Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"A Primer for Handling a Defective Tire Case: The Plaintiff's View," Stephen N. Six, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XXVII, No. 5, 10 (2004).

"How Old is Too Old? Kansas' Useful Safe Life Statute of Repose," David Morantz and Raymond Dake, 33 J.K.A.J., No. 2, 6 (2009).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Kansas product liability act; liability of counties for providing or selling certain chemicals. 86-173.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Seller of irrigation system with defective hose manufactured elsewhere liable for breach of warranty under UCC; cause of action accrued prior to enactment hereof. Stair v. Gaylord, 232 K. 765, 771, 659 P.2d 178 (1983).

2. Court concludes Kansas supreme court would declare seller of used product not subject to strict liability. Sell v. Bertsch & Co., Inc., 577 F.Supp. 1393, 1397, 1399 (1984).

3. Cited; product liability claims after effective date of act are governed thereby. Tice v. Ebeling, 238 K. 704, 712, 715 P.2d 397 (1986).

4. Cited; duty to warn employee of danger working with familiar machinery purchased from former employer examined. Olson v. U.S. Industries, Inc., 649 F.Supp. 1511, 1512 (1986).

5. Presumption that warnings noted in 60-3304 are adequate but rebuttable determined; error in granting summary judgment. Savina v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 247 K. 105, 126, 795 P.2d 915 (1990).

6. Products liability insurer of insured hay bales manufacturer not a "manufacturer" or "product seller" within meaning of act. Deines v. Vermeer Mfg. Co., 752 F.Supp. 989, 998 (1990).

7. Material fact issue as to whether farmer's cattle died of latent disease triggering statute of repose. Koch v. Shell Oil Co., 815 F.Supp. 1434, 1435 (1993).

8. On question certified (60-3201 et seq.), manufacturer's post-sale duty to warn of recall and retrofit defective products examined. Patton v. Hutchinson Wil-Rich Mfg. Co., 253 K. 741, 748, 861 P.2d 1299 (1993).

9. Whether seller who repaired or remanufactured product may be held strictly liable to person injured by defect examined. Stillie v. Am Intern., Inc., 841 F.Supp. 370, 374 (1993).

10. Various theories of product liability must be merged into one claim under act. Schoen by and through Schoen v. Spotlight Co., 979 F.Supp. 1379, 1382 (1997).

11. Issue concerning whether child was exposed to feed additive during gestation precluded summary judgment. Koch v. Shell Oil Co., 8 F.Supp.2d 1264, 1268 (1998).

12. Plaintiff failed to prove defective product claim under KPLA. Samarah v. Danek Med., Inc., 70 F.Supp.2d 1202 (1999).

13. Economic loss doctrine precludes purchaser of defective products from employing strict liability theory when only product is damaged, but recovery for physical damage to other property is allowed. Northwest Arkansas Masonry, Inc. v. Summit Specialty Products, Inc., 29 K.A.2d 735, 31 P.3d 982 (2001).

14. Motion by defendant to exclude plaintiff's expert witness granted. Miller v. Pfizer, Inc., 196 F.Supp.2d 1062, 1063 (2002).

15. KPLA (60-3301 et seq.) did not overrule learned intermediary doctrine. Miller v. Pfizer, Inc. (Roerig Division), 196 F.Supp.2d 1095, 1118 (2002).

16. Manufacturer could not be held strictly liable for failure to warn in products liability action. Messer v. Amway Corp., 210 F.Supp.2d 1217, 1227 (2002).

17. Summary judgment granted where plaintiff failed to prove defendant liable for manufacturing and warning defects. 103 Investors 1, L.P. v. Square D Co., 222 F.Supp.2d 1263, 1276 (2002).

18. Debtor entitled to homestead exemption where part of duplex was leased. In re McCambry, 327 B.R. 469, 471 (2005).

19. Device-specific requirements established by FDA for medical devices preempt claims based upon state common-law, as incorporated in the Kansas Product Liability Act (KPLA). Troutman v. Curtis, 36 K.A.2d 633, 639, 143 P.3d 74 (2006).

20. Kansas Product Liability Act did not subsume implied breach of warranty claims for economic loss under UCC. Gonzalez v. Pepsico, Inc., 489 F.Supp.2d 1233, 1241, 1242 (2007).

21. Genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether ear candle was defective, precluding summary judgment for seller on consumer's claims under the Kansas Product Liability Act. Danaher v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 779 F.Supp.2d 1198 (D. Kan. 2011).