Legal Opinion

Smith v. Russell

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided December 6, 2002No. 88,088PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Lockett, J.:

A workers compensation insurer, which had been notified that a civil action had been filed by its insured against a tortfeasor, appeals the district court’s denial of its motion to intervene in the civil action 5 months after the district court approved a settlement agreement between the insured and the tortfeasor. Three issues are raised: (1) Was the insurer’s notice of appeal timely filed, and (2) did the district court err in denying (a) the insurer’s motion to intervene and (b) the insurer’s motion to vacate judgment?

On April 9, 1999,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Mohr v. State Bank of StanleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1989
  2. Moyer v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1966
  3. Hukle v. City of Kansas CitySupreme Court of Kansas · 1973
  4. McDaniel v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  5. Snodgrass v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1990

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Landmark National Bank v. KeslerCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2008
  2. Water District No. 1 of Johnson County v. Prairie Center Development, L.L.C.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2016
  3. Ballard v. Dondlinger & Sons Constr. Co.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2015
  4. Rowland v. BarbCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2008
  5. Curtis v. Viega, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 2022

3 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