Legal Opinion
B.E. v. Pistotnik
Court of Appeals of Kansas
Decided September 11, 2026No. 128144Published
1Opinion of the Court
No. 128,144 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS B.E., Appellant, v. BRAD PISTOTNIK, TONY ATTERBURY, and BRAD PISTOTNIK LAW, P.A., Appellees. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. K.S.A. 60-456 requires a proffered expert to be shown to be qualified by "knowledge, skill, experience, training or education" in his or her proposed area of expertise. 2. Daubert did not lessen the qualifications for expert witnesses so that any licensed attorney is per se qualified to be an expert in a legal malpractice case. 3. K.S.A. 60-456, both before and after the 2014 Daubert amendment, requires that to be…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Salen v. United States Lines Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. NacchioCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.