A person who would otherwise have a privilege to refuse to disclose or to prevent another from disclosing a specified matter has no such privilege with respect to that matter if the judge finds that such person or any other person while the holder of the privilege has (a) contracted with a party against whom the privilege is claimed that he or she would not claim the privilege or, (b) without coercion, or without any trickery, deception, or fraud practiced against him or her, and with knowledge of the privilege, made disclosure of any part of the matter or consented to such a disclosure made by anyone.
K.S.A. 60-437
Waiver of privilege by contract or previous disclosure
Applied in 3 court decisions — leading case Nickel v. Hannigan (1996)
Most recently applied in Securities & Exchange Commission v. McNaul (June 2011)
L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-437; January 1, 1964.
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
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.