action, as defined in K.S.A. 60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such issue unless at least…”
Reeves v. Carlson, 969 P.2d 252 (Kan. 1998). “Wanton conduct is an act performed with a realization of the imminence of danger and a reckless disregard or complete indifference to the probable consequences of the act.”
Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996). “A medical malpractice action for damages for personal injury arising out of the rendering of professional services by a health care provider is governed by K.S.A. 60-3401 et seq. The question is, does K.”
Tompkins v. Bise, 893 P.2d 262 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). “60-3401 and amendments thereto, in which the standard of care given by a practitioner of the healing arts is at issue, no person shall qualify as an expert witness on such issue unless at least 50% of such person's professional time within the two-year period preceding the…”
— K.S.A. § 60-3401(e) — 1 case
Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996). “A medical malpractice action for damages for personal injury arising out of the rendering of professional services by a health care provider is governed by K.S.A. 60-3401 et seq. The question is, does K.”
— K.S.A. § 60-3401(f) — 2 cases
Reeves v. Carlson, 969 P.2d 252 (Kan. 1998). “Wanton conduct is an act performed with a realization of the imminence of danger and a reckless disregard or complete indifference to the probable consequences of the act.”
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.