Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

K.S.A. 60-3307

Inadmissible evidence

Applied in 1 court decision — leading case Norwood v. Raytheon Co. (2006)

Most recently applied in Norwood v. Raytheon Co. (September 2006)

L. 1986, ch. 214, § 1; July 1.

(a) In a product liability claim, the following evidence shall not be admissible for any purpose:

(1) Evidence of any advancements or changes in technical or other knowledge or techniques, in design theory or philosophy, in manufacturing or testing knowledge, techniques or processes in labeling, warning of risks or hazards, instructions for the use of such product, if such advancements or changes have been made, learned or placed into common use subsequent to the time the product in issue was designed, formulated, tested, manufactured or sold by the manufacturer; and

(2) evidence of any changes made in the designing, planning, formulating, testing, preparing, manufacturing, packaging, warnings, labeling or instructing for use of, or with regard to, the product in issue, or any similar product, which changes were made subsequent to the time the product in issue was designed, formulated, tested, manufactured or sold by the manufacturer.

(b) This section does not require the exclusion of evidence of a subsequent measure if offered to impeach a witness for the manufacturer or seller of a product who has expressly denied the feasibility of such a measure.

Official source: Kansas Office of Revisor of Statutes. Reproduced from public-domain Kansas statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.