KANSAS REFORMS

Appeal Bond Reform: HB 2457 (2005); Amended K.S.A. § 60-2103.  Provides that if the appellant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that setting the supersedeas bond at the full amount of the judgment will result in the appellant suffering an undue hardship or a denial of the right to appeal, the court may reduce the amount of the bond as follows: (1) if the judgment is less than or equal to $1 million, the supersedeas bond shall be set at the full amount of the judgment; or (2) if the judgment exceeds $1 million in value, the supersedeas bond shall be set at a total of $1 million plus 25 percent of any amount in excess of $1 million.

Appeal Bond Reform: SB 48 (2003).  Limits the amount that signatories to the Master Settlement Agreement are required to pay to secure the right to appeal to $25 million.

Asbestos / Silica Litigation Reform: S.B. 512 (2006); K.S.A. § 60-4901- K.S.A. § 60-4904.  Establishes minimum medical criteria for the filing of asbestos and silica claims.

Class Action Reform: HB 2764 (2004); Amended K.S.A. § 60-223.  Provides for the interlocutory appeal of class action certifications.

Collateral Source Rule Reform: HB 2693 (1988).  Permits the admissibility of evidence of collateral source payments, where damages exceed $150,000.  Provides for awards to be offset when the court assigns comparative fault.  The statute allowing evidence of collateral source benefits where claimant demands judgment for damages in excess of $150,000 violated the equal protection provision of the State Constitution.  Thompson v. KFB Insurance Co., 850 P.2d 773 (Kan. 1993).

Government Retention of Personal Injury Lawyers: HB 2627 (2000); K.S.A. § 75-37,130- K.S.A. § 75-37,135.  Requires open and competitive bidding for all contingent fee contracts for legal services between the state and outside counsel, where fees and services exceed $7,500.  Requires proposed contracts for legal services between the state and outside counsel in excess of $1 million to be submitted to the legislative budget committee for approval.  Requires, at the conclusion of representation, outside counsel to provide the state with a statement of hours worked and fees recovered through a contract for legal services between the state and outside counsel.  Provides that in no instance shall the state pay fees, even on a contingent fee basis, in excess of $1,000 per hour.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: Brown v. Keill, 580 P.2d 867, 874 (Kan. 1978).  Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages.

Medical Liability Reform: Periodic Payment of Future Damages: Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-2609.  Allows a judge to order the periodic payment of future damages in medical liability cases against any health care provider.

Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 2692 (1988): Kan. Stat. Ann. §§  60-1902, 60-1903.  Limits noneconomic damages to $250,000.  The Kansas Health Care Provider Insurance Availability Act provision setting a $250,000 limit on noneconomic losses in health care liability actions did not violate the  right to a jury trial or due process provisions of the State Constitution.  Samsel v. Wheeler Transport Services, Inc., 789 P.2d 541 (Kan. 1990).

Noneconomic Damages Reform: HB 2692 (1987).  Limits the award of damages for pain and suffering to $250,000.   

Obesity Litigation Reform: SB 75 (2005); K.S.A. § 60-4801. Exempts from civil liability manufacturers, producers, packers, distributors, carriers, holders, sellers, marketers, and advertisers of food (as defined in 21 U.S.C. 321) or an association of one or more such entities for claims arising out of weight gain, obesity, a health condition associated with weight gain or obesity, or other generally known conditions allegedly caused or likely to result from the long-term consumption of food.  The liability exemption does not apply if the    claim is based on a material violation of a state or federal adulteration or misbranding requirement.  The liability exemption also does not apply for any other material violation of federal or state law applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, distribution, advertising, labeling or sale of food and the violation was       committed knowingly and willfully.  Provides that discovery and all other proceedings shall be stayed during a motion to dismiss.

Punitive Damages Reform: HB 2731 (1988). Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-3701.  Limits the award of punitive damages to the lesser of a defendant’s annual gross income or $5 million.  (The 1992 legislature amended this statute to allow a judge who felt a defendant’s annual gross income was not a sufficient deterrent to look at 50% of the defendant’s net assets and award the lesser of that amount or $5 million.)  Requires a plaintiff to show that a defendant acted with willful or wanton conduct, fraud, or malice.  Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding.

Punitive Damages Reform: HB 2025 (1987).  Limits the award of punitive damages to the lesser of defendant’s highest annual gross income during the preceding five years or $5 million.  Provides that if the defendant earned more profit from the objectionable conduct than either of these limits, the court could award 1.5 times the amount of that profit.  Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding.  Requires a plaintiff to prove punitive damages by “clear and convincing” evidence.  Provides seven criteria for the judge to consider in punitive damages cases, including whether this is the first award against a given defendant.