Revisor's Note:

L. 2014, ch. 82, was held to be an invalid enactment, see Solomon v. State, 303 Kan. 512, 364 P.3d 536 (2015).

Cross References to Related Sections:

Fact findings unnecessary on motion for summary judgment, see 60-252(a).

Motion to dismiss treated as one for summary judgment, when, see 60-212(b).

Motion for judgment on pleadings treated as one for summary judgment, when, see 60-212(c).

Dispositive motions, fees, see 60-2008.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Utah case, 10 Utah 2d 329, 353 P.2d 168 (1960); discussed, 11 K.L.R. 197, 200 (1962).

Order hereunder may serve as pretrial order, "Highlights of the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure (1963)," Spencer A. Gard, 2 W.L.J. 199, 206 (1962).

Motion to dismiss with affidavits becomes summary judgment motion, "Highlights of the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure (1963)," Spencer A. Gard, 2 W.L.J. 199, 205 (1962).

Mentioned in discussing discovery methods, Louis E. Striegel, 5 W.L.J. 47, 48 (1965).

1963-65 survey of civil practice, Earl B. Shurtz, 14 K.L.R. 171, 179 (1965).

"Summary Judgment," Marion Beatty, 36 J.B.A.K. 17 (1967).

"Reducing Post-Conviction Litigation," Richard H. Seaton, 36 J.B.A.K. 99, 155 (1967).

Survey of Kansas family law, Harvey S. Berenson, 17 K.L.R. 349, 351 (1969).

Survey of civil procedure, Spencer A. Gard, 17 K.L.R. 739, 746 (1969).

"Certification of Finality Under K.S.A. 60-254 (b)—An Enigma?" Roger D. Stanton, 38 J.B.A.K. 93, 94 (1969).

"Procedure—Res Judicata—Requirement of Identity of Parties," Ronald Hill, 9 W.L.J. 161 (1969).

"Bench Decisions and Opinion Writing," Robert H. Miller, 47 J.B.A.K. 247, 250 (1978).

"Survey of Kansas Law: Civil Procedure," Jerry G. Elliott, 27 K.L.R. 185, 190 (1979).

"Procedural Pitfalls in Defamation Litigation," Leon B. Graves, 3 J.K.T.L.A. No. 1, 6, 9 (1979).

"Expert Testimony to Prove Plaintiff's Fault Required," Dwight A. Corrin, 6 J.K.T.L.A. No. 4, 18, 20 (1983).

"Recovery of Attorney Fees—An Historical Perspective," Ron Leslie, 53 J.K.B.A. 154 (1984).

"Sanctions Against Lawyers," Tim Alvarez, J.K.T.L.A., Vol. XIII, No. 1, 7, 8 (1989).

"Statutory Interpretation: Boy Scouts in the Bible Belt; Boy Scouts' Rejection of Atheist Not Illegal in Kansas, [Seabourn v. Coronado Area Council, Boy Scouts of America, 891 P.2d 385 (Kan. 1995)]," 35 W.L.J. 359, 365 (1996).

"On the Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Kansas," Mark D. Hinderks and Steve Leben, 66 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 24 (1997).

"A practitioner's guide to summary judgment Part 1," Robert W. Parnacott, 67 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 36 (1998).

"A practitioner's guide to summary judgment Part II," Robert W. Parnacott, 68 J.K.B.A. No. 1, 30 (1999).

"Summary Judgments and Established Facts: Application of Rule 56 (d)," Derek S. Casey, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 30, No. 2, 12 (2006).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Petition alleged negligence in constructing sidewalk by abutting owner; error to grant summary judgment. Harris v. McConnell, 194 Kan. 800, 803, 401 P.2d 908.

2. A summary judgment proceeding is not a trial by affidavits; parties entitled to trial when there is a good faith dispute of facts. Brick v. City of Wichita, 195 Kan. 206, 210, 403 P.2d 964.

3. Considered in action to set aside property settlement. Cramer v. Wohlgemuth, 195 Kan. 622, 625, 408 P.2d 644.

4. Summary judgment; when rendition proper; federal rules considered. Hartman v. Stumbo, 195 Kan. 634, 638, 408 P.2d 693; Board of Satanta v. Grant County Planning Board, 195 Kan. 640, 648, 408 P.2d 655.

5. Admission of facts permitting court to consider motion to dismiss as equivalent to motion for summary judgment. Schulenberg v. City of Reading, 196 Kan. 43, 54, 410 P.2d 324.

6. Subsection (c) considered; oral motion made without ten days advance notice. City of Ulysses v. Neidert, 196 Kan. 169, 171, 409 P.2d 800.

7. Genuine issue of fact framed by pleadings; pretrial discovery incomplete. Timmermeyer v. Black, 196 Kan. 481, 412 P.2d 984.

8. Cited; motion to dismiss petition for failure to state claim treated as motion for summary judgment. Graham v. Corporon, 196 Kan. 564, 565, 413 P.2d 110.

9. Purpose of act and rules applicable thereto stated and applied. Secrist v. Turley, 196 Kan. 572, 574, 412 P.2d 976; Merry v. Turley, 196 Kan. 581, 412 P.2d 982.

10. Affidavits and discovery if not disputed overcome pleadings. Meyer, Executor v. Benelli, 197 Kan. 98, 100, 415 P.2d 415.

11. Summary judgment approved; action for lump sum. Cramer v. Blankenship Painting & Decorating Co., 197 Kan. 360, 416 P.2d 255.

12. Summary judgment holding several motion picture censorship statutes unconstitutional approved. State, ex rel., v. Columbia Pictures Corporation, 197 Kan. 448, 450, 417 P.2d 255.

13. Considered; trial court has power to enter summary judgment on its own motion. Green v. Kaesler-Allen Lumber Co., 197 Kan. 788, 789, 420 P.2d 1019.

14. As against motion for summary judgment, a pleading is to be liberally construed. Price, Administrator v. Holmes, 198 Kan. 100, 103, 422 P.2d 976.

15. Summary judgment granted in action by trespasser against railroad. Morris v. Atchison, T.&S.F. Rly. Co., 198 Kan. 147, 148, 149, 422 P.2d 920.

16. Summary judgment in negligence case upheld, although such disposition not usually feasible. Shehi v. Southwest Rentals, Inc., 199 Kan. 265, 266, 267, 429 P.2d 838.

17. Motion under subsection (c) sustained only where there is no issue as to any material fact. Supreme Petroleum, Inc. v. Briggs, 199 Kan. 669, 678, 433 P.2d 373.

18. Summary judgment rendered only if no genuine issue as to any material fact and movant entitled to judgment as a matter of law. West v. Prairie State Bank, 200 Kan. 263, 267, 436 P.2d 402.

19. Action disposed of hereunder where pretrial procedures reveal no unresolved issues or material facts. Evans v. Lynch, 200 Kan. 331, 333, 436 P.2d 867.

20. On motion hereunder, court not to decide issues of fact, but merely to determine their existence. Schneider v. Washington National Ins. Co., 200 Kan. 380, 387, 437 P.2d 798.

21. Sustaining of defendant's motion hereunder upheld; plaintiff found to be "guest" within purview of K.S.A. 8-122b. Gorelick v. Ernstein, 200 Kan. 619, 624, 438 P.2d 93.

22. Subsection (c) interpreted; summary judgment may be rendered on issue of liability alone; amount of damages usually a fact question and where genuine issue should not be determined by affidavits. Elrod v. Preferred Risk Mutual Ins. Co., 201 Kan. 254, 257, 258, 440 P.2d 544.

23. Paragraph (c) mentioned; summary judgment establishing negligence upheld. Smithson, Executor v. Dunham, 201 Kan. 455, 458, 441 P.2d 823.

24. Mentioned; amendment of sheriff's return after judgment disallowed; prejudice to substantial rights of parties. Transport Clearing House, Inc. v. Rostock, 202 Kan. 72, 80, 447 P.2d 1.

25. Summary judgment proper when facts relied upon for judgment are admitted and claim is upon an insurance policy. Goforth v. Franklin Life Ins. Co., 202 Kan. 413, 415, 449 P.2d 477.

26. Motion for summary judgment may include matters outside the pleadings; motion to dismiss determined from allegations of petition. Gardner v. McDowell, 202 Kan. 705, 706, 451 P.2d 501.

27. Paragraph (c) mentioned; failure to state claim for relief at hearing on dismissal motion; counts dismissed. Picknell v. Jones, 203 Kan. 196, 201, 453 P.2d 127.

28. Summary judgment procedure can be utilized to invoke the doctrine of collateral estoppel. Goetz v. Board of Trustees, 203 Kan. 340, 352, 454 P.2d 481.

29. Summary judgment upheld; plaintiff failed to comply with requirements of K.S.A. 12-105. Powell v. City of Haysville, 203 Kan. 543, 551, 455 P.2d 528.

30. An order under subsection (d), specifying certain facts that appear without substantial controversy, is not a final and appealable order. In re Estate of Countryman, 203 Kan. 731, 733, 736, 457 P.2d 53.

31. A determination made under subsection (d) should not preclude a deponent from correcting mistakes, explaining inconsistencies or covering in greater detail matters brought out generally by questions he answered. In re Estate of Countryman, 203 Kan. 731, 737, 457 P.2d 53.

32. Cited in case concerning failure to pay workmen's compensation when due. Kraisinger v. Mammel Food Stores, 203 Kan. 976, 977, 457 P.2d 678.

33. Rules for entry of summary judgments stated and applied; doctrine of "sudden emergency" considered. Lawrence v. Deemy, 204 Kan. 299, 302, 461 P.2d 770.

34. In case submitted on the pleadings, matters outside thereof presented to the court on a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be treated as a motion for summary judgment and be disposed of as provided hereunder. Stratmann v. Stratmann, 204 Kan. 658, 660, 465 P.2d 938.

35. Paragraph (c) applied; motion for summary judgment granted; no genuine issue as to any material fact. Hastain v. Greenbaum, 205 Kan. 475, 481, 470 P.2d 741.

36. Summary judgment granted on appeal from order of board of trustees of Kansas public employees retirement system; affirmed; ample evidence to support findings of board. Strader v. Kansas Public Employees Retirement System, 206 Kan. 392, 395, 400, 479 P.2d 860.

37. Requirements of summary judgment discussed. State Bank of Burden v. Augusta State Bank, 207 Kan. 116, 119, 483 P.2d 1068.

38. Rules governing propriety of summary judgment stated and applied. Albright v. McElroy, 207 Kan. 233, 243, 484 P.2d 1010.

39. Summary judgment could not be sustained as long as genuine issue of fact remained undetermined. Harter v. Kuntz, 207 Kan. 338, 343, 485 P.2d 190.

40. Motion to dismiss in garnishment action properly treated as motion for summary judgment. Gilley v. Farmer, 207 Kan. 536, 540, 485 P.2d 1284.

41. The mere hope of discovering further evidence is not sufficient grounds to deny summary judgment if otherwise proper. Gray v. Ray Gill, Frontier Industries, Inc., 208 Kan. 95, 99, 490 P.2d 615.

42. Error where trial court does not consider interrogatories or depositions in ruling on motion for summary judgment. Fireman's Fund American Insurance Companies v. Central Securities, Inc., 208 Kan. 263, 266, 491 P.2d 914.

43. Applied; option to sell land; specific performance to remainder after condemnation; abatement of price. Wilcox v. Wyandotte World-Wide, Inc., 208 Kan. 563, 568, 572, 493 P.2d 251.

44. Cited in holding cable television franchising ordinance void; decision rendered after consideration of motion for summary judgment. Capitol Cable, Inc. v. City of Topeka, 209 Kan. 152, 154, 495 P.2d 885.

45. Construed; action by trial court in granting summary judgment held proper. Knapp v. Unified School District, 209 Kan. 237, 240, 496 P.2d 1400.

46. Subsection (c) mentioned in discussing duty of public utility where airplane came into contact with telephone lines and crashed. Weber v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 209 Kan. 273, 281, 497 P.2d 118.

47. Construed; action challenging imposition by trial court of remedy of summary judgment; trial court erred. Boring v. Haynes, 209 Kan. 413, 418, 496 P.2d 1385.

48. Subsection (c) construed; court lists requirements which must be complied with in order that summary judgment may be granted. Thompson v. Anderson, 209 Kan. 547, 555, 498 P.2d 1.

49. Partial summary judgment rendered under authority of statute held proper. Bud Jennings Carpets & Draperies, Inc. v. Greenhouse, 210 Kan. 92, 97, 499 P.2d 1096.

50. Subsection (c) complied with; notice of hearing on motion for summary judgment mailed to plaintiff, pro se. Lee v. Brown, 210 Kan. 168, 169, 499 P.2d 1076.

51. Subsection (f) mentioned; additional evidence necessary to deny an otherwise proper summary judgment under guest statute. Scheibmeir v. Dreiling, 210 Kan. 350, 502 P.2d 854.

52. Applied; action on contract for auction sale; no separate agreement imposing liability. Feaster Trucking Service, Inc. v. Parks-Davis Auctioneers, Inc., 211 Kan. 78, 85, 505 P.2d 612.

53. Summary judgment for specific performance of contract for real estate sale upheld. Darby v. Keeran, 211 Kan. 133, 136, 505 P.2d 710.

54. Subsection (c) mentioned; motion proper only when recorded conclusively shows no genuine issue as to material facts. Dawson v. Dawson, 212 Kan. 711, 714, 512 P.2d 522.

55. Summary judgment affirmed in action for specific performance for sale of franchise; no genuine issue of any material fact. DeBauge Bros., Inc. v. Whitsitt, 212 Kan. 758, 762, 512 P.2d 487.

56. Subsection (c) considered in granting summary judgment for school officials charged with negligence in not preventing fight between students. Sly v. Board of Education, 213 Kan. 415, 422, 516 P.2d 895.

57. Subsection (c) cited; filing and serving motion not tantamount to request for oral argument on the motion. Mater v. Boese, 213 Kan. 711, 716, 717, 518 P.2d 482.

58. Paragraph (c) applied; trial court erred in granting summary judgment; issue requiring jury determination. Williams v. Community Drive-in Theater, Inc., 214 Kan. 359, 364, 520 P.2d 1296.

59. Summary judgment rendered under guest statute reversed; claim remanded for trial under present law. Vaughn v. Murray, 214 Kan. 456, 459, 521 P.2d 262.

60. Motion for summary judgment; liberal construction to party against whom motion directed; judgment for loss of wages set aside. Lorson v. Falcon Coach, Inc., 214 Kan. 670, 679, 522 P.2d 449.

61. Nonmovant for summary judgment cannot rely solely on pleadings; evidentiary requirements; malpractice action. Stovall v. Harms, 214 Kan. 835, 838, 522 P.2d 353.

62. Paragraph (c) applied; suit questioning validity of proceedings under general improvement and assessment law. Cherry v. Vanlahi, Inc., 216 Kan. 195, 197, 531 P.2d 66.

63. Section mentioned; issues as to material facts unresolved; summary judgment reversed. Stripling v. Star Lumber and Supply Co., Inc., 216 Kan. 507, 509, 532 P.2d 1101.

64. Summary judgment for lump-sum award in workmen's compensation case upheld; K.S.A. 60-252a and Supreme Court Rule 116 applied. Scott v. Day and Zimmerman, Inc., 216 Kan. 458, 532 P.2d 1111.

65. Summary judgment may not be granted where issue of material fact to be determined; immunity statutes (K.S.A. 46-901 et seq. construed). Kern v. Miller, 216 Kan. 724, 725, 727, 533 P.2d 1244.

66. Motion for judgment hereunder denied; application of K.S.A. 84-9-103 (3). American State Bank v. White, 217 Kan. 78, 80, 535 P.2d 424.

67. Applied; action for specific contract dismissed; application of clean hands doctrine. Green v. Higgins, 217 Kan. 217, 220, 535 P.2d 446.

68. Summary judgment may be granted where pretrial discovery incomplete if no genuine issue of material fact. Temmen v. Kent-Brown Chevrolet Co., 217 Kan. 223, 535 P.2d 873.

69. Rules governing propriety of summary judgment in negligence actions stated and applied; motion sustained. Mechtley v. Price, 217 Kan. 344, 347, 536 P.2d 1385.

70. Granting summary judgment was improper where genuine issues of material fact undetermined. Brown v. Wichita State University, 217 Kan. 661, 664, 665, 538 P.2d 713. Affirmed: 219 Kan. 2, 4, 547 P.2d 1015.

71. Pleadings to be liberally construed in favor of party opposing motion for summary judgment. Voth v. Chrysler Motor Corporation, 218 Kan. 644, 545 P.2d 371.

72. Subsection (c) cited; summary judgment in libel action reversed; issues of material fact remained. Schulze v. Coykendall, 218 Kan. 653, 661, 545 P.2d 392.

73. Motion for summary judgment proper for issues of res judicata and collateral estoppel; rigid adherence to mutuality doctrine not required. Crutsinger v. Hess, 408 F. Supp. 548, 550, 551, 555 (1976).

74. Where records reflected genuine issue of fact, granting of motion not warranted even though both parties moved for judgment. Henrickson v. Drotts, 219 Kan. 435, 438, 548 P.2d 465.

75. Action to obtain specific performance of option agreement; disputed facts; summary judgment order reversed. Loose v. Brubacher, 219 Kan. 727, 735, 549 P.2d 991.

76. Failure to state controlling principles and basis of judgment; judgment reversed. First Land Brokerage Corporation v. Northern, 220 Kan. 48, 51, 549 P.2d 866.

77. Summary judgment properly rendered where evidence did not establish contract for employment. Johnson v. National Beef Packing Co., 220 Kan. 52, 56, 551 P.2d 779.

78. Summary judgment prematurely rendered in favor of third party defendant; negligence action. Arterburn v. St. Joseph Hospital & Rehabilitation Center, 220 Kan. 57, 68, 551 P.2d 886.

79. Motion for summary judgment improperly sustained; genuine issues of fact remained. Motors Insurance Corporation v. Richardson, 220 Kan. 288, 289, 552 P.2d 894.

80. Action properly terminated by summary judgment; no genuine issue of material fact. Time v. Pres-cott State Bank, 220 Kan. 377, 553 P.2d 315.

81. Granting of partial summary judgment based on prior personal injury judgment held erroneous under facts. Williams v. Evans, 220 Kan. 394, 552 P.2d 876.

82. Error to grant motion for summary judgment where factual questions unresolved; wrongful death action. Woods v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 220 Kan. 479, 481, 553 P.2d 900.

83. Order dismissing one of several multiple party defendants on motion for summary judgment held not appealable; K.S.A. 60-254 (b) applied. Fredricks v. Foltz, 221 Kan. 28, 557 P.2d 1252.

84. Summary judgment not proper where allegation of fraud in transfer of funds; questions of fact not litigated. Schierenberg v. Hodges, 221 Kan. 64, 558 P.2d 133.

85. Action alleging defamation and invasion of privacy; motion to dismiss not motion for summary judgment. Rinsley v. Frydman, 221 Kan. 297, 559 P.2d 334.

86. Option contract for sale of real estate held offer of sale; summary judgment finding option granted without consideration upheld. Berryman v. Kmoch, 221 Kan. 304, 305, 559 P.2d 790.

87. Suit seeking injunction against board exercising quasi-judicial function; proper remedy was appeal; judgment hereunder affirmed. Schulze v. Board of Education, 221 Kan. 351, 352, 559 P.2d 367.

88. Sustaining defendants' motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims affirmed; action for breach of contract or alternative claim based on fraud. Mildfelt v. Lair, 221 Kan. 557, 559, 561 P.2d 805.

89. Modification of alimony award denied; summary judgment granted. Spaulding v. Spaulding, 221 Kan. 574, 576, 561 P.2d 420.

90. Order not final; question whether summary judgment appropriate. Henderson v. Hassur, 1 Kan. App. 2d 103, 112, 562 P.2d 108.

91. Section cited; K.S.A. 60-206 inapplicable; private contract involved. Barnes v. Gideon, 1 Kan. App. 2d 517, 519, 571 P.2d 42.

92. Summary judgment procedure applicable where de novo jurisdiction exercised on appeal from probate court. In re Estate of Sowers, 1 Kan. App. 2d 675, 681, 574 P.2d 224.

93. Denial of motion for summary judgment not appealable under K.S.A. 60-2102 (a)(3); interlocutory order; real estate title not involved. In re Estate of Ziebell, 2 Kan. App. 2d 99, 575 P.2d 574.

94. Granting summary judgment to defendant in action for damages caused by flooding, error; action not barred by K.S.A. 60-513. Dougan v. Rossville Drainage District, 2 Kan. App. 2d 125, 575 P.2d 1316.

95. Damage action for attorney fees under K.S.A. 40-256; summary judgment for defendant. Frickey v. Equity Mut. Ins. Co., 2 Kan. App. 2d 163, 164, 576 P.2d 702.

96. Rules relating to the granting and appellate review of summary judgments construed. Smith v. Marshall, 2 Kan. App. 2d 213, 577 P.2d 362.

97. Mentioned in holding failure of automobile passenger to keep lookout for trains not contributory negligence. Smith v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 222 Kan. 303, 306, 564 P.2d 514.

98. Section applied; summary judgment improper. Klippel v. Beinar, 222 Kan. 681, 687, 567 P.2d 867.

99. Court did not err in granting summary judgment dismissing action for malicious prosecution. Earley v. Harry's IGA, 223 Kan. 32, 573 P.2d 572.

100. Summary judgment would not stand; genuine issues of fact to be resolved. Pedi Bares, Inc. v. First National Bank, 223 Kan. 477, 481, 575 P.2d 507.

101. Failure to x-ray injury not within common knowledge exception; expert testimony required; summary judgment for defendant affirmed. Webb v. Lungstrum, 223 Kan. 487, 490, 575 P.2d 22.

102. Judgment granting summary judgment reversed; governmental immunity; when municipality immune from tort liability determined. Gorrell v. City of Parsons, 223 Kan. 645, 646, 647, 576 P.2d 616.

103. Summary judgment upheld; plaintiff failed to respond to motion with counter affidavits or depositions justifying position. Miller v. Sirloin Stockade, 224 Kan. 32, 35, 36, 578 P.2d 247.

104. Entry of summary judgment against plaintiff error; material issues of fact in dispute. Snodgrass v. Bloomcamp, 225 Kan. 65, 587 P.2d 316.

105. Summary judgment dismissing action under K.S.A. 40-3101 et seq. proper; failure to meet threshold provisions of 40-3117. Smith v. Marshall, 225 Kan. 70, 587 P.2d 320.

106. Error to grant summary judgment where unresolved genuine issues of material fact. Welch v. Young, 225 Kan. 189, 589 P.2d 567.

107. Action on memorandum of agreement for lease barred; memorandum insufficient; summary judgment granted. Progress Enterprises, Inc. v. The Litwin Corporation, 225 Kan. 212, 589 P.2d 583.

108. Summary judgment affirmed; liability of landlord for condition of leased premises discussed. Fredricks v. Foltz, 225 Kan. 663, 666, 594 P.2d 665.

109. No error by trial court in granting summary judgment on issue of liability and submitting the issue of damages to a jury. Henderson v. Hassur, 225 Kan. 678, 690, 594 P.2d 650.

110. Denial of summary judgment correct; question of culpable negligence one of fact. Mead v. Meeker, 3 Kan. App. 2d 15, 18, 587 P.2d 1276.

111. Granting summary judgment error; action seeking indemnity for court costs and attorney fees expanded in recovery action; liability insurance. Southgate State Bank & Trust Co. v. United Pacific Ins. Co., 3 Kan. App. 2d 37, 38, 588 P.2d 486.

112. Collection of service charge of more than authorized by K.S.A. 21-3707 not prohibited where express contract; summary judgment proper. Merrel v. Reseach & Data, Inc., 3 Kan. App. 2d 48, 49, 50, 589 P.2d 120.

113. Summary judgment improperly granted; genuine issues of fact remained unresolved. Farmers Ins. Co. v. Schiller, 3 Kan. App. 2d 87, 89, 589 P.2d 641.

114. Summary judgment proper in defamation suit when no evidence of actual malice. Gleichenhaus v. Carlyle, 3 Kan. App. 2d 146, 153, 154, 591 P.2d 635.

115. Summary judgment upheld; court determines whether words spoken constitute slander per se; slander per quod discussed. Henderson v. Ripperger, 3 Kan. App. 2d 303, 304, 305, 594 P.2d 251.

116. Summary judgment improper; surety subrogated to rights of entity it indemnifies; actions against third parties. Western Surety Co. v. Loy, 3 Kan. App. 2d 310, 311, 594 P.2d 257.

117. Summary judgment lies only when record conclusively shows no unresolved genuine issue of a material fact (dissenting opinion). Farmers Ins. Co. v. Schiller, 226 Kan. 155, 163, 597 P.2d 238.

118. Cited; a party resisting a motion of summary judgment in an action based upon fraud need not pre-sent clear and convincing evidence of fraud in opposing the motion. Dugan v. First Nat'l Bank in Wichita, 227 Kan. 201, 207, 606 P.2d 1009.

119. Summary judgment granted to defendant attorney where no cause of action shown. Young v. Hecht, 3 Kan. App. 2d 510, 511, 597 P.2d 682.

120. Cited in case involving personal injury to a licensee; no unresolved material fact established on appeal; summary judgment sustained. Ogden v. Zeman, 3 Kan. App. 2d 718, 720, 601 P.2d 17.

121. Requirements of this section met by pretrial conference. Hall v. Twin Caney Watershed Joint Dist. No. 34, 4 Kan. App. 2d 202, 203, 604 P.2d 63.

122. Summary judgment appropriate where abstracter negligently relies solely on judgment docket and does not go to the original release itself. Wichita Great Empire Broadcasting, Inc. v. Gingrich, 4 Kan. App. 2d 223, 225, 604 P.2d 281.

123. Cited; summary judgment premature. Pottratz v. Firkins, 4 Kan. App. 2d 469, 470, 609 P.2d 185.

124. Defendant's mere absence from state did not toll statute of limitations. Gideon v. Gates, 5 Kan. App. 2d 23, 27, 611 P.2d 166.

125. Summary judgment for creditor affirmed in case alleging malicious prosecution, false arrest, false imprisonment and abuse of process. Porter v. Stormont-Vail Hospital, 228 Kan. 641, 621 P.2d 411.

126. When genuine issues of fact remain, summary judgment not warranted; summary judgment proper when questions of law only remain. Farmers State Bank & Trust Co. of Hays v. City of Yates Center, 229 Kan. 330, 341, 624 P.2d 971.

127. When matters outside pleadings presented, motion to dismiss for failure to state claim treated as one for summary judgment. Mouber v. City of Prairie Village, 6 Kan. App. 2d 972, 974, 637 P.2d 424 (1981).

128. Summary judgment proper, revocable inter vivos trust failed as matter of law, no material fact questions. Pizel v. Pizel, 7 Kan. App. 2d 388, 391, 643 P.2d 1094 (1982).

129. Trial court erred in granting summary judgment on issue of assault and outrage against county commissioner, but did not err as to the county. Gomez v. Hug, 7 Kan. App. 2d 603, 605, 645 P.2d 916 (1982).

130. Summary judgment not warranted when genuine issues of material fact present. Johnson v. Miller, 8 Kan. App. 2d 288, 291, 655 P.2d 475 (1983).

131. Trial court erred in granting summary judgment before discovery completed and factual circumstances fully developed. Hanks v. Riffe Constr. Co., 232 Kan. 800, 658 P.2d 1030 (1983).

132. No error in striking portions of affidavits opposing motion for summary judgment which contradicted prior depositions. Mays v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 233 Kan. 38, 42, 661 P.2d 348 (1983).

133. Trial court erred in sustaining motion for summary judgment when record shows there is a genuine issue of material fact. McAlister v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 233 Kan. 252, 257, 662 P.2d 1203 (1983).

134. Summary judgment proper where all issues allegedly subject to dispute not material to genuine issues. Busch v. City of Augusta, 9 Kan. App. 2d 119, 122, 124, 674 P.2d 1054 (1983).

135. Where basic facts developed in suit to cancel medical malpractice insurance, no error for entering summary judgment. Missouri Medical Ins. Co. v. Wong, 234 Kan. 811, 815, 676 P.2d 113 (1984).

136. Pleadings liberally construed in favor of party opposing motion. Oller v. Kincheloe's, Inc., 235 Kan. 440, 448, 681 P.2d 630 (1984).

137. Error to grant partial summary judgment that plaintiff's speeding was a cause of accident. Stetler v. Fosha, 9 Kan. App. 2d 519, 521, 522, 682 P.2d 682 (1984).

138. Motion to dismiss treated as one for summary judgment when matters outside pleadings not excluded under K.S.A. 60-212(c). Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan. App. 2d 192, 193, 694 P.2d 1331 (1985).

139. Where question is matter of law between restrictive covenants versus zoning regulations, summary judgment proper. McDonald v. Emporia-Lyon County Jt. Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 10 Kan. App. 2d 235, 697 P.2d 69 (1985).

140. In face of summary judgment motion plaintiff "could not bide time and wait for trial to see" if necessary evidence produced. Willard v. City of Kansas City, 235 Kan. 655, 659, 660, 681 P.2d 1067 (1984).

141. Summary judgment proper where general liability insurance policy excluded property damage from work performed or materials furnished. Owings v. Gifford, 237 Kan. 89, 697 P.2d 865 (1985).

142. Summary judgment improper where affidavit and hearsay evidence in deposition as to pre-accident notice created factual issue. Mastin v. Kansas Power and Light Co., 10 Kan. App. 2d 620, 622, 623, 706 P.2d 476 (1985).

143. Oral proffers of proof not considered on motion for summary judgment (civil rights/false arrest case). Alvarado v. City of Dodge City, 10 Kan. App. 2d 363, 371, 702 P.2d 935 (1985).

144. Cited; factors to consider in whether summary judgment should issue, stated. Allen v. Mills, 11 Kan. App. 2d 415, 416, 724 P.2d 143 (1986).

145. Cited; applicability of time period in K.S.A. 60-206(e) to Supreme Court Rule 141 examined. Munkers v. Pomerenke, 11 Kan. App. 2d 569, 571, 730 P.2d 360 (1986).

146. Cited; pro se litigant in civil case required to follow same rules as litigant represented by counsel. Mangiaracina v. Gutierrez, 11 Kan. App. 2d 594, 595, 730 P.2d 1109 (1986).

147. Burden on moving party to demonstrate no genuine issue of material fact does not require affidavits negating opponent's claim. Crooks v. Greene, 12 Kan. App. 2d 62, 64, 736 P.2d 78 (1987).

148. Cited; where material facts undisputed, professional conduct involving business dealings with client examined. Phillips v. Carson, 240 Kan. 462, 473, 731 P.2d 820 (1987).

149. Motion to dismiss treated as motion for summary judgment; rules relating to summary judgment stated. Beck v. Kansas Adult Authority, 241 Kan. 13, 14, 25, 735 P.2d 222 (1987).

150. Cited; ambiguity of gas storage lease, resolution thereof examined. Richardson v. Northwest Central Pipeline Co., 241 Kan. 752, 756, 740 P.2d 1083 (1987).

151. Cited; oral renewal of motion for summary judgment at pretrial conference may be ruled upon by trial court. InterFirst Bank Greenspoint v. First Fed'l Savings & Loan Ass'n, 242 Kan. 181, 185, 186, 747 P.2d 129 (1987).

152. Cited; failure to show material dispute of fact to give rise to tort action for legal malpractice examined. Knight v. Myers, 12 Kan. App. 2d 469, 476, 748 P.2d 896 (1987).

153. Cited; foreclosure and sale of inventory allegedly seized by breach of peace examined. Riley State Bank v. Spillman, 242 Kan. 696, 699, 750 P.2d 1024 (1988).

154. Cited; attorney fees assessed against plaintiff's counsel for pursuing punitive damages unreasonable and in bad faith (K.S.A. 60-2007) examined. Rood v. Kansas City Power and Light Co., 243 Kan. 14, 22, 755 P.2d 502 (1988).

155. Cited; failure to establish essential element so that no genuine issue as to any material fact exists examined. Heinsohn v. Motley, 13 Kan. App. 2d 66, 761 P.2d 796 (1988).

156. Cited; revocable inter vivos trust created by husband without wife's consent examined. Newman v. George, 243 Kan. 183, 185, 755 P.2d 18 (1988).

157. Cited; opposing parties' duties on summary judgment motion, silence in face of motion, affidavit controverting sworn statement examined. Bacon v. Mercy Hosp. of Ft. Scott, 243 Kan. 303, 307, 756 P.2d 416 (1988).

158. Cited; parish priest as independent contractor in relation to diocese, absence to material fact on issues examined. Brillhart v. Scheier, 243 Kan. 591, 597, 758 P.2d 219 (1988).

159. Summary judgment proper where intent clearly expressed in contract and no factual question presented. Noller v. General Motors Corp., 244 Kan. 612, 616, 772 P.2d 271 (1989).

160. Judgment examined where plaintiff signed covenant not to execute against insured; liability of insurer for excess judgment and interest determined. Glenn v. Fleming, 14 Kan. App. 2d 62, 68, 781 P.2d 1107 (1989).

161. Judgment based on rule against splitting causes of action examined. Wright v. Brotherhood Bank & Tr. Co., 14 Kan. App. 2d 71, 76, 782 P.2d 70 (1989).

162. Burden on party seeking summary judgment, appellate court scope of review in summary judgment cases examined. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins.Co. v. International Playtex, Inc. 245 Kan. 258, 259, 777 P.2d 1259 (1989).

163. Immaterial disputed facts as not preventing summary judgment noted; summary judgment properly entered on material questions of law. Miller v. Foulston, Siefkin, Powers & Eberhardt, 246 Kan. 450, 471, 790 P.2d 404 (1990).

164. Constitutionality of K.S.A. 25-1904 relating to qualification for membership on state board of education determined. State ex rel. Stephan v. Johnson, 14 Kan. App. 2d 542, 543, 795 P.2d 411 (1990).

165. In opposing motion for summary judgment, a party must present something of evidentiary value to establish material fact. Glenn v. Fleming, 247 Kan. 296, 305, 799 P.2d 79 (1990).

166. Facts constituting constructive notice and fraudulent conveyances sufficient to sustain motion against alleged bona fide purchaser examined. City of Arkansas City v. Anderson, 15 Kan. App. 2d 174, 178, 804 P.2d 1026 (1991).

167. Journalist's article on matter of public concern as voluntarily creating a limited public figure for defamation issues examined. Knudsen v. Kansas Gas & Electric Co., 248 Kan. 469, 483, 807 P.2d 71 (1991).

168. Resolution of ambiguity of automobile insurance policy as not resolving genuine issues of fact noted. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Old Hickory Cas. Ins. Co., 248 Kan. 657, 662, 810 P.2d 283 (1991).

169. To preclude summary judgment, facts subject to dispute must be material to conclusive issues. Mark Twain Kansas City Bank v. Cates, 248 Kan. 700, 704, 810 P.2d 1154 (1991).

170. Whether duties under K.S.A. 8-135 were breached remained questions of fact not proper for summary judgment. Mid American Credit Union v. Board of Sedgwick County Comm'rs, 15 Kan. App. 2d 216, 219, 806 P.2d 479 (1991).

171. Enforcement by successor purchaser of business of covenant not to compete addressed for first time. Safelite Glass Corp. v. Fuller, 15 Kan. App. 2d 351, 355, 807 P.2d 677 (1991).

172. No material facts in dispute; due process rights not violated as court's review of conclusions of law is unlimited. Thompson v. U.S.D. No. 259, 16 Kan. App. 2d 42, 43, 819 P.2d 1236 (1991).

173. Rules for granting summary judgments; existence of duty on part of pharmacy is question of law. Nichols v. Central Merchandise, Inc., 16 Kan. App. 2d 65, 66, 817 P.2d 1131 (1991).

174. Facts required to preclude summary judgment considered. Fleming Companies, Inc. v. Equitable Life Ins. Co., 16 Kan. App. 2d 77, 818 P.2d 813 (1991).

175. Motion for judgment shall be treated as one for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court. Admire Bank & Trust v. City of Emporia, 250 Kan. 688, 691, 829 P.2d 578 (1992).

176. Status of depositions moot where court on appeal held plaintiff sufficiently controverted defendant's uncontroverted facts. Bright v. Cargill, Inc., 251 Kan. 387, 401, 837 P.2d 348 (1992).

177. Summary judgment entered where statutes prohibiting and regulating sale of liquor to minors held to not impose civil liability. Mills v. City of Overland Park, 251 Kan. 434, 436, 837 P.2d 370 (1992).

178. Summary judgment reversed, record does not preclude recovery on asserted strict liability, negligence or warranty theories. Elite Professionals, Inc. v. Carrier Corp., 16 Kan. App. 2d 625, 629, 827 P.2d 1195 (1992).

179. Immunity from liability under tort claims act (K.S.A. 75-6101 et seq.) for nonplacement of protected left-turn signal on connecting link highway examined. Force v. City of Lawrence, 17 Kan. App. 2d 90, 93, 838 P.2d 896 (1992).

180. One-action rule examined; rule satisfied where comparative fault determination made in federal district court. Tersiner v. Gretencord, 17 Kan. App. 2d 551, 552, 840 P.2d 544 (1992).

181. Remanded for determination whether evidence could reasonably support jury verdict for punitive damages. Fusaro v. First Family Mtg. Corp., 17 Kan. App. 2d 730, 734, 843 P.2d 737 (1992).

182. Whether duty of care exists is question of law; no error in granting summary judgment. Chadwell v. Clements, 18 Kan. App. 2d 84, 86, 847 P.2d 1344 (1993).

183. In tort claims act suit, statute noted as extreme remedy applicable only where truth not left in doubt. C.J.W. v. State, 253 Kan. 1, 16, 853 P.2d 4 (1993).

184. Cited in joint review of petitions for annexation (K.S.A. 12-521) and incorporation (K.S.A. 15-121). In re Petition of City of Kansas City for Annexation of Land, 253 Kan. 402, 406, 856 P.2d 144 (1993).

185. Whether independent contractor's employees covered by workers compensation may assert inherently dangerous activity exception to vicarious liability examined. Dillard v. Strecker, 18 Kan. App. 2d 899, 901, 861 P.2d 1372 (1993).

186. Whether fact issue existed for summary judgment purposes where no answer to motion filed examined. U.S.D. No. 259 v. Sloan, 19 Kan. App. 2d 445, 447, 871 P.2d 861 (1994).

187. Whether issues regarding whether plaintiff was independent contractor and whether tree trimming is inherently dangerous activity precluded summary judgment examined. McCubbin v. Walker, 256 Kan. 276, 279, 886 P.2d 790 (1994).

188. Whether school board that suspended tenured teacher without pay while appealing administrative decision entitled to qualified immunity examined. Hubbard v. U.S.D. No. 434, 19 Kan. App. 2d 853, 855, 882 P.2d 483 (1994).

189. Whether insurance contract subrogation clause required insurer to execute a subrogation reimbursement agreement examined. Oetinger v. Polson, 20 Kan. App. 2d 255, 257, 885 P.2d 1274 (1994).

190. Summary judgment proper where evidence insufficient to prove corporation was alter ego of parent. Doughty v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 258 Kan. 493, 496, 905 P.2d 106 (1995).

191. No error in admission of unsworn affidavit where not critical to trial court's granting of summary judgment. Miskew v. Hess, 21 Kan. App. 2d 927, 935, 910 P.2d 223 (1996).

192. Procedures for granting summary judgment apply to will contests involving undue influence. In re Estate of Brodbeck, 22 Kan. App. 2d 229, 232, 235, 915 P.2d 145 (1996).

193. Nonmoving party may not rely on response filed by another party not the subject of summary judgment motion. Hull v. Agustin, 22 Kan. App. 2d 464, 466, 918 P.2d 651 (1996).

194. Summary judgment not proper procedural vehicle for resolving issues. Gerhardt v. Harris, 261 Kan. 1007, 1008, 934 P.2d 976 (1997).

195. Under facts, summary judgment granted before completion of discovery was not premature. Gragg v. Wichita State Univ., 261 Kan. 1037, 1044, 1061, 934 P.2d 121 (1997).

196. Summary judgment proper where governmental immunity existed under K.S.A. 75-6104(d) and (e). Jarboe v. Board of Sedgwick County Comm'rs, 262 Kan. 615, 621, 938 P.2d 1293 (1997).

197. Attempt by plaintiff to controvert respondent's contention in motion for summary judgment was not statutorily compliant. Stone v. City of Kiowa, 263 Kan. 502, 507, 950 P.2d 1305 (1997).

198. Various arguments failed to present material fact issue disputing running of statute of limitations. Western Video Collectors v. Mercantile Bank, 23 Kan. App. 2d 703, 709, 710, 935 P.2d 237 (1997).

199. Summary judgment improper where breach of contract issue not even raised in motion; foreseeability of lost profits examined. MLK, Inc. v. University of Kansas, 23 Kan. App. 2d 876, 883, 940 P.2d 1158 (1997).

200. Issues in conversion of forged instrument case involve interpretations of article 3 of UCC allowing unlimited review. King v. White, 265 Kan. 627, 632, 962 P.2d 475 (1998).

201. Federal civil procedure rule 11 does not preclude state action for malicious prosecution in abuse of process. McShares, Inc. v. Barry, 266 Kan. 479, 481, 970 P.2d 1005 (1998).

202. Proximate cause question of law where all evidence relied on by party undisputed and susceptible of only one inference. Cullip v. Domann, 266 Kan. 550, 553, 972 P.2d 776 (1999).

203. De novo review of order granting summary judgment affirms trial courts' ruling. Dominguez v. Davidson, 266 Kan. 926, 929, 974 P.2d 112 (1999).

204. Summary judgment upheld; deputy sheriff has no duty to verify validity of writ of execution. Conner v. Janes, 267 Kan. 427, 428, 981 P.2d 1169 (1999).

205. Action brought under Kansas act for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions is a civil action in which summary judgment may be granted. Seaman U.S.D. No. 345 v. Kansas Comm'n on Human Rights, 26 Kan. App. 2d 521, 523, 990 P.2d 155 (1999).

206. Expert testimony was required to establish standard of care; lacking such summary judgment was appropriate. Midwest Iron & Metal, Inc. v. Zenor Elec. Co., 28 Kan. App. 2d 353, 19 P.3d 181 (2000).

207. In aviation negligence case, summary judgment affirmed as it was not possible to determine who was piloting aircraft when it crashed. Friesen-Hall v. Colle, 270 Kan. 613, 17 P.3d 349 (2001).

208. Summary judgment for defendant school district affirmed under facts when seventh grader ran off school property onto public street where he was injured when struck by an automobile. Glaser v. U.S.D. No. 253, 271 Kan. 178, 21 P.3d 523 (2001).

209. Motion for summary judgment appropriate when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact; court to resolve all facts and inferences against moving party before granting summary judgment. Irvin v. Smith, 272 Kan. 112, 31 P.3d 934 (2001).

210. Minor not bound by settlement agreement until court approval has been obtained. White v. Allied Mutual Ins. Co., 29 Kan. App. 2d 797, 31 P.3d 328 (2001).

211. Summary judgment affirmed; employee's expectation of continued employment does not create implied employment contract. Inscho v. Exide Corp., 29 Kan. App. 2d 892, 33 P.3d 249 (2001).

212. Summary judgment granted confirming employment agreement requiring principal leaving firm to pay percentage of fees earned for services to former clients for five years subsequent to leaving company. Varney Business Services, Inc. v. Pottroff, 275 Kan. 21, 59 P.3d 1003 (2002).

213. Summary judgment affirmed; out of state defendant served by mail at three locations but failed to respond. State ex rel. Stovall v. Alivio, 275 Kan. 169, 61 P.3d 687 (2003).

214. Motel granted summary judgment; plaintiff chased by several men was refused entry into motel at 2 a.m. and was stabbed several times; no duty to aid or protect him. Gardin v. Emporia Hotels, Inc., 31 Kan. App. 2d 168, 61 P.3d 732 (2003).

215. Summary judgment affirmed in insurance company's favor; settlement agreement was subject to court's approval; plaintiff withheld fact that he was driver of vehicle in single car accident; attorney's fees disapproved for plaintiff's attorney. Ferguson v. Smith, 31 Kan. App. 2d 311, 63 P.3d 1119 (2003).

216. Summary judgment affirmed; sale of real estate at auction was subject to approval of governing board of university endowment association. Money v. Ft. Hays State Univ. Endowment Ass'n, 31 Kan. App. 2d 322, 64 P.3d 458 (2003).

217. Court has power to grant summary judgment at time final judgment is rendered that it has earlier denied. Bichelmeyer Meats v. Atlantic Ins. Co., 30 Kan. App. 2d 458, 42 P.3d 1191 (2001).

218. Denial of state's motion for summary judgment affirmed; state has duty to maintain fence along highway. Reynolds v. Kansas Dept. of Transportation, 273 Kan. 261, 43 P.3d 799 (2002).

219. Summary judgment affirmed; law firm hired by KPERS investment manager to perform legal services in purchase of company had no duty to assure transaction was prudent investment. KPERS v. Kutak Rock, 273 Kan. 481, 44 P.3d 407 (2002).

220. In action for additional holiday pay, no error in denying defendant's motion for summary judgment. Holmes v. U.S.D. No. 259, 273 Kan. 864, 46 P.3d 1158 (2002).

221. Summary judgment affirmed; insurance policy not ambiguous, policy did not cover operation of three-wheeled motorcycle. Liggatt v. Employers Mut. Casualty Co., 273 Kan. 915, 46 P.3d 1120 (2002).

222. Summary judgment reversed; material question of fact exists as to adequacy of safety barriers. Marshall v. Heartland Park Topeka, 274 Kan. 294, 49 P.3d 501 (2002).

223. Cemetery to be used exclusively for burial of dead; monument for unborn babies not permitted. Lower v. Board of Dir. of Haskell County Cemetery Dist., 274 Kan. 735, 56 P.3d 235 (2002).

224. Ten percent chance of survival is sufficient to withstand motion for summary judgment. Pipe v. Hamilton, 274 Kan. 905, 56 P.3d 823 (2002).

225. Summary judgment affirmed; chiropractor hired by insurance company to review plaintiff's medical records owed no duty to plaintiff. Doss v. Manfredi, 30 Kan. App. 2d 269, 40 P.3d 333 (2002).

226. Summary judgment affirmed; absent bad faith, buyers of property may cancel real estate purchase contract based on contingency that seller complete all items raised by inspection to seller's satisfaction by date certain. Hill v. Perrone, 30 Kan. App. 2d 432, 42 P.3d 210 (2002).

227. No duty to provide coverage for newly acquired vehicle when insurer does not insure all vehicles with insurance company. Allied Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moeder, 30 Kan. App. 2d 729, 48 P.3d 1 (2002).

228. Use of smaller drilling rig and drilling 51 feet was sufficient to satisfy lease requirement to commence drilling within three years of execution of lease. Bunnell Farms Co. v. Samuel Gary, Jr. & Assocs., 30 Kan. App. 2d 739, 47 P.3d 804 (2002).

229. Insured must repair or replace damaged property to receive full replacement cost of property. Burchett v. Kansas Mut. Ins. Co., 30 Kan. App. 2d 826, 48 P.3d 1290 (2002).

230. Summary judgment affirmed on tort claims based on running of statute of limitations but reversed with respect to contract claims. Roof-Techs Int'l, Inc. v. State, 30 Kan. App. 2d 1184, 57 P.3d 538 (2002).

231. Summary judgment reversed; question of whether earlier oral contract is controlled by subsequent inspection work order is matter for finder of fact. Continental Western Ins. Co. v. KFS, Inc., 30 Kan. App. 2d 1262, 59 P.3d 1 (2002).

232. Liability for emotional distress for interfering with dead body must be intentional or malicious; summary judgment affirmed. Ely v. Hitchcock, 30 Kan. App. 2d 1276, 58 P.3d 116 (2002).

233. Summary judgment affirmed based on (1) no federal law violations and (2) failure to exhaust administrative remedies on state claim. Purvis v. Williams, 276 Kan. 182, 73 P.3d 740 (2003).

234. Plaintiff's expert disqualified for failure to meet requirements of K.S.A. 60-3412. Dawson v. Prager, 276 Kan. 373, 76 P.3d 1036 (2003).

235. In ruling on motion for summary judgment, court is required to state facts and legal principles controlling the decision. Burcham v. Unison Bancorp, Inc., 276 Kan. 393, 77 P.3d 130 (2003).

236. Kansas Nurse Practice Act cannot be basis for retaliatory discharge claim. Goodman v. Wesley Med. Center, 276 Kan. 586, 78 P.3d 817 (2003).

237. No showing that city's water and sewer rates were discriminatory or unreasonable. Eudora Development Co. of Kansas v. City of Eudora, 276 Kan. 626, 78 P.3d 437 (2003).

238. Occupier of land has no duty to warn an entrant onto land of risks off premises. Cunningham v. Braum's Ice Cream & Dairy Stores, 276 Kan. 883, 80 P.3d 35 (2003).

239. Summary judgment affirmed plus return of escrow funds to purchaser in failed purchase agreement. ARY Jewelers, L.L.C. v. Krigel, 277 Kan. 27, 82 P.3d 460 (2003).

240. Realtor, with exclusive agreement to sell defendant's property, introduced parties who leased premises but purchased premises after expiration of listing agreement; held, no commission due realtor. Wright v. Shephard, 31 Kan. App. 2d 484, 66 P.3d 921 (2003).

241. After closing on sale of real estate, closing agent absconded with funds provided by buyer; held, giving of warranty deed by sellers requires compensation to satisfy mortgages on property. Kitchen v. Schmedeman, 31 Kan. App. 2d 694, 71 P.3d 486 (2003).

242. No error in denying motion for directed verdict nor in denying Dillon's instruction, see 16 Kan. App. 2d 298, in slip and fall case. Worley v. Bradford Pointe Apartments, Inc., 31 Kan. App. 2d 737, 73 P.3d 149 (2003).

243. Genuine issue of material fact precluded summary judgment; remanded for determination whether plaintiff's injuries were caused by elevator facility. Starr v. Union Pacific Ry. Co., 31 Kan. App. 2d 906, 75 P.3d 266 (2003).

244. Party opposing summary judgment must set forth specific facts, not allegations to support position. Lloyd v. Quorum Health Resources, LLC, 31 Kan. App. 2d 943, 77 P.3d 993 (2003).

245. Farmout agreement in drilling for oil did not allow multiple agreements of depth within test well. Avien Corp. v. First Nat'l Oil, Inc., 32 Kan. App. 2d 106, 79 P.3d 223 (2003).

246. Court had jurisdiction over zoning appeal although plaintiff had not registered alleged nonconforming use of property nor exhausted administrative remedies. Morgan v. City of Wichita, 32 Kan. App. 2d 147, 80 P.3d 407 (2003).

247. SRS assumed duty to provide services; jury must decide if duty was breached. Roe v. Kansas Dept. of SRS, 32 Kan. App. 2d 158, 80 P.3d 1162 (2003).

248. Economic loss doctrine applies to case against contractor in residential defect cases. Prendiville v. Contemporary Homes, Inc., 32 Kan. App. 2d 435, 83 P.3d 1257 (2004).

249. Final judgment is conclusive on all matters litigated as well as on all matters which could have been litigated. O'Keefe v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 32 Kan. App. 2d 474, 84 P.3d 613 (2004).

250. No recovery for sprained ankle incurred in city park used for recreational purposes. Jackson v. City of Norwich, 32 Kan. App. 2d 598, 85 P.3d 1259 (2004).

251. No recovery for customer who slipped and fell while walking over area covered by gasoline. Crowe v. True's IGA, 32 Kan. App. 2d 602, 85 P.3d 1261 (2004).

252. Snow and ice exception applies to circumstance when broken water main caused ice to form on roadway. Lopez v. Unified Gov't of Wyandotte County, 277 Kan. 682, 89 P.3d 588 (2004).

253. When insurance policy does not cover a claim, insurer not liable for damages associated with claim nor for plaintiff's attorney fees. South Central Kansas Health Ins. Group v. Harden & Co. Ins. Services, Inc., 278 Kan. 347, 97 P.3d 1031 (2004).

254. Plaintiff's allegations of sexual harassment sufficient to be considered by jury. Labra v. Mid-Plains Constr., Inc., 32 Kan. App. 2d 821, 90 P.3d 954 (2004).

255. Tavern owner not liable for personal injuries of customer from acts of third-party outside business. Legleiter v. Gottschalk, 32 Kan. App. 2d 910, 91 P.3d 1246 (2004).

256. Summary judgment for defendant affirmed; expert testimony was necessary to show breach of standard of care. Cunningham v. Riverside Health System, Inc., 33 Kan. App. 2d 1, 99 P.3d 133 (2004).

257. Servicing carrier under KAACP entitled to recover from primary insurer PIP benefits paid but is not entitled to prejudgment interest or attorney fees as insurer had reasonable belief it was not liable for PIP payments. Farmers Alliance Mut. Ins. Co. v. Garcia, 33 Kan. App. 2d 90, 97 P.3d 501 (2004).

258. Supreme Court Rule 170, regarding preparation of journal entries, may not be used as an alternative to summary judgment proceedings. Lyndon State Bank v. Price, 33 Kan. App. 2d 629, 106 P.3d 511 (2005).

259. No private right of action created by federal-aid projects for railway - highway crossings. Goodman v. Kansas Dept. of Transportation, 34 Kan. App. 2d 1, 113 P.3d 822 (2005).

260. Court properly treated motion to dismiss as motion for summary judgment in addressing merits of case. Perry v. Board of Franklin County Comm'rs, 281 Kan. 801, 807, 132 P.3d 1279 (2006).

261. Summary judgment reversed, material factual issues regarding whether defendant negligently performed an assumed duty remained. Sall v. T's Inc., 281 Kan. 1355, 1375, 136 P.3d 471 (2006).

262. Summary judgment affirmed on negligent entrustment claim where no genuine issue of material fact. Estate of Pemberton v. John's Sports Center, Inc., 35 Kan. App. 2d 809, 831, 135 P.3d 174 (2006).

263. Summary judgment affirmed, no evidence provided to show deceased was an invitee or licensee. Seitz v. Lawrence Bank, 36 Kan. App. 2d 283, 298, 138 P.3d 388 (2006).

264. Affirmed, plaintiff failed to prove existence of doctor-patient relationship necessary for medical malpractice action. Seeber v. Ebeling, 36 Kan. App. 2d 501, 515, 518, 519, 141 P.3d 1180 (2006).

265. Summary judgment reversed, evidence of business use relevant to pickup ownership, to be considered by trier of fact. Warner v. Stover, 283 Kan. 453, 463, 153 P.3d 1245 (2007).

266. Summary judgment not proper, genuine issue of material fact existed regarding encroachment and damages. Muhl v. Bohi, 37 Kan. App. 2d 225, 231, 232, 152 P.3d 93 (2007).

267. To overcome summary judgment the existence of genuine issue need not be established by clear and convincing evidence. Linden Place v. Stanley Bank, 38 Kan. App. 2d 504, 509 (2007).

268. Failure to controvert other party's uncontroverted facts in summary judgment motion deemed admitted. Dexter v. Brake, 38 Kan. App. 2d 1005, 1020, 1021, 174 P.3d 924 (2008).

269. Cited in upholding district court's decision to grant summary judgment for defendant without further discovery. Troutman v. Curtis, 286 Kan. 452, 458, 185 P.3d 930 (2008).

270. Cited in case granting summary judgment for defendants in medical malpractice claim. Stormont-Vail Healthcare, Inc. v. Cutrer, 39 Kan. App. 2d 1, 5, 178 P.3d 35 (2008).

271. When opposing motion for summary judgment, party must show evidence that establishes a disputed material fact. Johannes v. Idol, 39 Kan. App. 2d 595, 603, 606, 181 P.3d 574 (2008).

272. Cited; K.S.A. 60-503 discussed and applied; county acquired property by adverse possession. Chesbro v. Board of Douglas County Comm'rs, 39 Kan. App. 2d 954, 966, 186 P.3d 829 (2008).

273. Summary judgment and dismissal upheld based on contract language. Santana v. Olguin, 41 Kan. App. 2d 1086, 208 P.3d 328 (2009).

274. Adverse party to summary judgment must come forward with evidence to establish a disputed material fact. Law v. Law Company Building Assocs., 42 Kan. App. 2d 278, 210 P.3d 676 (2009).

275. Defendant county failed to follow protocol for proceedings on motions for summary judgment in order to demonstrate it is entitled to judgment on the discretionary function exception to tort liability. Lovitt v. Board of Shawnee County Comm'rs, 43 Kan. App. 2d 4, 221 P.3d 107 (2009).

276. When motion to dismiss is converted to motion for summary judgment, opposing parties must be given opportunity to present on the motion. Sperry v. McKune, 305 Kan. 469, 481, 384 P.3d 1003 (2016).

277. A party responding to a motion to dismiss filed under K.S.A. 60-212 may respond with information outside the pleadings, but the responding party must then comply with the procedural requirements relating to summary judgment motions in K.S.A. 60-256. Lambert v. Peterson, 309 Kan. 594, 439 P.3d 317 (2019).