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

K.S.A. § 60-3412 (2026)

Expert witnesses, qualifications

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

60-3412. Expert witnesses, qualifications. 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 50% of such person's professional time within the two-year period preceding the incident giving rise to the action is devoted to actual clinical practice in the same profession in which the defendant is licensed.

History: L. 1986, ch. 229, § 17; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2021 · leading case: Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tompkins v. Bise, 910 P.2d 185 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 70× “The Court of Appeals found that K.S.A. 60-3412 requires that an expert witness in a medical malpractice action be licensed in the same profession in which the defendant health care provider is licensed and reversed the district court in Tompkins v.”
Schlaikjer v. Kaplan, 293 P.3d 155 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 24× “The district court granted the motion in limine because Cooper did not meet the requirements of K.S.A. 60-3412. In the absence of expert testimony on the standard of care, Schlaikjer could not, as a matter of law, carry her burden of proof; and summary judgment in Kap-lan’s…”
Williams v. Lawton, 207 P.3d 1027 (Kan. 2009). · cites it 14× “Lawton argued that K.S.A. 60-3412 required Diggdon’s disqualification because Diggdon had retired approximately 3 months before Lawton treated Williams.”
Endorf v. Bohlender, 995 P.2d 896 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 27× “: This medical malpractice case focuses on the K.S.A. 60-3412 “actual clinical practice” requirement for standard of care expert testimony.”
Glassman v. Costello, 986 P.2d 1050 (Kan. 1999). · cites it 14× “Costello was guilty of negligence in (1) failing to direct and monitor nurse Mahoney in the administration of anesthesia, (2) beginning surgery after the failure of a spinal anesthesia administered under his direction, (3) ignoring the oral representation of Mahoney that Cathy…”
Williams v. Lawton, 170 P.3d 414 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 24× “After the district court concluded Williams' standard of care witness qualified as an expert under K.S.A. 60-3412, Philip Diggdon, M.D., testified he had completed thousands of such surgeries, including hundreds on adults, and that Williams should have been checked for diabetes…”
Dawson v. Prager, 76 P.3d 1036 (Kan. 2003). · cites it 8× “Simon, defendants sought summary judgment on the medical malpractice claim on the ground that Dawson’s designated expert witness on standard of care did not spend *375 at least 50% of his professional time in actual clinical practice for the 2 years preceding the incident giving…”
Wisker Ex Rel. Wisker v. Hart, 766 P.2d 168 (Kan. 1988). · cites it 6× “" In so instructing, the trial court was applying its interpretation of K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 60-3412, which provides: "In any medical malpractice liability action, as defined in K.”
Latshaw v. Mt. Carmel Hosp., 53 F. Supp. 2d 1133 (D. Kan. 1999). · cites it 18× “Kansas Standards For Expert Witness Testimony In Medical Malpractice Actions K.S.A. § 60-3412 provides that a physician must meet certain requirements to qualify as an expert witness in a medical malpractice case.”
Samsel v. Wheeler Transp. Servs., Inc., 789 P.2d 541 (Kan. 1990). · cites it 2× “65-4922); and limitations were placed on the qualifications of expert witnesses in medical malpractice actions (K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 60-3412). Finally, the legislature attempted to limit the liability of health care providers in medical malpractice actions by capping recovery for…”
Williamson v. Amrani, 152 P.3d 60 (Kan. 2007). · cites it 2× “10); and the requirements for expert witnesses in K.S.A. 60-3412. The broad-sweeping act was apparently "prompted by the fear that the escalating cost of medical liability insurance would drive health care providers out of certain areas of practice, or even out of the state.”
Tompkins v. Bise, 893 P.2d 262 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 12× “The court ruled oral and maxillofacial surgery was the "profession" referred to by K.S.A. 60-3412, as applied to this case. At trial, the court allowed Captline to testify over Bise's objection.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
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.