Supreme Court of Kansas· 4/10/1992

Harding v. K.C. Wall Products, Inc.

Citations

831 P.2d 958
250 Kan. 655
1992 Kan. LEXIS 94

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that § 60-513(b) is a substantive statute of repose because it relieves defendants of liability for long-past claims, regardless of whether the claims have actually accrued
distinguishing between statute of repose as substantive and statute of limitations as procedural; determining defendant had no vested right in statute of limitations
implying amendment to statute of repose could not apply retroactively; however, amendments in question dealt only with statute of limitations
right to a defense based on expiration of statute of repose is a vested right
a statute of limitations is “remedial and procedural” but a statute of repose is substantive
The “legislature cannot revive a cause of action barred by a statute of repose, as such action would constitute the taking of property without due process.” (emphasis in original)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Herd

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

82 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.