Summary
The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Tillman Partners in a personal injury action arising from the plaintiff's alleged exposure to epoxy paint fumes. The court held that the plaintiff's expert causation opinion lacked a sufficient factual basis under K.S.A. 60-456(b), relying on speculation rather than evidence showing that the exposure more likely than not caused her ongoing symptoms. Because the causation testimony was inadmissible, the plaintiff could not establish an essential element of her claim.
Holdings
- The district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Dr. Kanarek's causation opinion because it was based on speculation and lacked a reasonable factual basis; therefore, summary judgment was appropriate.
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court erred in concluding that Kuxhausen had no admissible expert testimony on causation, thereby dismissing her action.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (12)
- Kuxhausen v. Tillman Partners, 40 Kan. App. 2d 930, 197 P.3d 859 (2009)(affirmed)
- State v. Papen, 274 Kan. 149, 50 P.3d 37 (2002)
- State v. Struzik, 269 Kan. 95, 5 P.3d 502 (2000)(quoted)
- Peatie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 112 Conn. App. 8, 961 A.2d 1016 (2009)
- Central Natural Resources v. Davis Operating Co., 288 Kan. 234, 201 P.3d 680 (2009)
- Klose v. Wood Valley Racquet Club, Inc., 267 Kan. 164, 975 P.2d 1218 (1999)(quoted)
- State v. Shadden, 290 Kan. 803, 235 P.3d 436 (2010)
- American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Grim, 201 Kan. 340, 440 P.2d 621 (1968)(quoted)
- Deal v. Bowman, 286 Kan. 853, 188 P.3d 941 (2008)
- Yount v. Deibert, 282 Kan. 619, 147 P.3d 1065 (2006)(quoted)
Showing top 10 of 12.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…