Legal Opinion

Ensminger v. Terminix International Co.

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided December 31, 1996No. 95-3314PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN C. PORFILIO, Circuit Judge.

In this appeal, Terminix International Company contends a jury’s adverse verdict is infested with error which the district court failed to repair when it denied post-trial motions for judgment as a matter of law and new trial. Concluding Terminix has infused the issues with its own interpretation of the elements of a claim of fraud by silence under the structure of Kansas law, we affirm.

In purchasing a home in a Wichita suburb, Cynthia and Danny Ensminger obtained from the sellers assurance the house was free of termites. The Wood Destroying Insect Information…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PRUDENTIAL FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
  2. Denison State Bank v. MadeiraSupreme Court of Kansas · 1982
  3. Wolf v. BrungardtSupreme Court of Kansas · 1974
  4. Compton v. Subaru of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
  5. Wilson v. MeeksCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. ClearOne Communications, Inc. v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
  2. Hawkinson v. BennettSupreme Court of Kansas · 1998
  3. Smith v. PrintupSupreme Court of Kansas · 1997
  4. Mynatt v. CollisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2002
  5. United States v. MilovanovicCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API