Moore v. Bird Engineering Co., P.A., 273 Kan. 2

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kansas reviewed a dispute arising from the design and construction of a bridge on the plaintiff's residential property. The court held that professional engineering services fall within the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and that a deceptive representation under K.S.A. 50-626(b)(1) does not require intent to deceive when the supplier knew or had reason to know the representation was false. The court addressed the engineering company's liability for breach of contract, breach of warranty, negligence, and violation of the KCPA.

Holdings

1. Engineering services supplied by Bird Engineering to Moore fell within the KCPA because Moore was a consumer, Bird Engineering was a supplier, and the sale of engineering services was a consumer transaction under the statute.
2. Intent to deceive is not an element of a deceptive act under K.S.A. 50-626(b)(1); it is sufficient that the representation was made knowingly or with reason to know that the property or services had characteristics or qualities they did not have, or materially differed from the representation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether professional engineering services supplied by Bird Engineering to Moore constituted a consumer transaction covered by the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
2. Whether a plaintiff must prove intent to deceive to establish a deceptive act under K.S.A. 50-626(b)(1).

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded