Robinson v. City of Wichita Employees' Retirement Board of Trustees
Supreme Court of Kansas
1DissentLuckert, J.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the common fund doctrine does not apply in this case. The majority adopts the view of the Nebraska Supreme Court in Kindred v. City of Omaha Emp. Ret. Sys., 252 Neb. 658, 564 N.W.2d 592 (1997), and the dissent in Flynn v. State Compensation Ins. Fund, 312 Mont. 410, 60 P.3d 397 (2002), both of which adhere to the early roots of the common fund doctrine and reject a less rigid equitable view that is more consistent with this court’s application of the doctrine. I would adopt the holdings and rationale of the courts in Leonard v.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Sprague v. Ticonic National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- PETOW v. WarehimeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Gigot v. Cities Service Oil Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1987
- Young v. MoryAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.