Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 257 KAN 813 - See v. Hartley

See v. Hartley’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
6
states following
December 2020
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 10 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently December 2020 · most notably Cronin v. Howe (1995), Ripley v. Tolbert (1996)

4 federal appellate · 10 district · 27 state decisions

1801995200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Martindale v. Tenny · Harding v. K.C. Wall Products, Inc. · State Ex Rel. Stephan v. Kansas Racing Commission · Wright v. Robinson · Rochester American Insurance v. Cassell Truck Lines, Inc.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We conclude that once an action is timely filed under the provisions of a so-called ordinary statute of limitations or within the applicable time limitations of a repose statute, such as K.S.A. 60-513(b) or (c), the action is then subject to the savings provision of K.S.A. 60-518.... The first action, having been timely filed, was subject to the savings provision of K.S.A. 60-518, and therefore the second action was also timely and not barred by K.S.A. 60-513(c).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), the causes of action listed in subsection (a) shall not be deemed to have accrued until the act giving rise to the cause of action first causes substantial injury, or, if the fact of injury is not reasonably ascertainable until some time after the initial act, then the period of limitation shall not commence until the fact of injury becomes reasonably ascertainable to the injured party, but in no event shall an action be commenced more than 10 years beyond the time of the act giving rise to the cause of action.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““(a) The following actions shall be brought within two years: (1) An action for trespass upon real property. (2) An action for taking, detaining or injuring personal property, including actions for the specific recovery thereof. (3) An action for relief on the ground of fraud, but the cause of action shall not be deemed to have accrued until the fraud is discovered. (4) An action for injury to the rights of another, not arising on contract, and not herein enumerated. (5) An action for wrongful death. (6) An action to recover for an ionizing radiation injury as provided in K.S.A. 60-513a, 60-513b and 60-513c, and amendments thereto. (7) An action arising out of the rendering of or failure to render professional services by a health care provider, not arising on contract.” (Emphasis added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.