King v. Pimentel

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding legislature intended written notice of claim under the statute was required for bringing an action against municipal employees
• explaining that § 12-105b(d)’s notice requirement applies to municipal employees acting within the scope of their employment “[bjecause a municipality faces significant liability” whether an action is “brought against it [or] against its employees”
• explaining that 12-105b(d)’s notice requirement applies to municipal employees acting within the scope of their employment “[b]ecause a municipality faces significant liability” whether an action is “brought against it [or] against its employees”
• looking to federal case law for help in interpretation of K.S.A. 60-215
• answer is appropriate response to a petition, including an amended petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).